GR 165975; (September 2007) (Digest)
G.R. No. 165975; September 13, 2007
PAYAKAN G. TILENDO, Petitioner, vs. OMBUDSMAN and SANDIGANBAYAN, Respondents.
FACTS
Payakan G. Tilendo, as President of the Cotabato City State Polytechnic College (CCSPC), was the subject of a complaint alleging misuse of public funds. Specifically, it was alleged that funds allocated for the construction of an Agriculture Building, evidenced by Notices of Cash Allocation totaling millions of pesos, were diverted. The complaint asserted that the building was constructed without proper plans, using scrap materials from a demolished structure, and that only a fraction of the allocated amount was actually spent on the project. It further alleged that construction materials were delivered to Tilendo’s personal residences.
Investigations by the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) and the Commission on Audit (COA) corroborated key allegations. The NBI report confirmed the project lacked engineering designs and that only an estimated ₱300,000 was spent, utilizing scrap materials, despite a multi-million peso appropriation. The COA audit found irregularities, including unliquidated cash advances and expenditures for the project that were not properly supported by documents.
ISSUE
Whether the Office of the Ombudsman committed grave abuse of discretion in finding probable cause to charge Tilendo with malversation and violation of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act.
RULING
The Supreme Court ruled that the Ombudsman did not commit grave abuse of discretion. The Court emphasized that a finding of probable cause requires only a reasonable belief that a crime has been committed and the accused is probably guilty thereof. It is based on evidence showing more than bare suspicion but less than evidence justifying a conviction. The Ombudsman enjoys broad investigatory and prosecutorial discretion, and its factual findings are generally accorded respect.
The Court found the Ombudsman’s determination was supported by substantial evidence from the investigations. The NBI and COA reports provided a reasonable basis to believe that public funds were misapplied, as the actual construction was grossly deficient compared to the substantial allocations. Tilendo, as the college president and accountable officer, failed to rebut the prima facie case. His defense, which shifted blame to subordinates without providing convincing evidence of their sole responsibility, was insufficient to negate the finding of probable cause. Thus, the Ombudsman acted within its lawful authority, and the petition was dismissed.