GR 189343; (July, 2013) (Digest)
G.R. No. 189343, G.R. No. 189369, G.R. No. 189553; July 10, 2013
BENILDA N. BACASMAS, Petitioner, vs. SANDIGANBAYAN and PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Respondents.
ALAN C. GAVIOLA, Petitioner, vs. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Respondents.
EUSTAQUIO B. CESA, Petitioner, vs. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Respondents.
FACTS
The petitioners, all public officers of the City Government of Cebu, were convicted by the Sandiganbayan for violation of Section 3(e) of Republic Act No. 3019 (the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act). Benilda N. Bacasmas was the Cash Division Chief, Alan C. Gaviola was the City Administrator, and Eustaquio B. Cesa was the City Treasurer. They, along with City Accountant Edna J. Jaca, were involved in the process of approving and releasing cash advances for the city. The standard procedure required a paymaster, Luz Gonzales, to request a cash advance, which would then be approved by Bacasmas and Cesa, certified for funding by Jaca, and finally approved and countersigned by Gaviola before a check was issued.
A Commission on Audit (COA) team conducted a surprise cash count on March 5, 1998, which revealed an accumulated shortage of ₱9,810,752.60 in the cash and accounts of paymaster Luz Gonzales for the period September 20, 1995, to March 5, 1998. The COA report found that the petitioners and Jaca failed to follow the prescribed procedure, facilitating the loss. Irregularities included granting new cash advances despite previous unliquidated ones, approving vouchers not supported by payrolls, and failing to ensure liquidation within the required five-day period. An Information was filed alleging they acted with manifest partiality, evident bad faith, or gross inexcusable negligence by allowing Gonzales to obtain cash advances despite her unliquidated balances, causing damage to the Cebu City Government.
At trial, the prosecution presented COA auditors and their Narrative Report. The petitioners defended themselves by claiming reliance on the certifications of others, delegation of duties, customary practices (like rounding off amounts), and lack of awareness of any anomaly. The Sandiganbayan found them guilty beyond reasonable doubt, sentencing them to imprisonment of 12 years and 1 month to 15 years, perpetual disqualification from public office, and joint and several indemnification of ₱9,810,752.60 to the city.
ISSUE
Whether the Sandiganbayan erred in convicting the petitioners of violating Section 3(e) of R.A. 3019.
RULING
The Supreme Court DENIED the petitions and AFFIRMED the Sandiganbayan’s Decision and Resolution.
The Court held that all elements of violation of Section 3(e) of R.A. 3019 were present: (1) the accused are public officers; (2) the charged acts are related to their official duties; (3) they acted with manifest partiality, evident bad faith, or gross inexcusable negligence; and (4) their actions caused undue injury to the government or gave unwarranted benefits to a private party.
The Court found that the petitioners acted with gross inexcusable negligence. Their duties under the Local Government Code (R.A. 7160), the Government Auditing Code (P.D. 1445), and relevant COA Circulars were not merely ministerial but involved the exercise of sound discretion and diligence. By repeatedly signing and approving cash advance vouchers and checks despite clear violations of rules—such as the existence of prior unliquidated cash advances, absence of supporting payrolls, and non-liquidation within the prescribed period—they demonstrated a flagrant disregard of their duties. This negligence was not a simple error in judgment but a conscious indifference to the consequences, which amounted to bad faith. Their defenses of reliance on subordinates, delegation, and custom were unacceptable, as they could not delegate their accountability or circumvent clear legal and regulatory mandates. Their collective failure to adhere to basic auditing and disbursement rules directly facilitated the massive shortage, causing undue injury to the City Government of Cebu. The penalty imposed by the Sandiganbayan was affirmed.
