G.R. No. 234561 . November 11, 2021
Ramsy D. Panes, Petitioner, vs. People of the Philippines, Respondent.

FACTS

Petitioner Ramsy D. Panes was the Executive Assistant II and Officer-in-Charge of the Permits and Licenses Division of Victorias City, Negros Occidental. On June 10, 2010, Gaudencio Corona applied for a business permit to operate a jai-alai betting station. On June 23, 2010, a business permit was issued to Corona upon the recommendation of Panes and the approval of then Mayor Severo Palanca. On July 14, 2010, several persons identified as bet collectors for Corona were arrested for illegal betting activities. The following day, Panes recommended the cancellation of Corona’s permit due to his failure to install a betting machine, and Mayor Palanca cancelled it on July 15, 2010. A complaint was filed with the Office of the Ombudsman, leading to the filing of an Information charging Panes and Palanca with violation of Section 3(j) of R.A. No. 3019 (Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act) for issuing a business permit to Corona despite knowing he had no legislative franchise or legal requirements to operate a jai-alai betting station. During trial, it was established that the business name “Dalisay Amusement Games and Recreation Station” used by Corona was owned by another person, and the address provided was owned by someone else. Panes testified that he processed the application because the Mayor had already approved it, and he issued a provisional permit pending the installation of a betting machine. Mayor Palanca died during the pendency of the case, leading to its dismissal against him. The Sandiganbayan found Panes guilty beyond reasonable doubt.

ISSUE

Whether the Sandiganbayan correctly convicted petitioner Ramsy D. Panes of violation of Section 3(j) of R.A. No. 3019 .

RULING

Yes, the Sandiganbayan correctly convicted the petitioner. The Supreme Court affirmed the Sandiganbayan’s decision. All elements of violation of Section 3(j) of R.A. No. 3019 were present: (1) the accused is a public officer; (2) the accused knowingly approves or grants any license, permit, privilege or benefit in favor of any person; and (3) such person is not qualified or is not legally entitled to such license, permit, privilege, or advantage. The Court held that jai-alai is a prohibited game under existing laws, specifically P.D. No. 1602 and P.D. No. 1892, which revoked the authority of local governments to issue permits for jai-alai and vested it solely in the national government. The documents submitted by Corona did not show that the entities he represented possessed a legislative franchise to operate outside the Cagayan Special Economic Zone and Free Port. As the OIC of the Permits and Licenses Division, Panes had a duty to ensure the business applied for was not contrary to law. His defense that he merely acted on the Mayor’s prior approval was untenable, as he admitted he knew Corona lacked the required documents. His act of issuing a provisional permit did not negate his knowledge of Corona’s lack of legal entitlement. The penalty imposed by the Sandiganbayan—an indeterminate prison term of six years and one month minimum to eight years maximum, plus perpetual disqualification from public office—was affirmed.