GR 74689; (March, 1990) (Digest)
G.R. No. 74689 , March 21, 1990
Roberto R. Benedicto, petitioner, vs. Hon. Quirino D. Abad Santos, Jr., in his capacity as Presiding Judge of the Regional Trial Court of Negros Occidental, and Social Security System, respondents.
FACTS
Petitioner Roberto R. Benedicto employed Salvador Pillon as a truck driver from March 1971 until Pillon’s death in 1974. Benedicto failed to report Pillon for compulsory coverage with the Social Security System (SSS) and to remit the corresponding contributions. This delinquency was discovered by an SSS investigator in October 1975, following which Benedicto accomplished the necessary registration forms. However, an Information for violation of the Social Security Act was filed against him only on July 18, 1985, approximately ten years after the discovery.
Before arraignment, Benedicto moved to quash the Information, arguing that the criminal liability had prescribed. The respondent judge denied the motion, citing Section 22(b) of the Social Security Act, as amended by P.D. No. 1636, which provides a twenty-year period to institute necessary actions against an employer. Benedicto’s motion for reconsideration was likewise denied, prompting this Petition for Prohibition and Mandamus.
ISSUE
Whether the criminal action against petitioner for violation of the Social Security Act had prescribed at the time the Information was filed.
RULING
Yes, the criminal action had prescribed. The Supreme Court granted the petition for prohibition, thereby permanently enjoining the criminal prosecution. The Court clarified that the twenty-year prescriptive period under Section 22(b) of the Social Security Act applies exclusively to administrative and civil actions for the collection of unpaid contributions. It does not govern the prescription of criminal offenses.
For criminal prosecutions under the Act, the applicable prescriptive period is derived from the National Internal Revenue Code (NIRC), as mandated by Section 22(b) itself, which states that contributions shall be collected “in the same manner as taxes are made collectible under the National Internal Revenue Code.” At the relevant time, the NIRC prescribed a five-year period for the institution of criminal actions for tax violations. The offense was discovered in October 1975, but the Information was filed only in July 1985, clearly beyond the five-year limit. Consequently, the criminal liability was extinguished by prescription.
However, the Court ruled that the civil liability for the unremitted contributions survived. Since no separate civil action was reserved, it was deemed instituted with the criminal case. Pursuant to Section 22(b) of the Social Security Act, this civil action for collection prescribes in twenty years from the discovery of the delinquency. The case was thus remanded to the trial court solely for the continuation of the civil action to recover the sum of P6,381.00, representing the benefits due to Pillon’s heirs.