G.R. No. 253975, September 27, 2021
People of the Philippines, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. Rex Fusingan Dapitan, Accused-Appellant.

FACTS

Accused-appellant Rex Fusingan Dapitan, the Vice President for Finance, Administration, and Resource Generation of Sultan Kudarat State University (SKSU), was charged with Malversation of Public Funds. He received a cash advance of ₱70,000.00 under Disbursement Voucher No. 10-10-186 dated October 26, 2010, to defray transportation expenses for a Lakbay Aral (educational tour) of SKSU officials and employees to Surigao del Sur State University from October 27 to 29, 2010. The approved training design stated that expenses other than transportation (food, accommodation, incidental) were to be shouldered by the participating employees. The prosecution alleged that Dapitan willfully appropriated ₱50,625.00 for personal use, as the participants attended a co-employee’s wedding during the tour on official time using public funds, and Dapitan paid for their food and accommodation contrary to the training design. An Audit Observation Memorandum deemed the expenses irregular and excessive, and a Notice of Disallowance was issued. Dapitan denied being the proponent of the Lakbay Aral, claimed the side trip to the wedding was incidental, and argued the trip to another campus was cancelled due to bad weather. He submitted a liquidation report with receipts and asserted he acted under an honest belief that Executive Order No. 248 allowed such expenses. The Sandiganbayan found him guilty beyond reasonable doubt.

ISSUE

Whether or not Rex Fusingan Dapitan is guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of Malversation of Public Funds under Article 217 of the Revised Penal Code.

RULING

Yes, the Supreme Court affirmed the Sandiganbayan’s ruling. The Sandiganbayan correctly exercised jurisdiction as Dapitan’s position was equivalent to or higher than a “manager” under Section 4 of Republic Act No. 8249, covering officials in a permanent, acting, or interim capacity. All elements of malversation were proven: (1) Dapitan was a public officer; (2) he had custody or control of public funds by reason of his office; (3) the funds were public and for which he was accountable; and (4) he appropriated or misappropriated them. The evidence showed the Lakbay Aral was deliberately scheduled to coincide with a co-employee’s wedding, which the participants attended on official time using public funds, and Dapitan paid for food and accommodation despite the training design prohibiting it. His defense of good faith was unavailing as he failed to prove the Lakbay Aral was properly carried out for its true objective, and no sufficient liquidation report was submitted. His restitution of the amount, while not exonerating, was considered a mitigating circumstance. The penalty imposed by the Sandiganbayan was modified in line with Republic Act No. 10951, adjusting the fine. The Court sentenced him to an indeterminate penalty of two (2) years, four (4) months, and one (1) day of prision correccional, as minimum, to six (6) years and one (1) day of prision mayor, as maximum, with a fine of ₱50,625.00, perpetual special disqualification from public office, and payment of costs. The fine shall earn legal interest at 6% per annum from finality until full payment.