G.R. No. 122166 March 11, 1998
CRESENTE Y. LLORENTE, JR., petitioner, vs. SANDIGANBAYAN and LETICIA G. FUERTES, respondents.

FACTS

Petitioner Cresente Y. Llorente, Jr., the Municipal Mayor of Sindangan, Zamboanga del Norte, was charged with violating Section 3(e) of Republic Act No. 3019 (Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act). The Information alleged that from July 1990 to October 1991, he willfully, unlawfully, and with evident bad faith refused to sign and approve the payrolls and vouchers for the salaries and other emoluments of Leticia G. Fuertes, the duly appointed Assistant Municipal Treasurer, without just cause and due process, thereby causing her undue injury. Fuertes, after being detailed to other offices from 1986 to June 1990, returned to Sindangan in July 1990 but was not given work assignments or facilities, and her daily time records and leave applications were not acted upon. The Sangguniang Bayan, presided by Llorente, passed a resolution objecting to her assignment. Fuertes filed a Petition for Mandamus with Damages in May 1991 for the mayor’s refusal to approve her claims, including unpaid salaries, differentials, RATA, and other benefits. A Compromise Agreement was entered into and approved by the court on August 27, 1991, wherein Llorente bound himself to sign and approve all vouchers and payrolls for Fuertes’s unpaid and subsequent emoluments. However, upon his failure to fully comply, a writ of execution was issued. Fuertes received complete payment of her salary claims on January 4, 1993, and her RATA on July 25, 1994. The Sandiganbayan found Llorente guilty beyond reasonable doubt and sentenced him to imprisonment, perpetual disqualification from public office, and to pay costs. Llorente’s motion for reconsideration was denied.

ISSUE

Whether the Sandiganbayan erred in convicting petitioner Cresente Y. Llorente, Jr., of violating Section 3(e) of R.A. No. 3019 for causing undue injury to Leticia G. Fuertes through his refusal to sign her payrolls and vouchers.

RULING

Yes. The Supreme Court REVERSED the Sandiganbayan’s Decision and ACQUITTED petitioner Cresente Y. Llorente, Jr. The Court held that for a conviction under Section 3(e) of R.A. No. 3019 for “causing undue injury to any party,” the prosecution must prove “actual” injury. Speculative or incidental injury is insufficient. In this case, while there was delay in the payment of Fuertes’s salaries and benefits, the prosecution failed to prove that she suffered actual and material injury as a direct result of the delay. The evidence showed she eventually received all her monetary claims in full. The Court found that the delay was not solely attributable to Llorente’s refusal but also to administrative processes, such as the need for a supplemental budget from the Sangguniang Bayan and the requirement for Fuertes to submit necessary clearances. Furthermore, the element of “evident bad faith” was not established. Bad faith must be proven as a state of mind evincing a fraudulently dishonest purpose. Llorente’s actions, including his requirement for clearances due to a demand from the Municipality of Piñan for reimbursement of overpayments to Fuertes, were motivated by a desire to ensure proper accounting and avoid liability for the municipality, which constitutes a valid exercise of his official duty. Therefore, the prosecution failed to prove his guilt beyond reasonable doubt.