GR 120391; (September, 1997) (Digest)
G.R. No. 120391 September 24, 1997
SIMPLICIO AMPER, petitioner, vs. SANDIGANBAYAN and PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, respondents.
FACTS
Petitioner Simplicio Amper, the Assistant City Engineer of Davao City, was charged with violating Section 3(e) of R.A. No. 3019 (Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act). The Information alleged that on August 7, 1988, he willfully used a city-owned Allis Backhoe for personal treasure hunting without authority, causing undue injury to the government. The prosecution evidence established that Amper was caught in flagrante delicto by Mayor Rodrigo Duterte. Witnesses testified that Amper directed the backhoe’s operation on private property, with the equipment being operated by a city employee under his office’s supervision.
Amper denied the charges, claiming the backhoe was officially leased to a private construction firm (F.T. Chavez Construction) and its use on the property of a certain Segundo Tan was proper. However, he failed to present either Francisco Chavez or Segundo Tan as witnesses to corroborate this defense. The Sandiganbayan found him guilty, sentencing him to imprisonment and perpetual disqualification from public office.
ISSUE
Whether the Sandiganbayan erred in convicting Amper of violating Section 3(e) of R.A. No. 3019 .
RULING
The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. The legal logic centered on the elements of the crime under Section 3(e): the accused is a public officer; the act was done in the discharge of official functions; and it was done through manifest partiality, evident bad faith, or gross inexcusable negligence, causing undue injury or giving unwarranted benefit. The Court found all elements present. Amper, a public officer, used his official position to commandeer a city asset for a private, unauthorized purpose. His act of directing a subordinate to operate the backhoe for personal treasure hunting constituted manifest partiality and evident bad faith, as it was a clear misuse of public property and authority.
The Court rejected Amper’s defense of a valid lease, upholding the Sandiganbayan’s finding that his failure to present the alleged lessee and property owner justified the presumption that their testimonies would be adverse to his case. The evidence conclusively showed the backhoe was used for Amper’s personal venture, not for any legitimate city project or authorized private lease. This unauthorized use caused undue injury to the Davao City government through the equipment’s wear and tear without compensation. Thus, the Sandiganbayan’s factual findings and legal conclusions were sustained.