REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINESSANDIGANBAY AN

QUEZON CITY

THIRD DMSION

!RUE COP\

ULMt

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Criminal Case/fo. SB-I0-CRM-OlllPlaintitf. .For: Violation of Section 3(e),RepublicAct No.

':JJ, 3019

- versus-Criminal CaseNo. SB-12-CRM-0064For: Violation of Article 217, Revised Penal

Code(Malversationof Public Funds)

ROBERTO M. LUNA, JR., et al.,Accused.

Criminal CaseNo. SB:-12-CRM-0065For: Violation of Article 171, Par. 2, Revised

Penal Code (Falsification of PublicDocument)

Present:,

CABOTAJE-TANG, P.J.,ChairpersonFERNANDEZ, B, J. * andFERNANDEZ, SJ, J.,**

Promulgated:Julle Ab .tb/q 'I

1[----------------------------------------------------------------------------------1[

DECISION

FERIVANDEZ, SJ, J.

For their individual and collective acts towards thedisbursementofPhPl,610,800.00aspaymentfor the honorariaand per diems of 101 job order workers, for the period ofJanuary to April 2004, despitethe absenceof appropriation,deficienciesin the supportingdocumentsand irregularities inthe procedure,and when there wereallegedlyno job workerswho were actually hired, who rendered service, and whoreceivedthe payments,accusedRobertoM. Luna,Jr., Jethro P.Lindo, Venus M. Carlos, EbrencioFijo Indoyon, .Ir., AntonioCasuergaSaligumbaand Nilda T. Ferrando, all officials an

* .Justice Berneli~o R. Fernandez, as the regular member of the Third Division, replace..d Justice ~Samuel R. Ma.rt.ires, who was appomted to the Supreme Court. ;" '

** Justice Sarah Jane T. Fernandez was a member of the Third Division at the time th~ case was' .M.submitted for Decision. / .. V

D.;cisionPeoplevs. Luna, et at.SB-IO-CRM-Oll1, etc.)(------------------------------------------------x

2

employees of the Municipality of Lingig, Surigao del Sur, werecharged as follows:

- ~rimi;:~_case] Namealld Po~itioQ I Crime I

I----- I I I

L----- .. I I I

RobertoM. Luna, Jr.(MunicipalMayor)

Jethro P, Lindo[Executive Assistant IV)

VenusM. CarlosSS·lO·CRM-O III I (Municipal Accountant)

EbrencioFijo Indoyon,Jr.(Municipal Treasurer)

Antonio Corisuerga Saligumba(Municipal Budget Officer)

Nilda T. Ferrando(Cash Clerk 1)

Roberto M. Luna, Jr.,(Municipal Mayor)

SB-12-CRM-0064 I Jethro P. Lindo(Executive ASSistantIV)

VenusM. Carlos(Municipal Accountant)

Roberto M. Luna, Jr.,(Municipal Mayor)

SB-12-Cl'!M-0065 Jethro P. Lindo(ExecutiveAssistant IV)

VenusM. Carlos(Municipal Accountant)

RELEVANT l\.NTECED~NTS

Violation of Section ~(e),Republic Act No. 3019

Violation of Article 2 J7,Revised Penal Code(Malversation of Publicfunds)

Violation of Article 171,Par. 2, Revised PenalCode [Falsification ofPublic Document]

On July 8, 2010, an Information for Violl1tion of Section are)ofR.A. No. 3019 was filed against accused Luna, Lindo, Carlos,Indoyon, Saligumba and Ferrando. The Information, docketedas SB-1O-CRM-0111, reads;

That in April 2004, and sometime prior orsubsequent thereto, in the Municipality of Lingig,Surigao del Sur, and within the jurisdiction of thisHonorable Court, accused ROB&RTO lW-LUN.4·,JR.,a public officer, being the.Municipal Mayor, J~TlIROP. LINDO, also a public officer being the ExecutiveAssistant IV, VENUS ~. CARLOS, likewise a publicofficer being the Municipal Accountant, EB~E"'CIOFIJO INDOYON~JR., also a:public officer being theMunicipal Treasurer, ANTONIO CONSUER.G•.

~

h

DecisionPeoplevs. Luna, et al.SB-1O-CRMOll1, etc.x---------------------------------------------~---x

SAUGUMBA, also a public officer being the MunicipalBudget Officer and NJLDA T. FE RANDO, likewise agovernment employee, being the Cash Clerk I, all ofthe Municipality of Lingig, Surig 0 del Sur, while inthe performance of their respectiv duties, committingthe offense in relation to thei respective offices,conniving and conspiring wit each other, withevident bad faith, or gross inexcu able negligence, didthen and there, willfully, unlaw lly and criminally,disburse public funds of the Lac Government Unitof Lingig, Surigao del Sur, n the amount ofPI,610,800.00 by way 0 Cash AdvanceDisbursement Voucher No. 00-2004-04-1271,which was duly certified by a cused JETHRO P.UNDO in behalf of accused Municipal MayorROBERTO M. LUNA as to th legality and thenecessity of the cash advance an incurred under hisdirect supervision and of whic he approved forpayment in behalf of accuse Municipal MayorRoberto M. Luna, Jr.; while accused MunicipalAccountant Venus M. Carlos c rtified on the cashadvance voucher as to the comple enessand proprietyof supporting documents; and accused MunicipalTreasurer EBRENCIO FIJO !NOO 01\1', JR· certifiedonthe cash advance voucher as to "c s~ availability" andwhich amount of P1,610,800.0 was received byaccused NILDA T. F~RRANOO s payment of thehonoraria and per diettis of one hundred one (101)

, '

workers hired through Job Orde Contracts coveringthe value of their services rende d from .January toApril 2004, despite the (fact that) accusedknewfullywell that: 1) there was no approp iation ordinance Of

law authorizing the release of sai funds; 2) thecheckcovering the amount of the cash advance ofPl,610,800.00 was released on pril 12, 2004, twodays ahead of the approval of the ash advance; 3) thecash advance was not obligate at the time of itsapproval; 4) job order contracts w re not submitted tothe Civil Service Commiasion for its review purauant

, ' ,

to CSC Memorandum Circular No. 17, series of 4002,also known as the "Policy Guideli e& for Contracts QfService" and CSC Memorandu Circular No. 24,series of 2002, also known as t e "Clarification onPolicy Guidelines for Contracts 0 Service; 5) that theworkers hired through. Job Or er Contracts were"designated" as Community Ai e, Informant andConfidential Employee Assistant with the names ofthe workers as appearing in the ob Order Contractsand Time Book Payrolls being "a surned names"; 6)there were no Daily Time Records ubmitted to evincethat the job order employees rend red services for theperiod January to April 2004; 7) he Time Book andPayroll shows that the job order e ployees were paiddifferent rates of monthly comp nsation instead ofdaily or hourly wages; 8) that the j b order employeeswere paid for services .rerrder'e despite that ~~ ~column for "Residence Certificate' in the Time BO~ ~

3

/"'?

/" ". '. A1(, "-.'

/'1 0

DecisionPeofJlevs. Luna, et al.SB-lO-CRM-O 111, etc.x -----------------------------------------------x

4

and Payrolls were not filled up with any entry as to"Number", "Date", "Place of Issue" and "Signature of,Witnesses"; 9) funds utilized for the payment of thehonoraria and per diems of the 101 job orderemployees were taken out of the 20% DevelopmentFund allocated for Peaceand Order and Public Safetyand National Security Mission Projects and Initiativesin the amounts of P344,OOO.OQ andP648,OOO.OO.OO, respectively, as well theappropriated funds intended for AdministrativeSupport Services in the Office of the Municipal Mayorin the amount of P80,QOO.OO and against theappropriated funds intended for Other Services in theOffice of the Municipal Mayor in the amount ofP90,OOO.OO and against the appropriated fundsintended for Other Services in .the Office of theMunicipal Treasurer in the amount of PtOO,OOO.QO,adversely affecting the execution of. other budgetaryservices and/or programmed activities of the localgovernment unit of Lingig and caused undue injury tothe Local Government Unit of Lingig as well as thegovernment in the amount of Pl,610,800.0Q as thetransaction is void for want of necessary authorityfrom the Sangguniang Bayan of Lingig orappropriation ordinance.

CONTRARYTO LAW:l

On even date, six (6) Informations, docketed as 88-10-CRM-0112 to 0117, for Violation of Section 220 of the RevieedPenal Code were filed against accused Luna, Lindo and Carlos,

On August 27,2010, accused Saligumba was arraigned inss' 1O-CRIVI-O111.2 Pre-trial proceededas to accusedSaligumbaon May 25,2011.3

On July 26, 2011, accused Luna, Lindo, Carlos andIndoyon were arraigned in 8B-IO-CRM-0111.4 Pre-trial as tosaid accused proceeded on January 27,2012.

In its Resolution dated September 22, 2011, this Courtgranted the prosecution's Motion to Withdraw SB-IO...,CRM-0112to or 17.

On March 23, 2012, the Information in SB-12-CRM-0064and 0065 were filed. The Information in SB-12-CRM-0064

I Iuform ation dated .Jarruary 30, 2009, pp. 1-3; Record, Vol. I, pp. 1-3.Certificate of Arraignment dated August 27, 2010; Record, Vol. I, p. 198; Order dated August 27, ~OlO;Record, Vol. I, p. 200. .

J Order dated May 25, 2011; Record, Vo!. 11,p. 102. t:7Certificates of Arraignment all dated JUly 26, 2011; Record, VoL I1,pp. 219-222; Order dated July 26, ~O11;". .- . '.Record Vo!. 11,pp. 224·225.

~

DecisionPeoplevs. Luna, et al.SB-IO-CRM-Olll, etc.x-- ----------------------------------------------7-X

5

charging accused Luna, Lindo and Carlos of Maluersation. ofPublic Funds reads:

That on or about 12 April 2004, or sometimeprior to or subsequent thereto, at the Municipality ofLingig, Province of Surigaode1 Sur, Philippines, andwithin the jurisdiction of _this Honorable Court,accused ROBERTO LUNA, JR. Y MALIJAO, a highranking public officer, being then the Municipal Mayorof Lingig, Surigao del Sur, and as such is accountablefor the public funds amounting to ONE MILLION SIXHUNDRED TEN THOUSAND EIGHT HUNDREDPESOS (PI,610,800.00) received and/or entrusted tohim by reason of his office, acting in relation to hisoffice and taking advantage of the same, connivingand confederating with accused JETHRO LINDO YPABALATE and VENUS .CARLOS Y MAGALLANO,both public officers being then the Executive AssistantIV and Municipal Accountant respectively, who areboth signatories to the disbursement voucher,payrolls and job orders among others, relative to thepurported payment of salaries of 101 job orderworkers for the period January 2004 to April 2004,did then and there,' willfully, unlawfully andfdoniously take, misappropriate to their personal useand benefit and/or through abandonment ornegligence permit other persons to take the amount ofONE MILLION SIX HUNDRED TEN THOUSANDEIGHT HUNDRED PESOS (P1,610,800.00) from suchpublic funds which is part of the proceeds of the cashadvance drawn by Nilda Ferrando under DV No. 100-2004-04-1271, to the damage of the government inthe aforestated amount.

CONTRARYTO LAW.s

The Information in SB-12-CRM-0065 charging accusedLuna, Lindo and Carlos with Falsification of Public Documentreads:

That on or about August 2004, or sometimeprior or subsequent thereto, at the Municipality ofLingig, Province of Surigao del Sur, Philippines, andwithin the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court,accused ROBERTO LUNA, JR. Y MALIJAO, a highranking public officer being then the Municipal Mayorof Lingig, Surigao del Sur, acting in relation to hisoffice and taking advantage of his position, connivingand confederating with accused JETHRO LINPO YPABALATE and VENUS CARLOS Y MAGALLANO, bothpublic officers being then Executive Assistant IV andMunicipal Accountant respectively, with deliberate

;; Infurmation dated March 1,2012, pp. 1-2; S8-12-CRM-0064, pp. 1-2.

._--_.._... __._--_._--- ()

)1

DecisionPeoplevs. Luna, et al.SB LO-CRM·O111,etc.x-------------------------------------------------x

6

intent, did then and there willfully, unlawfully andfeloniously falsify public documents consisting of joborder contracts and payrolls among others, by makingit appear that 101 job order workers rendered serviceas informan ts and community aide to the Municipalityof Lingig, Surigao Del Sur in the period Janllary2004to April 2004 and allegedly received salaries in thetotal amount of ONE MILLION SIX HUNDREO TENTHOUSAND EIGHT HUNDRED PESOS(Pl,610,800.00), the sum of which is part of theproceeds of the cash advance drawn under DV No.100-2004-04-1271 ,when in truth and in fact,accused knew fully well that there were no 101 joborders who rendered service for the said period anddid not actually receive the salaries covered by thedisbursement voucher, to the damage and prejudiceof the Municipality of Lingig, Surigao del Sur, .

CONTRARYTO J..,AW.6

On July 25, 2012, accused Luna,arraigned in SB-12-CRM-0064to·0065.1September13,2012.8

Lindo and Carlos werePre-trial proceededon

During the separatepre-trial proceedings,the prosecutionand accused Luna, Lindo, Carlos, Saligumba rand Indoyonstipulated as follows:

SB-IO-CRM-Oll1'

1. The prosecution and accused Saligumba:

a. Accused Antonio Saligumba y Ccrrsuegra is thesame Antonio Saligumba y Consuegra who wasarraigned on August 27,2010.9

2. Theprosecutionand accusedLuna, Lindo, Carlos,and Indoyon:

a. Accused Roberto Luna, Jr. y Malijao, .Jethro Lindoy Pabalate and Venus Carlos y Magallano are thesame Roberto Luna, Jr. y Malijao, .JethroLindo yPabalate and Venus Carlos y Magallano, Whowerearraigned on July 26, 2011.

b. At all times material and relevant to this case,accused Roberto Luna, Jr. y Malijao, Jethro Lindoy Pabalate and Venus Carlos y Magallano were theMunicipal Mayor, Executive Asaiatant ,mdMunicipal Accountant, respectively, of I theMunicipality of Lingig, Surigao del Sur.

Information dated March 1. 2012. PP. 1-2; S8-12-CRM-0064. Record, pp.

DedsipnPeople vs. Luna, et al.SB·l0-CRM-Oll1, etc.

7

1~ ----------------------------------------------x

c. Accused Ebrencio Indoyon, Jr. admits that he isthe same Ebrencio Fijo Indoyon, Jr. who wasarraigned on 26 July 2011.10

SH12-CRM-0064 to 0065

The prosecution and accusedLuna, Lindo and Carlos:

a. Accused Roberto Luna, Jr ~y Malijao, .Jethro Lindoy Pabalate and Venus Carlos y MagalIano are thesame Roberto Luna, Jr. y Malijao, Jethro Lindo yPabalate and Venus Carlos y Magallano who werearraigned on July 25,2012.

b. At all times material and relevant to this case,accused Roberto Lima, Jr. y Malijao, Jethro Lindoy Pabalate and VenUSCarlos y Magallano were theMunicipal Mayor, Executive Assistant andMunicipal Accountant. respectively of theMunicipality of Lingig, Surigao del Sur.t!

Upon Motion of accused Carlos.. the three (3) cases wereconsolidated. 12

On July 30,2013, accusedFerrandowasarraigned.P Theprosecutionand accusedFerrandoagreedto adopt the Pre-TriqlOrder dated January 27, 2012, and all the evidencepresentedby the prosecutiori.!"

The prosecution presented the following witnesses:1) Erbito Perianueva; 2) Leonor M. Otagan, Jr.; 3) Marah M.Meridoza; 4) Aureha A. Alledo; 5)·Gilda f. Laureno; 6) Harold P.Pareja;7) Luzviminda Basafiez;and, 8) RosaliaNaranjo.

~rbito T~ Pefianueva, Local Assessment Operations- .. , ... ', ,

Officer11of Lingig Municipal Assessor'sOffice,15 testified:

1. On September6, 2010, pursuant to OfficeOrder No, 07-2010, he was ~esignated as the Human ResourceManagementOfficfr (HR-MO) of Lingig. He is still holdingsaid position.16

r ...io Pre Trial Order dated JanUMY 27. 20 I'. pp. 2·3, R.~n1. vei. nr, P~5.11 .Joint Manifestation ofthe Prosecution and Accused Roberto Luna, .Jr., .Jethro Lindo ~4 Venus Carlos dated

September 4,2012, p. 2; SB-12-CRM-0064 Record, p. 370, Pre-Trial Order dated .January 27,2012; Record,vet. Ill, p. 53.

12 Resolution dated April 4, 2013, p. 5; Record Vol. I, SB-12-CRM-OQ64. p. 409. J

13 Certificate of Arraignment dated July 30, 2913; Record, Vol. IV, p. 185; Order dated J~ly 30. 2013;Record, Vo!. IV, p. 186.

•• Order dated September 4,2013; Record, Vol. IV, p. 208; Joint Manifestation dated AUfWllt 3P, 2013, p. 2,20 I 3; Record, Vol. IV, p. 202. ..

IS TSN dated July 26, 2011, p. 6.

16 Exhibit J.JJ;TSN dated July 26,2011, pp. 11-13 and 16-17; TSN dated July 27.2011. p. 5.

DecisionPeoplevs. Luna, et al.SB 1O-CRM-O 111, etc.x-- ----------------------------------------------x

8

2. Among his duties and functions as HRMO are:

u. Act as custodian of the Form 201 files of thepresentand former employeesof the Municipality;

b. Issue certified true copies of documents whendirected through a subpoenaor when ordered bycompetentauthorities;

c. Issue Service Records of employees of theMunicipality. 17

3. He received a subpoena duces tecum directing him tosubmit certified true copies of the Personal Data Sheets,Oaths of Office, Appointment Papers, and Service Recordsof:

a. Antonio Saligumbab. Roberto M. Luna, Jr.c. Ebrencio F. Indoyon, Jr.

d. Jethro P. Lindoe. Venus M. Carlosf. Nilda T. Ferrando is

4. He retrieved the requested 201 files, and certified thephotocopies of the same, except that 'of accused Indoyon.The 201 file of Indoyon was missing. He also issued theService Records requested. He sent the certified copies ofthe documents, together with a letter informing ProsecutorFunelas that he did not find the record of employment ofIndoyon, to the Office of the Special Prosecutor. 19

5. Accused Indoyon was the Municipal Treasurer from 2002-2004. They were eo-employees. Leonor M. otagan , .Ir.,was Lingig's HRMO Designate from 1992-:2004,20

Leonor M. Otagan, Jr., complainantand former HumanResource Management Officer Designate of LOU Lin~ig,2ltestified: . .

1. He was the designated HRMO of.Lingig from August 1992until May 17, 2004 when, pursuant to Mernprq,n-durnOrder dated Mqy 17, 2004, he was transferred "byaccused Luna to the Office of the Municipal Planningand Development Coordinator. His official position wasMunicipal Government Assistant Department Head atthe Office of the Municipal Mayor.22

2. He was dismissed from service because of theFalsification of Public Document~ase iled against himby the Office of the Ombudsman.s

,~ -;~::>Ndated Jl:ly 2~;~:pp~ 17-18; TSN dated July 27,2011, p. 6. ~

lti TSN dated July 26,2011, p. 18. 1JI" TSN dated July 26, 2011, pp. 19-22. .' .20 TSN dated July 26,2011, pp. 54, 56. . '.'" TSN dated July 27, 2011, p. 3.22 Exhibits MMM and 000; TSN dated July 27,2011, pp: 6,12,21,23,25'27,32; TSN dated July 30, 2Q13,

p. 17.

23 TSN dated July 30,2013, pp. 9-lO, 16,17 and 26.

DectsfonPeoplevs. Luna, et al.SB·lO-CRM-Olll, etc.

x-~ --------------------------------------------x

9

3. His functions as HRMOdesignateinclude:

a. Recruiting applicants or workers to behired by the municipality;

b. Preparing and signing job orders forworkers;

c. Processingappointments;d. Acting on leave applications of

emplcyeea.s+

4. Sometimein the secondweekof June 2004, he went tothe office of accused Carlos to follow up histransportation expenses.AccusedCarIosaskedhim ifhe has signedthe job ordersfor January to April 2004,as he was the HRMOdesignateduring the said period,for the liquidation of the .cash advances for thehonoraria or per diem-s.25

5. Immediately afterwards, he proceededto the office ofaccusedIndoyon, then Municipal Treasurer. AccusedFerrando,whowasassignedat saidoffice,told him that. .

she will just approach him after she completes thedocuments for the job orders. Accused Ferrandoshowedhim thejob orders,which werealreadyfilled up,and signed in the Acknouiledqmentportions, and alsosignedby accusedSaligurnbaand Luna. The workerswere describedas confidential agents,assignedto theOffice of the Mayor. The stated salaries werePhP5,OOO.00 per month.: He was supposed to signapproximately25job orders.26

6. He expressedinterest in signing the job orders becausehe wanted to know if the job order workers indeedrenderedservicefrom January to April 2004.27

7. On the third week of June 2004, Ms. Adlawan, a joborder employee assigned at the Treasurer's Office,asked him to go to the officeof accusedFerrando. Hetold Ms. Adlawan to inform accusedFerrando that hewill sign the job orders at his office after he examinesand reviewsthe attachments,and, determinesthat thejob order workerssubmitted all supporting papers.Thejob orders were not forwarded to his .office thatafternoon and even until he· left the municipalgovernmentin 2006.28

8. Sometimein September2004, he learned that the joborders for January to April 2004 intended for his

"0 Exhibit 58-Carlos; TSN dated July 27,2011, pp. 13,34.25 TSNs dated .July 27, 2011, pp. 24-25, 30-31; TSN datedJanuary 27, 2013, p. 31."0 TS[~dated July 27,2011, pp. 28-30, pp. 80-82."7 TSN datedJuly 27,2011, p. 46. .

". TSNdatedJuly 27, 2011, pp. 31-33.f/

..

~.' ....-

~ ~ U

DectsionPeoplevs. Luna, et al.S8-1O-CRM-OIll, etc.x-------------------------------------------------x

signature were replaced by job orders that were signedby accused Lindo, as HRMO. He was shown copies ofboth sets of job orders by his source.The two (2) setsofjob orders contained the same names and number ofemployees.Someof those whose names appear in thejob order visited his office. When he asked them,Senando Anon, Edwin Adlawan, and Angelina Abelgaswereamongthosewho werenot awarethat they werejoborder employees. Among others, Angelina Abelgas,SenandoAnon, Policarpio Orencio;Archie Daylo, EdwinAdlawan, and Edison Torres are ghost employees. Hedid not see them report to the office. He cannotrememberthe namesof all the workers.29

9. When he learned that the subject cash advance wasliquidated evenwhen he did not sign the job ordere, hefiled a complaint before the Civil Service Commission(CSC) alleging that the job order workers are ghostemployees.30

10. AUy. Legaspi,Director ofthe RegionalRLAOCARAGA13,COA, informed him that the CSC.forwarded his letter-complaint to the Office of the 'Ombudsman (OMB),which, in turn, directed the Commissionon Audit (~OA)to conduct an audit, As requestedby COA,he executedan affidavit. He did not participate in the audit, TheCSCwrote to inform him that they forwarded his letter-complaint to the OMB.31

11. The Municipality hired skilled job order workers everyyear, from 1992 to 2004. They were aseigned to thedifferent officesand programsof the municipality.P

12.Ajob order worker is hired basedon a special skill. Themayor determineswho are hired under job order. A joborder worker is funded by the 20%DevelopmentFund,33

13. A job order contract is prepared,as follows:

a. Theworker submits his PersonalData Sheet;b. The necessaryinformation is encodedin the

job order;c. He affixes pis signature under the words

"Prepared by";d. The worker is asked to affix his signature on

thejob order contract;

e. The job order contract iSer~r;::tsed in thefollowing chronological ord~ ~

" .,.geld••• d Juiy 27, 20 Il , p; 33 3S. 61. 67~68. /l30 Exhibits PPPto PPP-4; TSN dated July 27,2011, pp. 39-42, 57-60, 70.J' 1'Sfl dated July 27, 2011, pp. 42-45; ExhibitsFF to FF-5."2 rsr: dated July 30,2013, p. 25. M"J TSI! dated July 27, 2011, p. 19; 74-76; TSN dated July 3D, 2013, (lp. 22·23. I~lJ

10

DecistonPeople vs. Luna, et al.SB-lO-CRM -0 111, etc.x··_..------- --- - --- --- - -- -- - - -- - -- ------ ----'------- x

11

I. The Municipal BudgetOfficer certifies asto the existenceof the appropriation;

ii. The Municipal Accountant certifies thatthere is an existing obligation;

iii. The Office of the Municipal Mayorapprovesthejob order;

iv. Theheadof departmentwherethe workeris to beassignedalsosigns thejob order;and, .

v. The job order is returned to the HRMOfor record keeping and to notify the

34worker to report for work.

14. The job order is prepared in six (6) copies fordistribution or submissionto: "

a. Office of the Municipal Accountant;b. Human ReSQ4rCeManagementOffice;c. Office of the Mayor; and,d. Civil ServiceCommission [two (2) copie§p:i

15. The job orders-s he prepared complied with therequirementsand standardsof the CSC. Thejob orderssubject of the presentcaseswerenot submitted to himfor liquidation. The job orders signed by accusedLindo, Saligumba,and Luna, did not have supportingdocumerits.v?

16. The amount of Php1,610,000.OQ,more or less, wasdisbursed for the payment of honoraria of job orderworkers for January to April 2004, and was liquidated.The job orders, the Time Book and Payroll, and thedisbursement voucher were submitted as supportingdocumentsfor liquidation of the cashadvance.w

17. On August 31, 2004, the Report of Disbursementprepared by accused Ferrando for the payment ofhonoraria was recordedin the Books of Accounts. Theliquidation of cash advances,which were submitted tothe Officeof the Municipal Accountant,are the sameasthose in Journal Entry Voucher No. 100-01-04-08dated August 31, 2004 and Journal Book Entry No.100-02-08 preparedand signedby Loreta Edukawan,and, signedby accusedCarlos.P?

18.Whenhe first sawthe disbursementvoucher,hewasnotin the position to know that it listed fictitious employees.But when he saw the Time Book and Payroll, he knewthat the job order workerswere fictitious. Even.beforeconducting, in September2004, his investigation andrandom verification of the job order workers, he was

3. TSN dated July 27,2011, pp. 13-16,20; TSN dated July 30,2013, pp. 13-14, 19." TSN dated July 27,2011, pp. 17,20-21. ....; Exhibit FFF

,1 TSN dated July 27, 2011, pp. 73-77.jti TSN dated July 27,2011, p. 38.co TSN dated July 27,2011, pp. 38-39. r:

~'"

,.~0

DecisionPeoplevs. Luna, et al.SB-1O-CRM-0111, etc.~-------------------------------------------------x

12

already certain that said employeeswere fictitious. He-talked to someworkers in the list.40

19.Hehad no participation in the preparation of the subjectjob orders. He had no participation in the preparationof the budget of the municipality. His complaint wasbasedon the ghost workers. The complaint WEl.~ part ofthe inquiry on the job order.v'

Marah lVJ. Mendp~a, State Auditor II, Commission OIl

Audit, Region 13,42 testified:

I. She is a State Auditor 11of COA, Region 13 since. -

November2004.43

2. In 2005, she was assignedto the Regional Leqal qndAdjudication Office (RLAO).Theregionalofficereceivedfrom COA Central Office, an order directing them toconduct an audit investigationon the disbursementbythe LGUof LingigofPhPl,610,800.00, for the per diemand honoraria of job order workers in 2004.44

3. The investigation was requested by GMfs-Mindanao.OMls-Mindanao'srequest was based on Rito Orillo'scomplaint.45

4. The complaint of Orillo pertainedto the cash advanceofaccused Ferrando under Disbursement Voucher (DV)No. 100-2004-04-1271amounting to PhP2,3271000.OO.The documentssubmitted with the Complaint include:

a. Original copy of the duplicate copy ofCheck!'fo. 231481;

b. Original copies of the Allotment andObligation Slips;

c. Original copiesof the Job Orders;d. Original copiesof the Tittie Book and

Payrolls; -- -e. Copy of the Transmittal Letter dated

September22, 2004, addressedto theProvincial Auditor, signed by VenusCarlos, forwarding the disbujsementvoucherand the payrolls.46

ru TSNdatedJuly 27, 21l1l, pp. 5'/-60. • r?4\ Exhibits FFF to FFF--17;TSNdated JU. ly 30,2013, pp. 31-33, 35-31>. ~4" TSI-jdated October 12,2011, p. 3 "_ ....'3 TSNdated October 12, 2011, p. 6; TSl'l dated May22,2012, p. 12. ." Exhibits RRR and VVV; TSNdated October 12,20q, pp. 12-13; 'fSN dated May 22, ~PI2, pp. 19, ~4-25.

28; SecondIndorsement dated February 7,2005 signedby a certain Elizabeth Zoaa,p4"~.::torIV 9ftht;Commissionon Audit Central Office,Exhibit QQQ; Complaint attached tothe lnd!lf~m.~P.t,~$p~t ~R.

'5 TSNdated October 12, 2011, pp. 6, 9-11; TSNdated May22, 20q, pp. 12. 1~, 20-22; Office Order NC!.2005-13-002 dated April 27, 2005 signedby Atty. Marisol E. Legaapi, RegionalCluster Director, Jbx1Ul/it~;Office Order No. 2005-13-002-A dated August 5, 2005, also signed by a Atty, Lega~pi,EJqtibitB'. .

,,, Exhibit Q; T::iNdated OCLOber12,2011. pp. l4-21; TSN dated-May22,2012, pp. 29-36.:39-40.

Dt;ciiiionPcuple vs. Luna, et al.SIJ-lO-CRM-O11 1, etc.x ---·---------·----------------------------------x

13

5. The audit teamwas composedof:

a. Mr. Bucong, who was later droppedfrom the team by Atty. MarisolLegaspi;

b. Ms. Sally Ladaga;and,c. herself as eo-teamleader.

She was later made team leader through an OfficeOrder."?

6. The audit team evaluated Ortillo's complaint togetherwith the attached documents, then prepared an AuditProgram. They requestedthe LGUof Lingig for a list ofits regular and job order workers. The letter-requestdated May 5, 2005 was receivedby accusedLindo.w

7. There are two (2) particulars in the DisbursementVoucher: (i) salaries of regular employees(PhP7l6,49l.l5); and, (ii) job order workers'honorarium and per diems (PhP1,610,800.00). Theaudit team f-ocusedon the job order workers hired from.Ianuary to April 2004.49

8. Basedon the ALOBS,the PhP716,491.15for the salariesof the regular employees was charged against theappropriate funds.s"

9. When they wereabout to leavefor Lingig on June 2005,accused Luna called and talked to Bucong throughmobile phone. Bucong informed the audit team thataccusedLuna admitted that the namesin the Time Bookand Payroll weredummies and the payment was takenfrom his IntelligenceFund. BucongrequestedaccusedLuna to submit a certification containing saidadmission. She was in another room when theconversation betweenBucong and accused Luna tookplace.>!

10. Pursuant to their request, accused Luna submitted aCertification datedJune 16,2005 togetherwith a List of107 job order workers for January to April 2004. TheCertificate partly reads:"This certifies that the followingpersonslisted belowarejust dummieswho receivedtheamount out of my intelligence funds." The List was

~--- ----- .---.-~-.------

41 TSN dated October 12,2011, p. 14; TSN dated May 22,2012, pp. 22-23.'" TSN dated October 12, 2011, pp. 22-23, 26; TSN dated May 22, 2012, p. 29, 40-41, 43, 45-46; Letter dated

May 5,2005, Exhibit SSS and SSS-l. '1"" TSN dated December 7,2011, pp. 7-8; TSN dated August 28,2012, pp. 73-74, 77-78. .cu TSN dated August 28,2012, pp. 76-77; .01 TSN dated October 12,2011, p. 29; TSN dated May 22,2012, pp. 49-50; TSN dated August 28,2012, pp.

69-71; TSN dated September 25, 2012, p. 17.

DectsionPeople vs. Luna, et al.SB-IO-CRM-Ol11, etc.x-------------------------------------------------i

14

prepared by accused Lindo and certified correct by .accusedLuna.c?

11. The audit team prepareda list of the names in theTime Book and Payroll. They compared the 101names in the Time Book and Pauroll with the 107namesin the List. Four (4)of the namesin the Listwere listed twice and two (2) of the names thereinwere not in the Time Book and Payroll. The auditteamtreatedthe CertificationdatedJune 16,2005 asan admissionby accusedLuna that the amount wassourcedfrom his IntelligenceFund."

12. They proceededto Lingig to pay a courtesy call toaccused Luna. But since accused Luna was notaround, they met with accusedLindo and Carlos, andother municipal personnel. They interviewedsomeofthem, including accusedLindo, about the List that themunicipality submitted.. The audit team,was not ableto confirm from the individuals in the payroll if theywere paid. LGU Lingig did not comply with the auditteam'srequestfor the postaladdressesof the job orderworkers. It was difficult for them to penetrate theMunicipality becauseof the peaceand order situation.They did not go to the Civil Registrar to check on thelisted persons.q4

13. Thereafter,the audit team receivedIndorsement datedJune 24, 2005 from ElizabethZosa,Director IVi Legaland Adjudication Office, COA, together with thecomplaint of LeonorOtagan. Mr, Otagarr's complaintwas similar to Orillo's; both pertain to the payment ofghostjob order workersunder the samedisbursementvoucher. Orillo used the word "dummy' while Otaganused "ghost". Upon the team's request, Otagansubmitted a SwornAffidavit.55 .

14. SinceLuna claimedthat the paymentwas taken fromhis IntelligenceFund and that theassignmentof thejoborder workers is confidential in nature, and in view ofaccusedCarlos'declarationthat the chargesweretakenfrom the 20% DevelopmentFund, the audit team .requestedfor a copy of the 2004 Budget,the Annu~1\1Investment Plan (AlP),and, the DevelopmentFund,) 1r>

j2 Exhibits J to J-IO; TSN dated October 12, 2011, p. 25; TSN dated October 13, 2011, pp. 6-7; TSN dated

May 22,2012, pp. 46-47, 63-65; TSNdated May 23,2012, pp: 35c36. . iD53 Exhibits J to J-I0, T, U; TSNdated October 12, 2011, pp. 26-28; .TSNdated October 13, 2011, pp. 6-7; TSN .

dated May 22,2012, pp. 48-49, 63-65, 67-69; TSNdated May 23,2012, pp.33-36 .,. TSN dated October 12, 2011, pp. 30-31; TSN dated May 22,2012, pp. 52-53; TSN dated October 24,2012,

pp.20-2l. '. .

5S TSNdated October 12, 2011, p. 40; TSNdated October 13, 2M1, pp. 10-11; TSN dated May 22,2012, pp.'12-73; TSN dated September 25,2012, p. 19.

DecisionPeoplevs. Luna, et al.S8-1O-CRM-Olll, etc.x ..-._-------- --- --- ---..-- --------- ------.c-----------:x

15

determine if there were appropriations for said items.They gavethe letter request to accusedCarlOS.56

15. AccusedLuna submitted copiesof the Annual Budgetand the AlP of 2004. There is no intelligence fund inthe Municipality's Annual Budget. Under the AlP, therewas an appropriation for Peace and Order and NationalSecurity Mission Project.57

16. They evaluated the documents that they gathered,including:

a. DV No. 2001-04-1271 datedApril 14,2004;b. Duplicate copy of Check No. 231481 dated April

12,2004;c. Original copiesof the Time Book and Payroll;d. Original copiesof the .JobOrders: .e. Original copies of the Allotment and Obligation

Slips (ALOBS);f. Annual Budget for the year 2004;g. Annual Investment Plan for 2004;h. Certification dated June 16, 2005;i. 2"d Indorsernerrt dated June 24, 2005 from

Elizabeth Zosa, Director IV, Legal andAdjudication Office, Co.A, with the attachedcomplaint of LeonorOtagan,.Jr.:arid,

j. Affidavit of LeonorOtagan..Jr.

17.The audit team concludedthat:

a. The municipality paid per diems and honoraria to101 Job Orders who were dummies or ghostworkers; .

b. The municipality paid PhPl,610,800.00 forconfidential expenses even if there was noappropriation for confidential and intelligencefund. Said amount was paid a month prior to the2004 May elections,and the CSCrequirements onthe hiring of job order employees were notcomplied with, i.e., the contracts were potsubmitted to the CSC;· .

c. The corresponding check was issued on April 12,2004 or two (2) days before the date of theDisbursement Voucher; Other documents, suchas the job orders, and the ALOBSwere preparedafter the check was issued; and,

d. Municipal officials including accusedLuna, Lindo,Saligumba,Indoyonand Carlosparticipated in theassailed transaction.58 .

The audit team concluded that th.e sXf.bJ.·et wo.rkersare dummies for the followingreasons: ..-_ r;

18.

'150 Exhibits Rand TTT; TSN dated October 12.2011, pp. 32-37; TSN dated May 22. 2012, pp. 54-55. and 87.51 TSN dated October 12.2011. p. 35; TSN dated December 7.2011, p. 20; TSN dated May·22. 2Q12, pp.59-

62; TSNdated August 28.2012. pp. 7, 17-18;TSNdated August 29.2012, p. 10.,,, TSN dated October 13. 2011. pp. 23-24; TSN dated June 26, 2012. pp. 11-13.

DecisionPeople vs. Luna, et al.::J8-1O-CRM-O111, etc.

16

;(---------------------------------------------------x

a. Inconsistencies between the list of workerssubmitted by the Municipality and the workers asappearing in the payroll;

b. The job order contracts were signed by accusedLindo even when the same is beyond his authority;Otagan was the HRMO designate:

c. Otagan claimed that he did not see the job orderworkers;

d. The checks were prepared ahead of the supportingdocuments, i.e., the' ALOES, the Pauroll and JobOrder Contracts; and,

e. The admissions of accused Luna in his phone call,in the certification he issued, and in themanagement comments.c?

19. She prepared Audit Observation Memorandum(AOM) dated July 28, 2005. On .July 28, 2005, theaudit team furnished accused Luna and Carlos witha copy of the AOM.6o

20, They did not conduct an exit conference in theMunicipality of Lingig because of the peace and orderproblem. The AOM served the purpose of an exitconference - to inform the concerned persons of theirfindirigs.v!

21. After receiving; accused Luna and Carlos' separatecomments, the audit team preparedan Audit Reportand the Notice of Disallowance (ND).62

22. The Notice of Disallowance, signed by Atty. MarisolLegaspi, was issued on November 29, 2005, Copiesof the ND were addressed and sent to accused Luna,Lindo, Carlos, Ferrando, Indoyon and Saligumba, toformally inform them. They issued a Notice ofDisallowance because the Municipality paid perdiems or honorarium on April 2004 in the amount ofPhP1,610,800.00to 101job order workers who weredummies, per accused Luna's admission.s-

23. Accused Luna and the other persons found liable fileda Motion for Reconsideration before the Legal andAdjudication Office.s+

24. After preparing the Audit Report, sheand Sally Ladagaexecuted a Joint Affidavit. 65 They submitted the JointAffidavit, together with the Audit Report, to OMl3

r>'9 TSNdatedOctober24,2012,pp. 21-22.uU ExhibitC; TSNdatedJune26,2012,p.21;TSNdatedAugust. 28,2012,p. 63;TSNdatedSeptember 25,

2012,p.23. Ai61 TSNdatedJuly25,2012,pp. 16-17;TSNdatedSeptember25,2012,p.8.02 TSNdatedOctober13,2011,p. 30;ExhibitC. . ... '03 TSNdatedOctober13,2011,pp. 36-39and42-43:TSNdatedJune26,2012,pp. 24,26,29-30;TSNdated •....

August28,2012,p.68. .04 TSNdatedOctober13,2011,p. 41.0' ExhibitX

DecistonPeoplevs. Luna, et al.SB-lO-CRM-Olll, etc.x--------------··----------------------------------x

17

Mindanao and to the COA-Central Office, incompliance with the OMB's order to include theirfinal observationin said affidavit.

25. TheAudit Reportwasreleasedon December1,2005.TheAudit Reportis presumedto havebeenapprovedby the approvingauthority of COAon November16,2005.66

26. The OMB conducteda preliminary investigationanddirected the audit team to file Joint ReplyAffidavits."? "

27. Subsequently, he was informed by Atty. MarisolLegaspithat the subject amount was fully refundedby accusedLuna.v''

28. Basedon CSCMemorandumCirculars (MC)No. 17and 24, seriesof 2002, only positions with specialortechnical skills not availablein the municipality canbe hired through a Job Order. The basic monthlysalary of such employeesshould be on a daily orhourly rate. A'Confidential agentdoesnot fall underthis definition; hence, confidential agents are notentitled to honoraria or per diems.s?

29. Under CSC MC No. 17, job order workers are notgovernment personnel and are not covered by theCivil ServiceLC\.w.Job Orderscoverpieceof work orintermittent jobs of short duration, not exceedingsix(6)months and, paid on a daily basis."?

30. Sections 5 and 6 of CSC MC No. 17 require thesubmission of the Job Order Contract to the CSCforreview. The generalrule is that there should be norendition of servicespendingreviewof saidcontracts.The .Job Order personnelcannot render serviceuntilthe CSC reviews the Job Order Contract. The JobOrder Contracts may only be implementedafter itsreviewby the CSC. Thereviewis undertaken to stopthe practice of government.agencieson the 45/55%limitations.on PersonnelServices."! .

31. Under Section6~MCNoO'.17,Seriesof 2.002.,t~e He.){d.' .of the Agency, In the exigency of public service or If ./"'70 .

ce Exhibit C; TSN dated December 7,2011, pp. 14-15. . 0 (/

61 Exhibit Y; TSN dated October 13,2011, pp. 42-43; TSNdated June 26, 2012, p. 24 and 29-30.' ~.0" TSN dated October 13,2011, pp. 34-36; TSN dated June 26,2012, pp. 28-29; Official Receipt No. ~539239 .

dated September 7, 2010 (PhPl,500,QOO.00), Exhibit GGG; Official Receipt No. 2925302 dated September .." ....21,2010 (PhPllO,800.00), Exhibit HHH.· .

0" TSN dated October 13,2011, pp. 22-43; TSN dated May 23,2012, p. 24; TSN dated .July 25,2012, p. 9. .!O TSNdated August 28, 2012, p. 58.

il TSN dated May 23, 2012, pp. 21-23; TSN dated June 26, 2012, pp. 4-6 and 8; TSN dated July 25, 2012, P:11; TSN dated August 28,2012, pp. 44-45, 48, 56-57.

DecisionPeoplevs. Luna, et al.S8-1O-CRM-O 111, etc.x-------------------------------------------------x

18

public welfare or safety requires, may allow theperson hired to render service and receivecompensation during the pendency of the review bythe CSC. The Job Order contract is valid even if notreviewed by the CSC. Even job order contracts notsubmitted to the CSC are subject to COA Rules andRegulations.t-

32. The certification appearing in the job orders are notirregular. The Job Orderswere not submitted to theCSC for its review, in violation of CSC-MC No. 17,Series of 2002 and CSC-MC No. 24, Series of 2002.The alleged hiring of 101 Job Order workers does notfall under the exceptions under CSC MemorandumCircular No. 24. The. exceptions pertain only toexigencies of service. There was an irregularity notmerely on the basis of non-submission of thecontracts to the CSC.73

33. Their findings in relation to CSC MC No. 17 and 24were not included in the FactFindinq Audit Reportbecause those are minute detail observations thatlead them to conclude that no job order workers werehired. The audit team saw no need to include it inthe report since the report already states theirconclusion. The observations regarding the CSCcirculars do not directly address the complaints ofOtagan and Orillo. The' same were mentioned in their.Joint Reply Affidavit. Other issues not included inthe audit report were clarified in the affidavitcomplaint. 74

34. The audit team looked into the following DILGissuances to identify the projects that can be fundedby the 20% Development Fund and to know how theIntelligence and Confidential Fund can be utilized:

Amending M.C. No. 98-136 dated J141y 24, 199~~entitled "Revised Guidelines Relative to theUtilization of Funds for Intelligence or ConfidentialPurposes"Reiterating or Further Amending the Provisions ofM.c. No. 95-216 dated December 14, 199$~entitled "Policies and Guidelines on. the Utilization.of the 20% Deve 'Pment Fund and Related Mqttersas Amended'--" ._, ,__ -.L=~.:..c.::..:::.:...::..::.;c. :...:..:,-=..1------------.,--------1

(7"'1ts Exhibit BBBB; TSN dated August 28,2012, pp. 56-57,59-61;TSNdated October 23,2012, p. 44-4Q,52-

53;TSNdated October 24,2012, pp. 10-11. .7) Exhibits BBBB and CCCC;TSN dated August 29,2012, p. 7; TSNdated October 24, 2012,'pp. 10-11;TSN

dated October 23,2012, p. 43-46, 52-53.74 TSNdated August 28,2012, pp. 61-62;TSNdated September25,2012, p. 30; TSNdated October 24,2012, .

pp. 17-20and 55-56.

M.C. No. 99-65dated April 23,]999

MC No. 99-66dated April 23,1999

DecisfonPeoplevs. Luna, et al.SB-lO-CRM-0 Ill, etc.x~ -----------------------------------------------x

19

G··_-_·_-

M.C. No. 99-144 Further Amending M.C. !VD. 95-216 entitleddated AUg.ust 11, "POliC!. ies and Guidelines on the Utiliz.alio.Tt of the1999 20%Develo ment Fund and Related Matters75

35. The AlP is funded by the annual budget. It lists theprojects that can be funded through the 20%Development Fund. The 20% Development Fundcannot be used to fund personnel services. It can beused for economic services and social services. Thisis for the programs and projects of the municipality.tv

36. LGU Lingig's AlP has an appropriation for PeaceandOrder and National Security Mission Project.77

37. The DILG Circulars did not list the National SecurityMission Project as a component of the 20%Development Fund.78 The National Security MissionProject includes cost of services that are confidentialin nature, to carry on administrative activities. It maybe used to fund Peaceand Order Project, and, in thecourse of implementing this project, the Mayor mayhire Job Order workers."

38. DILG MC No. 99-144 allows provision of funds, fromthe Development Funds, for Peace and Order andPublic Safety; the amount under Peace and Ordermust not exceed 10% of 80% of the 20% DevelopmentFund. Only certain expenses are allowed underPeace and Order, per DILG Memorandum Circular99-65.80 The Peaceand Order and Public Safety can.be funded from, but should not be more than 10% of,the 80% of the 20% Development' Fund.s!

39. The Fund may be used to purchase firearms andequipment, and pay for the maintenance and otheroperating expenses of the PNP, D$P, and BJMP.82 Itmay also be used for the administration of the Peaceand Order Council, relative to the, Council's conductof its regular meetings.s- Peaceand Order and PublicSafety covers the administration of the Peace andOrder Countil in the conduct of its regula.r.m.ee.tingand the as4ministration Of the Law EnforcementBoard.s+

(74·'" Exhibits z, AA and BB; T~d~d October 13, 2011, pp. 1 20; N dated May 22, 20l2, pp. 43-44; TSri

dated May 23,2012, p. 13. \\. ..70 TSN dated May 23,2012, p_27.71 TSN dated October 12,2011, p. 35; TSN dated December7,2011, p. 20; TSri dated May 22, 2012,pp. 59-

62; TSN dated August 28,2012, pp. 7,17-18; TSN dated August 29,2012, p. 10.70 TSN dated October 24,2012, pp. 36-37.1Y TSN dated August 28,2012, pp. 34-38.8u Exhibit BB; TSN dated August 28, 20l2, p. 24.01 TSN dated June 26, 2012, p. 4.82 TSN dated July 25, 2012, pp. 32-33.03 TSN dated August 29,2012, p_ 13_84 TSN dated October 13, 2011, p. 5; TSN dated May 23, 2012, pp. 3Q-37;TSN dated August 28, 2012, pp. 11-

12; rsx dated August 29,2012, pp. 11-12.

DecfsionPeoplevs. Luna, et al.SB-lO-CRM -01 11, etc.x~------------------------------------------------x

20 .

40. Under the Manual of the' National GovernmentAccouniinq System, confidential and intelligencepertain to the same fund,85

41. The Annual Budget for the year 2004 for theMunicipality of Lingig did not provide for anappropriation for the Confidential and IntelligenceFund.86

42. As shown in Table III of the Audit Report.s? none ofthe six (6) funding charges were charged to theIntelligence Fund or the Confidential and IntelligenceFund. The certification of the Budget Officer in. theDisbursement Voucher states that the payment wascharged against the Peaceand Order Funds. 88

43. LGU of Lingig's AlP for the year 2004 provides for (i)National Security Mission Project and Initiative(PhP1,000,000,00), and, (ii) Peace and Order andPublic Safety (PhP450,000.00).

44. Peaceand Order cannot be used to fund the paymentfor job order workers because the same does not fallunder the allowable expenses under M,C. No. 99-65,Likewise, the National Security Mission Project is notamong the projects which can bcl funded under the20% Development Fund.s?

45. The National Security Mission Projects can be takenas part of the Confidential and; Intelligence Fund.Peaceand Order is pot part of said fund.w

46. The audit team considered the National SecuritqMission Projects as part of the '20% DevelopmentFund."! The amount of PhP450,OO·0.00WaS allocatedfor Maintenance of the P~aceand .order project.

The amount of PhP450,000.00 (Peaceand Order) andPhPl,OOO,ooo.OO (National Security Mission)exceeded the limitations under the Circulars.v-

47. The obligations were Charged against the Peace andOrder and 20% Development Fund intended . forNational Security Mission; some were charged to the

(7

)td5 TSN dated July 25,2012, p. 32."" TSN dated August 29,2012, p. 5; Audit Report dated November 16, 2005, Exhibit C.•', Exhibit C

88 TSN dated August 29, 2012, pp. 28, 30-32.89 TSN dated October 23,2012, p. 30.W TSN dated July 25,2012', p. 32.Yl TSN dated August 29,2012, p. 12.Y2 TSNdatedAugust29,2012,pp.15,17-19.

DectsionPeople vs. Luna, et al.S8-1O-CRM -01 11, etc.

21

X· .. - -- ----- - - -- - .. - -- -- -- -- - - - - --- --- ---.------'- ----x

appropriation of the Officeof the Mayorand the Officeof the Municipal Treasurer.v'

48. The Statement of Statutory and ContractualObligation is part of the Annual Budget. This mayhave been one of the basesof the Municipal BudgetOfficer in determining whether there was anappropriation for Peaceand Order Fund.v+

49. DBM Circular No.62 or the "Guidelines on the Grantof Honoraria in -theLocalGovernmentUnits" providesthat governmentofficials and employeesare allowedto receive honoraria. Job Order workers are notconsidered government employees.f" There is noemployer-employee relationship between the JobOrder workers and the Municipality of Lingig,96

50. The Local Chief Executive's Office is in charge ofimplementingthe projectsunder the AIP;97

51. There can be an appropriation for confidential andintelligence fund if the priority concern of themunicipality is peaceand order; it can only be usedfor the payment of rewards, purchase of informationor food and medical aid, supplies, ammunition, andtravelling expenses incurred for the purpo&e ofconfidential and intelligence operation. TheConfidential and IntelligenceFund should not exceed3% of the total appropriation, or 30% of the PeaceandOrder, whichever is 10wer.98

52. The salary of the informants (Job Order workers,confidential in nature) 'rnay be taken from theConfidential and Intelligence Fund. In the presentcase, however, there was no appropriation forIntelligenceFund in the 2004 approvedbudget,"

53. The audit teamreferredto COA Circular No. 2003-003for the audit and liquidation of confidential andintelligence expenses.w"

54. The liquidation of confidential and intelligence fundis directly submitted to the Office of the Chairman,COA. The liquidation voucher must be duly signed

,201(::7~3 TSNdated October 12, 2011, pp. 47-48i TSNdatedMay23,2012, pp. 26-27i TSNdated

p.19.94 Exhibit UUU;TSNdatedAugust29,2012, pp. 9-10.95 Exhibit BBB;TSNdatedMay23,2012, pp. 10-11.% TSNdatedJuly 25, 2012, p. 9.07 TSNdatedAugust 29,2012, pp. 12-13.98 TSNdatedOctober13,2011, p. 20; TSNdate" May 23,2012, pp. 45-46; DILG MemorandumCircular.No.

99-65datedApril 23, 1999,Exhibit Z.9" 2004Annual Budget,Exhibit UUU;TSNdatedOctober13,2011,p. 5; TSNdatedMay22,2012, p. f!6;TSN

datedMay23,2012, pp. 29-31;TSNdatedJuly 25,2012, p. 33; TSNdatedSeptember25, 2Q12,pp. 17-18.IOu Exhibit CC;TSNdatedOctober13,2011, pp. 12-14;TSNdatedMay23,2012, pp. 38-39.

k1l

DecistonPeoplevs. Luna, et al.SB-IO-CRM-Olll, etc.x~ ~-----------------------------------------------x

by the authorized signatory and supported by thefollowingdocuments:

a. Certified Xerox copy of the DisbursementVoucherof the cash advancebeing liquidated;

b. Certification of the Mayor and LGDconcernedofthe utilization of the Intelligenceand Confidentialexpense.Any disbursementfrom the Intelligenceor ConfidentialFund shall beaccountedsolelyonthe certification of the Headof LGD responsiblefor intelligence, confidential, and nationalsecurity mission project;

c. Copy of approved budget of the SangguniangBayan;

d. Copy of the Minutes of the Meeting showing thetwo-third (2/3) votesof the council for the releaseof the Intelligenceand Confidential Fund;

e. PNP Certification regarding peace and orderproblem in the area for the use of confidentialand intelligencefund;

f. Allocations for Intelligence and Confidentialfunds approved by the Secretary of the DILG;and,

g. Approval from the Presidentof'the Philippines.101

55. Here, the Job Orders, and TIme Book and Payrollsubmitted for the liquidation of the disbursementareunnecessaryforthe liquidation of intelligencefunds.No copy of the approvedbudget was submitted forliquidation.102

56. Sheis awarethat there is a peaceand orderproblemin Lingig. The managementinvoked the insurgencyand the presenceof groups in the Municipality ofLingig to justify the disbursementof funds for Peaceand Order and the' National Security MissionProject.103

57. The Job Orders must be prepared prior to thepayment. The Job Orders serveas proof that theMunicipality hired workers. The issuance of thecheck should be the last act. Here, the check wasissuedbeforethe job orders,disbursementvouchersand Allotment ObligationSlipswereprepared.104

58. The Allotment and Obligation SlipDevelopment fund was preparedadvancehas beenconsummated.f"

for the 20%ter the cash

(?

ftt101 TSN dated October 13, 2011, pp. 15-17; TSN dated May 22,2012, pp. 41-42.102 TSN dated May 23, 20 12, pp. 42, 55-56; TSN dated October 13, 2011, p. 17.rea TSN dated July 25,2012, p. 12; TSN dated August 29,2012, p. 36.104 TSN dated September 25,2012, pp. 21-22, and 29.Wo TSN dated May 23, 2012, p. 28.

22

Decfaio nPeople vs. Luna, et al.SB-lO-CRM-Olll, etc.x-------------------------------------------------x

59. Accused Ferrando is considered an accountableofficer becausesheis a CashClerk.106

60. Accused Carlos is accountablebecauseshe signedthe disbursement voucher even without· thesupporting documents; she also signed·the ALOaSfor the Job Ordersafter the checkwas issued.

61. AccusedLindo signedthe checkand the disbursementvoucherevenif therewereno supporting documents.

62. AccusedIndoyon signedthe checkand the payroll inthe absence of supporting documents. AccusedIndoyonwas included in the Disallowancebecausehesigned the Time Book and' Payroll. The signature ofaccused Indoyon is also found in the DisbursementVoucher.107 He should sign the DisbursementVoucheronly after the Municipal Accountant and theMayor havesignedthe same.lOB

63. The Allotment and Obligation Slip is filled up by therequesting officer. Thereafter, the request isforwardedto the Municipal BudgetOfficer. The lattershall check the Annual Budget and verify whetherthere is an appropriation; he shall sign the Slip tocertify that thereis an appropriation. TheMunicipalAccountant certified the Obligationof Allotment. Thedocuments (slips) passedfrom the requester (Officeof the Municipal Mayor), then to the MunicipalBudget Officer, and to the Municipal Accountant.The Slips will be attached to the payroll for thepreparation of.the DisbursementVoucher. AccusedLuna requestedthe allotment. AccusedSaligumbafirst checked the budget, whether there is anappropriation in relation to the funding charged.w?

64. TheMunicipal BudgetOfficersignsthe Allotment andObligation Slips. Such act is not an independentorspecific responsibility of the Municipal BudgetOfficer.U? The Municipal Budget Officer is also theone who writes the numbers on the Allotment andObligation Slips; said officer identifies the allotmentand stateswhether the account is closed.III

65. The Municipal Budget Officeris the onewho certifiesthe existence of appropriation of Peace and Order

WO TSN dated October 23, 2012, p. 10.lU! TSN dated September 26,2012, pp. 8-10.

lU8 TSN dated September 25, 2012, pp. 26-27.10, TSN dated August 29,2012, pp. 38-40.

llU ExhibitsH to H-32; TSN dated August 29,2012, pp. 36-38,III TSN dated August 29,2012, p. 40.

23

?'A1

DectsfonPeuplevs. Luna, et al.S81O-CRM-Olll, etc.x-~----------------------------------------------x

Funds; accused Saligumba (Municipal BudgetOfficer)certified the existenceof appropriation.

66. It is the job of accused Carlos, as MunicipalAccountant, to look into the existence of theobligation. AccusedCarlosmayonly certify as to theexistenceof an obligation after the existence'of anappropriation has beencertified.U?

67. The certification by accusedSaligumba must havebeen done prior to the issuance of the checkmAccused Carlos certified as to the existence ofappropriation after the issuanceof the check.U?

68. Theaudit teamdisallowedthe disbursementbecauseno workers were actually hired, hence, there weremerely"ghostworkers". TheJob Ordersare the bestproof that no workers were hired because thecontracts were issued late, or after the check wasreleased.U" Basedon the payroll, the workers hiredunder the subjectJob Orderswerenot paid on a dailybasis.Majority of the workerswerepaid on a monthlybasis.t '> .

69. The disbursement is irregular becausethere was noproject undertaken. There was irregular charging.As admitted by accusedLuna himself, the paymentwas made and intended for confidential andintelligence expenses. Hence, it should have beenchargedto the confidentialand intelligencefund. Butno appropriation was made. Thus, the same wascharged to the 20% Developmentfund and otherfurids.!"

70. The Job Order should havebeensignedprior to theissuance of the check on April 12, 2004. The JobOrdersl!" were signedby the Municipal Accountantafter the checkwas iesued.l'?

71. There are supporting documents that need to beattached to the disbursementvoucherand there arealso supporting documents that may be submittedlater.120 In a cash advance,":the supportingdocuments of the Disbursement Voucher are theAllotment and ObligationSlip, unsigned payroll ani

IU TSN dated August 29,2012, pp. 3-4.113 TSN dated October 23,2012, pp. 22-23 & 24.11< TSN dated October 24,2012, pp. 26-27.m TSN dated October 23,2012, pp. 35-37.110 TSN dated October 24,2012, pp. 15-16.1lI TSN dated October 24,2012, pp. 38-39.lW Exhibit G to G-3011" TSN dated October 24,2012, pp. 24-25.I"" TSN dated November 20, 2012, pp. 25-26.

24

(l

);

DecfsionPeople vs. Luna, et al.SS-} O-CRM -0 Ill, etc.x- ---.------- -- ---- -- -... --- -- --- -------------"---- x

25

.Job Order Contracts. for liquidation, the signedpayroll and the liquidation report are submitted. Thepayroll is a liquidation document. The payrolls areproof that there was already an encashment.Otherwise, there is nothing to be liquidated if nocheck was encashed. The check encashed byaccused Ferrando was not submitted to the audittearn.V!

72 _ Under normal procedure, box A and box B in theDisbursement Voucher must first be signed prior tobox C.122

73. There were no workers who were paid because fromthe very start, the Job Order contract of theseworkers were v'oid.123

74. Based on the Job Ordera.P" the Job Order workerswere hired either as community aides, confidentialemployees, and informants, who were paid on amonthly basis or daily basis, during the periodJanuary to April 2004. _The material particulars, i.e.,funding, charges, office aasignrnerrts,were not statedin the .Job Orders. The acknowledgment portion forthe Job Order workers were not duly signed by someof the workers. The Job Order does not bear a stampof Civil Service cornpliance.P"

75. The audit team did not verify the date of the actualencashmen t of the check from Land Bank Theyinvestigated why the check was issued two (2) daysahead of the Disbursement Voucher. These matterswere not in the AGM nor in the Audit InvestigationReport, since they only addressed the issues raisedin the complaint.!" The team made severalobservations during the conduct of theirinvestigatiori.P? The AGM does not contain anyfindings on 'non-compliance with CSC MC No. 17 and24, nor on the date of Allotment and Obligation Slipsand the date of their submission. ~28

76. The Fact Finding Audit Report is a product of theirinvestigation. Since there is no Special Audit Divisio

'" 'CSN dated ~o'ob,,·'2~~;OI2,pp. 48,52,56, . ~W TSN dated November 20,2012,p. 36. ~m TSN dated October 13, 2011,p. 12. _ -m Exhibits G to G--30m TSN dated October 12,2011,pp. 44-46;TSN dated May 23,2012,pp. 11-12,18-21;TSN dated June 2p, --.

2012,p. 19_106 TSN dated September 25,2012,pp. 10-11,29.m TSN dated May 23,2012,p. 51;TSN dated June 26,2012,pp. 14-15.120 TSN dated August 28,2012,p. 63;TSN dated August 29,2012,p. 41;TSN dated September 25,2012,p.

23

DecisionPeoplevs. Luna, et al.SB-IO-CRM-Olll, etc.x--------- ----""""-- --- -- ..c - - -- - -- - -- - --------.-- ----x

26

at the RegionalLevel,the investigation is undertakenby the RegionalLegalAdjudication.

77. The basis of the Noticeof Disallowanceis the AuditReport, which contains the final findings with themanagementcommentof the officials concerned.129

78. She does not know where complainant Otagan wasconnected,nor that the latter was dismissed by theOMB for dishonesty and charged by said Office forfalsification ofTranscript of Record.Theteamdid notconduct an investigation of Otagan since it is nottheir duty to do SO.130 "

79. She does not know why Mr. .JererniasBucong wasremovedfrom the audit team.P!

80. The signature of accused Indoyon appears in theAnnual Budget of 2004.132 Based on the Manual ofLocal Budgeting, the Municipal Treasureris a memberof the FinanceCommittee,and hel sheparticipates inthe preparation of the budget,

The testimony of J\.l.lre;liil A. AlledQI Registration Officer IIIat the National Statistics Office,\33 was dispensedwith after theparties stipulated:

] . Sheholds the position of RegistrationOfficer III at theNational Statistics Office;

2. It is her duty to pull out vital documents from thedatabaseof the NSOincluding.death certificates;

3. Shereceiveda subpoenafrom the Officeof the SpecialProsecutor directing her to" submit the DeathCertificate of a certain Edna C. Badang.

4. In compliancewith the directive, she generatedfromthe databasethe death cert~ficateof a certain EdnaC. Badang and submitted tpe S8.1Ileto the Office ofthe SpecialProsecutor.134" .

?lAi

1:", Exhibit V; TSN dated October 13,2011, pp. 26-27; TSN dated December 7, 2Qll;pp. 11-12j TSN datedJune 26,2012, p. 23; TSN dated August 29,2012, p. 4L

130 TSN dated .July 25,2012, p. 28.1"1 TSN dated September 25,2012, pp. 11-12.132 Exhibit UUU; TSN dated September 26,2012, pp. 7-10.133 TSN dated December 3,2012, p. 2.'3; Exhibit AAA; TSN dated December 3,"2012, pp. 5-7; Or-del'dated December 3,2012; Record, Vol. lV, p. 26.

DecisionPeoplevs. Luna, et al.SB-lO-CRM-Olll, etc.x-.------------.-------------------------------~--x

27

The testimony of Gilda F. Laureno, Chief of the CentralRecordsof the DILG,135 was dispensed with after the partiesstipulated on the authenticity and existenceof the following:

1. DILG MC No. 99-65 dated April 23, 1999;2. DILG MC No. 99-66 dated Apri123, 1999;3. DILG MC No. 99-144 dated August 11,1999.136

Harold P. Pareja, Director II of the Civil ServiceCommission,137 testified:

1. He is the Director of the CSC Field Office, Tandag,Surigao del Sur, since April 2006.138 .

2. He received three (3) subpoenas. The first required himto submit Office Orders' issued by accused Luna toaccused Lindo and Otagan; The second directed him tosubmit LGU Lingig's Job Orders from January to April2004; The third directed him to submit MemorandumCircular's of the CSC related to Job Orders. 139

3. His staff retrieved the office orders for Otagan andaccused Lindo, and CSC MCs No. 17 and 24. He issuedcertified true copies of the same. They did not find the101 job orders for January to April 2004, lie issued theCertification dated August 22,2011. He sent the certifieddocuments and the certification to the Office of theSpecial Prosecutor.Jw

4. CSC-MC No. 17 and 24 were repealed sometime in ~007.Non-submission of job orders and contracts of service tothe CSC would no longer invalidate them. 141

5. Government agencies under the province, includingLingig, were required to submit job orders to. the FieldOffice in Tandag, Surigao del SUL He was not theProvincial Director of CSC,Surigao del Sur from .Januaryto April 2004. He has no personal knowledge on ..thesubmission of the subject job orders to the CSCRegionalOffice.142

Luzvtmtnda Basaiie~, a resident of Lingig,143 testified!

'tJ,·_. « " '"

,"" TSN dated December 3, 2012, p. 9_. . .

Do Exhibits, Z, AA and BB; TSN dated December 3, 2QP, pp. 10-12; Order dated December 3, 20l2; Record,"Vol. IV, p. 26. .

m TSN dated January 22,2013, p. 4. Jb133 TSN dated .Jariuary 22, 2013, p. 6. "13" TSN dated .Iariuary 22, 2013, p. 7. "140 TSN dated January 22, 2013, pp. 16d 7; TSNdated January 23,2013, pp. 8-9; Exhibit; AAAA "

TSNdated .Jarruary 22,2013, pp. 18-19. ''42 TSN dated January 22,2013, pp_ 18-20.

HJ TSN dated February 26,2013, p. 3.

DecfaionPeoplevs. Luna, et al.S8-1 O-CRM-O 111, etc.x-------------- ---------------------------------x

28

1. She has been a resident of Brgy. Sabang, Lingig for 46years. There are about 2,000 residents in theirbarangay. She does not know the names of allresidents, but she knows them by their faces, becauseshe seesthem in the barangay.!"

2. In .January2013, Otaganwent to her house and showedher the Time Book and Payroll for January to April 2004.She was surprised that her name appeared thereonevenwhen she did not work, nor did she receivemoneyfor the said period.145

3. She did not work as a Community Aide on January,March and April 2004, nor did she receive thePhP1,500.00 (January), PhP4,000.00 (March), andPhP5,000.00 (April) indicated in _tile TIme Book andPayroll. She did not work as Informant on February2004, nor did she receivePhP4,760.00 for the period.The signatures appearingnext to her namesin the TimeBook and Payrolls are not hers. She agreedto executean affidavit and to testify becauseshewanted to tell thetruth, i.e., she didnot work and she did not receiveany'amount. 146

4. She knows Emma Linaza, Demetila Ebramo, WilmarSeraspe,Farah Abelgas,Randy Linaza, Rusmen Biaco,and Ramonita Badang, all' of whom are residents ofBarangay Sabang. Ernma Linaza and Demetila Ebranoare her sisters and her neighbors.The other individualsin the payrolls live in other barangays.t"?

5. She, Emrna Linaza, Wilmar Seraspeand Otagan wentto Atty. A1cisoat Mangagoy,Bislig. Emma Linaza's andWilmar Seraspe'sname were also in the TImeBook andPayroll. Otagan brought the TIme Book and Payroll toAtty. A1ciso. After confirming to Atty. Alciso that shedid not work for the Municipality of Lingig, Atty. Alcisodrafted an affidavit. Shesignedthe Joint Affidavit datedJanuary 21, 2013 with Wilmar Cutamora SeraspeandEmma Veroy Linaza. She was beside them when theysigned.t='

6. Theirs is the only "Basanez"family in Lingig. They arefive in the family; she is the only one in her family anin Lingig named "Luzviminda Basariez". She has q~ybeen to two barangays, i.e. Sabangand Mandos.149

-

/7rHI TSNdated February 26,2013, pp. 8 and 11-12;TSNdated February 27,2013, pp. 3-4.I4S TSNdated February 26,2013, pp. 24-26. )1146 Exhibits F, F-7, F-7-b, F-21, F-21-a, F-23, F-23-b, F-30, F-30-b, F-33; TSNdated February 26,2013, pp. ...

34-35,37,41-43,47-50.'4-' TSNdated February 26,2013, pp. q-13; February 27, 201;i, PP. 28-29. . -HO TSNdated February 26, 2013, pp. 22-23, 28-29.14" TSNdated February 26,2013, pp. 13-14;TSNdated February 27, pp. 8-9, 14.

De crsfonPeoplevs. Luna, et al.S8-10-CRM-Ol11, etc.x-------------------------------------------------x

29

7. Gerry Dano is the incumbent mayor and a resident ofLingig; Amalia Dano is a resident of Lingig and isconnected with the LGU of Lingig. She does not knowall the employeesof the LGU of Lingig.150

8. Her middle initial (V)stands for "Veroy".1~1

9. She knows that Otagan was previously connected withthe Municipality of Lingig.152

10. She had no employment from January to April 2004.153

Rosalia Naranjo, Administrative Officer III at theBureau of Local Government Finance (BLGF),154 testified:

a. On April 20, 2013, she issued a certified true copyfrom the original of the Confirmation of thedesignation of Benilda Gutang as OlC MunicipalTreasurer of Lingig, vice Ebrencio Indoyon, who wasdetailed at the Surigao del Sur ProvincialTreasurer's Office.155

b. Said document is with the BLGF, which exercisesadministrative and technical supervision over theLGU treasurers. 156

This Court admitted the following exhibits offered by theprosecution: 157

ISO TSNdated _1>1 TSNdated February27,2013,p. 7-8,16,19,26-28.,,~ TSNdated February 27,2013,pp. 17-18.153 TSNdated February 26,2013,pp. 7-8.15" TSNdated May 28,2013, p. 5; Criminal CaseNo. SB-lO-CRM-Olll155 TSN May 28, 2013, pp. 20-21; First Indorsement dated October5, 2005, Exhibit 0000.156 TSNdated May 28, 2013, p. 23.157 Resolution dated February 24, 2014; Record, Vo\. V, p. 12; Prosecution's Formal Offer of

Evidencedated September 16, 2013; Record.Vol. lV, pp. 218-243.

Exhibit DocumentOriginal Copy of Office Order No, 2005-XIII-002directing .the conduct of a fact finding audit

A investigation concerning the complaint of Rito Orilloagainst accused Luna, Jr. 011the transaction subjectof Disbursement Voucher 100-2004-04-1271.

BOriginal Copy of Office Order No. 2005-XIU-002-A,designating Ms. Marah Mendoza as team leader.

Original Copy of Report dated November 16,2005 ofC the Fact-Finding Audit Team on the complaint of

Rito orill 0 against accused Luna.

DOriginal copy of Disbursement Voucher No. 100-2004-04-127.1 dated April 14, 2004 of the

_."\)

/l~

30DecisionPeoplevs. Luna, et al.S8-1 O-CRM-O 111, etc.x-------------------------------------------------x

-------------,- Municipality of Lingig for the amount .of I

PhP2,327,291.32, signed by accused Lindo, Carlos,___ H_ I Indoyon, and Ferrando, - I

Original copy of Landbank Check No. 231481, in theamount of PhP2,327,29 1.32, signed by accused

___ . I Lindo andlndoyon. IOriginal copy of Time Book and Payroll forHonorarium for April 2004 signed by accused Lindo,Luna and Ferrando. . .

Original copy of the Time Book and Payroll forHonorarium for April 2004 signed by accused Lindo,Luna and Ferrando.

E

F and F-2

F-3

F-4 to F-10

Original Copy of Time Book and Payroll forHonorarium for March 2004 signed by accusedLindo, Luna and Ferrando.

F-ll

H

F-12

F-22 to F-24

F-25 to F-32

Original copy of Time Book and Payroll forHonorarium for April 2004, signed by accusedLindo, Luna and Ferrando.Original copies of Time Book and Payroll forHonorarium for March 2004, signed by accusedLindo, Luna and Ferrando.Original copies of Time Book and Payroll for perDiemsfor January 2004, signed by accused Lindo,Luna and Ferr'arido.Original copies of Time Book and Payroll forHonorarium for January 2004, signed by accusedLindo, Luna and Ferrando.

G, G-2 toG-3

Original copies of Job Orders for April 2004 signedby accused Lindo, Luna, Saligumba and Carlos.

GA to G-10

G-11

G-12

G-13 to G-Ig

G-20

G-21 andG-22

G-23 to G-30

Original copies of Job Orders for January and March2004 for the position of community aide signed byaccused Lindo, Luna, Saligumba and Carlcs.

Original copiesof the Job Orders for February 2004for the position of confidential employee assistant,signed by accused Lindo, Luna, Saligumba andCarlos.Original copies of Job Orders for .January andMarch 2004 for the position of community aide.

Original copies of Job Orders for April 2004 for theposition of community aide, signed by accused

I Lindo, Luna, Saligumba and Carlos. I~ Original copies of Job Order for April 2004 for the

position. of community aide, signed by accusedLindo, Luna, Saligumba and Carlos.

Original copies of Job Orders for February 2004 forthe position of Informant signed by accusedLindo,Luna, Saligumba andCarlos. . I

I Original copies of Job Orders for February 2004 forthe position of confidential employee· assistant,signed by Leonor Otagan, Jr., accused Lindo, Luna,Saligumba and Carlos. .

Original copy of Allotment and Obligations No. 100-2004-06-0831 for Honorariut for April 2004, in theamount of PhPIOO,OOO.OO. ..

A f7~

DecfsfonPeoplevs. Luna, et al.SB-1O-CRM-Ol11, etc.x~--------------------------------------~---------x

31

--_.Original Copyof Allotment and Obligations No. 100-

H-2 2004-06-0B33 for Honorarium for April 2004. in the

..amount of PhPI00,000.00.Original Copyof Allotment and Obligations No. 100-

H-3 2004-06-0832 for Honorarium for April ~004, in the

.. amount of PhPI00,000.00.Original Copyof Allotment and Obligations No. 100-

H-4 2004-06-QB11 for Honorarium for March 2004, illthe amount of PhP24,OOO.00.Original Copyof Allotment and Obligations No. 100-

H-5 2004-06-0B09 for Honorarium for March 2004, inthe amount of PhP32,000.00.Original Copyof Allotment and Obligations No. 100-

H-6 2004-06-0BI2 for Honorarium for March 2004, inthe amount of PhP36,000.00.Original Copyof Allotment and Obligations No. 100':'

H-7 2004,-06-0B13 for Honorarium for March 2004, inthe amount of PhP60,000.00.Original Copyof Allotment and Obligations No. 100-

H-8 2004-06-0B14 for Honorarium for March 2004, inthe amount of PhP24,000.00.Original Copyof Allotment and Obligations No. 100..,

H-9 2004-06-0810 for Honorarium for March 2004, ill

1---- the amount of PhP60,000.00.Original CQPY of Allotment and Obligations No. 100...

H-IO 2004-06-0808 for Honorarium for 'March 2004, inthe amount of PhP24,000.00.Original Copyof Allotment and Obligations No, 100-

H-ll 2004-06-0834 for Honorarium for April 2004, in theamount of PhP100,000.00.Original Copyof Allotment and Obligations NO~100-:

H-12 2004-06-0807 for Horiorarium for March 2004, inthe amount of PhP60,000.00.Original Copyof Allotment and'Obligations No, 100':

H-13 2004-06-0819for Honorarium for February 2004, inthe amount of PhP28,560.00. ;

Original Copyof Allotment and Obligations No: 100:..H-14 2004-06-0B20 for Honorarium for February 2004, in

the amount of PhP3B,OBO.OO,Original Copy of Allotment and ObligaticnsNc. 100::

H-15 2004-06-0818for Honorarium for February 2004, mthe amount of PhP71,400,OO.Original Copyof Allotment and Opligittipns No. 100~

H-16 2004-0Q-0817for Honorarium fer FebmIMY~004, inthe amount of PhP28,560,OO.Original COpyof Allotment and Q'bligatiQJlsNo, 100-e

H-17 2004-06-0822 for Honorarium for February 2004,in the amount of PhP28,560.00.Original Copyof Allotmen-tand Obligations No. 100"

H-IB 2004-06-0816for Honorarium forFebruary 2004, iqthe amount of PhP71,400.00.Original Copy of Allotment andf.bliga!iOn~ Np. 100-

H-19 2004-06':'0815for Honorarium f r February ~004, illthe amount of PhP42,B40.00.

'~

~,'

~ ~'

~

De crsfon

People vs. Luna, et al.SB-IO-CRM-Ol 11, etc.x-------------------------------------------------x

32

------- I Original Copy of Allotment and Obligations No. 100- I

2004-04-005 dated April S, 2004, for Honorarium forFebruary 2004, in the amount of PhP100,OOO.00.

H-20

Original Copy of Allotment and Obligations No. 100:"2004-06-0821 for Honorarium for February 2004, in

_' __'. . I the amount ofPhP71,400.00. ,IOriginal Copy of Allotment and Obligations No. lOO..,2004-06-0562, dated April 21, 2004, for Per Diemsfor .Januarv 2004, in the amount of PhP30,000.00.

H-21

H-22

H-23

H-24

Original Copy of Allotment and Obligations No. 100-2004-06-0561, dated April 29, 2004, for Per Diemsfor January 2004, in the amount of PhP30,000.00.Original Copy of Allotment and Obligations No, 100~2004-06-0560, dated April 27, 2004, for Per Diemsfor January 2004, in the amount of PhP30,OOO.00.

H-25Original Copy of Allotment and Obligations No. 100-2004-06-0823, for Honorarium for January 2004, inthe amount of PhP36.000.00.

H-26Original Copy of Allotment and Obligations No, 100-2004-06-0827, for Honorarium for January 2004, inthe amount of PhP24,000.00.

H-27

H-28

Original Copy of Allotment and Obligations No. 100.,2004-06-0828, for Honorarium for" the periodJanuary 2004, in the amount of PhP60,OOO.00'.Original Copy of Allotment and Obligations No. lQO-2004-06-0824, for Honorarium for January, 2004,in the amount of PhP60,000.00.

H-29

H-30

Original Copy of Allotment and Obligations No, 100~2004-06.,0825, for Honorarium for .January 2004,in the amount of PhP24,000.00. .Original Copy of Allotment and Obligations No. 100-2004-06-0829, for Honorarium for January 2004, ill

the amount of PhP60,000.00.

H-32Original Copy of Allotment and Obligationa No. 10P~2004-06-Q826,'for Honorarium for January 2004, illthe amount of PhP24,00Q.00.

J,J-2 to J-

10

Original Copy of Summary Allotment a,nc;lObligations of the Municipality Of Lingig from.January to April 2004. "Original copy of List of Municipal Offjcifl.l&·~n4Employees Including Job Orders for .January-April2004, signed by accused Luna and Lindo.

KProgram Appropriation and Obligation by Objectsigned by Lindo, Saligurnba and Luna. .

QLetter dated September +2, 2004 addressedto theProvincial Auditor of Tandag, Surigao del Sur signee!by accused Carlos. . .

RAnnual Investment Plan of the Mun1cipaJjty of Lingigfor the Year 2004 signed py accused Luna. ..

TOriginal Copy of Notarized Certification dated 16June 2005 signed by accused Luna.

u

v

Summary List of Job Order Employees p(?r Payrollprepared by State Auditor II Marah Mendoza.Original Copy of Audit 'Observation Memorandum NQ2005-001]dated July 28, ~W05addressed to accuaedLuna.

A\ r~

DecisionPeoplevs. Luna, et al.SB-lO-CRM-Oll1, etc.x-------------------------------------------------x

33

------- I Original copy of Notice of Disallowances dated I

November 16, 2005 signed by Atty. Marisol D.Legaspi.

w

x

y

AA

BB

cc

z

Certified true copy of Department of Interior andLocal Government Memorandum Circular No. 99-65dated April 23, 1999.

FF

Original copy. of Joint Affidavit of Marah Mendoza I

_~_~ +- and Sally Lada a subscribed on 19 November 2005.Original copy of Joint Reply Affidavit of MarahMendoza and Sally Ladaga dated Julv 23,2008.Certified true copy of Department of Interior andLocal Government Memorandum Circular No. 99-66

___ ~__ I dated April 23, 1999. • ICertified true copy of Department of Interior andLocal Government Memorandum Circular No. 99-144 dated August 11, 1999.

Commission on Audit Circular No. 2003-003 datedJuly 30, 2003 with Subject "Audit And Liquidationof Intelligence And Confidential Funds of Local

I I Government Units". IOriginal copy of Affidavit of Leorior Otagan, Jr. dated21 September 2005, with attachments.

HH

Original copy of the Certification dated 24 February2011 signed by Atty. Nilda B. Plaras, Director IV,Head of the Intelligence/Confidential Fund AuditUnit, Commission on Audit.

IICertified Correct copy of Service Record of accusedAntonio Saligumba.

JJ Annointment Paper of accused Antonio Saligumba.KK Oath of Office of accused Antonio Saligumba.

MMLL Personal Data Sheet of accused Antonio Saligumba.

-- --~-

Service Record of accusedRobertoLuna, Jr.NN00

Service Record of accused.JethroLindo.Personal Data Sheet of accused .JethroLindo.

QQPP Service Record of accused Venus Carlos.

Appointment Paper of accused Venus.RR Oath of Office of accused Venus Carlos.ss Personal Data Sheet of accused Venus Carlos.TT Service Record of accused Nilda Ferrarido.UU Appointment Paper of accused Nilda Ferrando.vvww

zz

Oath of Office of accused Nilda Ferrando.Personal Data Sheet of accused Nilda Ferrando.Office Order date May 17, 2004 addressed to LeonorOtagan, JL informing him of his termination asHRMO-Designate of the Municipality of Lingig,Certified true copy of Nsd Death Certificate of EdnaBadan£!

AAA

BBB

FFFto

FFF-12

GGG

Local Budget Circular No, 62 setting the GuidelinesOn The Grant of Honoraria In The Local GovernmentUnits.Original copies of Job Orders signed by LeonorOtagan as HRMO of the Municipality of Lingig for.Iarru ary, February to March 2004.Official Receipt No. 2539239 dated September 7,2010 of -the Office of the Provincial Treasurer;

/7~

DectstonPeoplevs. Luna, et al.SB~1O-CRM-O 111, etc.x- -~----------~---~~------~----------------------x'

- -------~ ,-

Surigao del Sur in the name of accused Roberto M.___~~ . Luna, Jr. in the amount of PI ,500,000.00. I

Official Receipt No. 2925302 dated September 21,2010" of the Office of the Provincial Treasurer,Surigao del Sur in the name of accused Roberto M.

~ __ n ~ I Luna, Jr. in the amount QfPII0,800.00. ICertification dated September 30,2010.Original copy of Office Order No. 07-2012 datedSeptember 2010 signed by Mayor Henry Danodesignating Mr. Erbito Penanueva as Human

__~~ I Resource Management Officer. I

Original copy of Appointment Paper of LeonorOtagan, Jr. as Human Resource ManagementOfficer

_~ m Ion August 3, 1992 signed by Amerosin Onsing IOffice Order No. 2 dated May 20, 2004 designating

"_~ __ ~_ I Jethro Lindo as HRMO of the Municipality of Lingig;. IOriginal copy of Office Order dated May 17! 2004 toLeonor Otagan, Jr. terminating the designation of

______ n I the HRMO. IOriginal copy of Letter complaint of Leonor Otagan,Jr. dated October 25, 2004 addressed to the

~~_ I Chairman, Civil Service Commission. IOriginal copy of 2nd Indorsement letter datedFebruary 7, "2005 from Elizabeth Zosa, Commissionon Audit Central Office pertairring to the complaintof Mr. Rito Orillo and the request of the Office of theOmbudsman Mindanao to conduct auditinvestigation with attached complaint of Rito Orillo.

HHH

III

JJJ

MMM

NNN

000

PPP

QQQ

34

RRRLetter complaint of Rito Orillo dated October 21,2004 addressed to Antonio Valenzuela, Deputy

__ ~__ I Ombudsman for Mindanao. IOriginal copy of Letter request dated May 5, 2005addressed to Roberto Luna, Jr. signed by .JeremiasBucona.

SSS

1'1'1'

uuu

Original copy of Letter dated June 8, 2005 addressedto Roberto Luna, Jr. signed by Ueremias Buconz.Original copy of Folder of the Annual Budget for theyear 2004 of the Municipality of Lingig,

VVV

VVV-l

Original copy of 2nd Indorsement letter dated June24, 2005 from Elizabeth Znsa, Commission on Audit,Central Office pertaining to the complaint of Mr.Leonor Otagan, Jr. and the request of the Office ofthe Ombudsman, Mindanao to conduct an auditinvestigation with attached complaint of LeonorOtagan.i.Ir.Original copy of Letter complaint of Mr. LeonorOtagan, Jr. with attachments.

www Letter dated September 21, 2005 of Leonor Otagan,Jr. addreasedto Atty. Marisol Legaspi.

WWW-lAttached Affidavit dated 21 September 2005 ofLeonor Otagan, Jr. including the attachments.

xxxXXX-l

Submission of Joint Reply Affidavit dated August 8,2008 pertaining to OMfs-Mindanac Case No. OM8-M-C-O109-8. with attached Joint Reply affidavitdated August 8,2008. /

~?lJ't

DecisionPeoplevs.Luna, et al.SB-lO-CRM-Olll, etc.x-------------------------------------------------x

35

Original copy of Certification dated August 2~, 201lAAAA issued by Director II Harold Pareja stating that nq

copies of the job orders for .January to April 2004are available in their Office..------.-----+-=--=--=:.::.:...::==.:--=--=~~~-"--'-'----_,__---------__4Certified Machine Copy of Civil ServiceCommission

BBBB Memorandum Circular No. 24, series of 2002pertaining to the Policy Guidelines for Contract ofServices.

--------- Civil ServiceCommissionMemorandum Circular No,CCCC 17, series of 2002 on the Policy Guidelines for

Contract of Services.HHHH SwornAffidavit of Luzviminda V. Basafiez,Wilmar C,

Seraspeand Emma Linaza.Certified Duplicate CopyOf I st Indorsement, October

0000 5, 2005 of the Bureau of LocalGovernmentFinance,'-. Department of Finance,qentral Office,

In its Resolutions dated March 24, 2014 and April 25,2014, the Court denied158 the Motions for Leaue of Court to FileDemurrer to Evidence separately filed: by accused Luna andLindo, and accused Carlos and Ferrando. 159

In its Resolution promulgated on July 15,2015, this Courtdismissed the case against accused, Saligumba, after theprosecution confirmed his death on September 15, 2014.160

The defensepresented the following witnesses: 1) accusedJethro P. Lindo, 2) Leody C. Enriquez, 3) Marlo Lanuza, 4)accused Venus M. Carlos, 5) Lolita D. Dapitanon, 6) Ruth C.Beniga, 7) Jose .Judilla, Jr., 8) accused Nilda T. Ferrando, 9)Herbert E. Luna, 10)' Teofilo Q.. Macatiog Jr., 11) accusedEbrencio F. Indoyon, Jr., and, 12)accused Roberto M. Luna, Jr.

Accused Jethro p. J,tindQ., Secretary to the SangguniangBayan of Lingig, 161 testified:

1. In 2004, he was the ExecutiveAssistant IV at theOffice of the Mayor. He served as the privatesecretary of accused Luna, before he Waspromoted as ExecutiveAssistant.!"

2. As ExecutiveAssistant IV, he servedas the alterego of Mayor Luna.. He acted on document.

ise Resolutiondated March 24, 2014; Record,voi. V, p. 37; ResolutiondatedApril 2., 2014; Recl>/d, VO!.0,p.83.

159 Record,Vol. V, pp. 26-29, 48-55. .reo Record, Vol. V, p. 345; Certificate ofDeath, Record, Vo!. V, p. 344.161 Lindo's Judicial Affidavit dated June 3, 20l4, p. 2; TSN dated October 22,2013, p. 9.lb~ TSN dated August 26, 2014, pp. 30-31. ~

DecisionPeoplevs. Luna, et a1.SB-lO-CRM-OIII, etc.

x-------------------------------------------------x

36

submitted to the Office of the Mayor and signeddocuments on behalf of Mayor Luna, includingthe regular transactions,. i.e., documentsregarding claims; vouchers for payrolls/ salariesand wages, including those of job orderemployees,and checks.!". .

3. AccusedLuna, through OfficeOrder..No. 2 datedMay 20, 2004, designated him as HRMO. Hisduties as HR-MOinclude interviewing applicants,preparing job orders, and certifying the TImeBook and Payroll ofjob order employees. Hewas performing the duties of HRMO, upon thedirective of accused Luna, even before OfficeOrder No. 2 was issued. There is no plantillaposition of HRMO. The Municipal Mayor is illcharge of the Human ResourceManagementinthe Municipality.l"

4. He is familiar with the names of the job orderemployeesbut could no longer recall their faces.He could not recall if Edna C. BadangWasoneofthern.!"

5. He interviewedeachapplicant and prepared thejob orders, subjectof the presentcase. Job orderemployeeswere required to submit their biodatawith their photo. Sincejob order employeesWerenot regular, their work would last, sometimes,foronly three (3)months. l66

6. Only residents of the Municipality of Lingig canbe hired as Job Order' employees. TheCertification of the Punonq Baranqai] serves asproof of residency. The job order workerspersonally applied for the job. Some wererecommended by barangay officials and otherinformal leaders in the municipality. The. .

individuals in the Job Ordersare "warm bodies."

7. The hiring is doneby the Officeof the Mayor butthe mayor is not involved in the preparation ofJob Orders.167 '-

8. He forwardedthe job orders to the budget officerand accountant for their certification as to the

/" I

'" TSNdatedAugust 26,20[4, pp. 16-17and 27. V 17161 Exhibit NNN; Lindo's Judicial Affidavit dated June 3, 2014, p. 2; TSN dated August 26,2014, pp. 12-

15 and 38. . . . ~16" TSN dated August 26, 2014, pp. 18, \20and 28. ,:',,/'66 TSNdatedAugust 26,2014, p. 33. .Wl TSNdatedAugust 26,2014, pp. 33-34, 39. Lindo'sJudicial Affidavit dated.June3, 2014, pp. 3-4. .. . .

DecfaionPeoplevs. Luna, et al.SB-IO-CRM-Olil, etc.x-------------------------------------------------x

37

existence of appropriation and completenessofdocuments, and to the Mayor for his approval.!"

9. He reviewed and signed the TIme Book andPayrolls in goodfaith. Hecheckedand confirmedthat the persons listed therein rendered theservice indicated in the job order.?"

10.Heprepareda List of Municipal Official/EmployeesIncluding Job Order Employees, for the monthsof January to April 2004 and submitted the sameto the COAAuditor in relation to a special auditinvestigation.170 The list was certified as correctby accusedLuna. He is not aware that said listdid not jibe with that 'in the subjectjob orders.F'

11. He provided'an ambulance for the COA auditors'conduct of verification in the barangays. Hewasinformed by the assigned driver that the COAauditors asked him to bring them back to thecity.m

12. COA did not conduct an exit conference. TheAudit Team sent the Notice of Disallowance viaregistered mail on November 29, 2005; Hereceivedthe Noticeof Disallowanceon December5, 2005.173

13. He was surprised to have been included in theinstant casefor signingthe TImeBook and Payrolland for preparing the job orders.!" Hisparticipation in the disbursement of the subjectPhP1,610,800.00was limited to the preparationof the Job Orders.

14. There is nothing irregular with the disbursementof PhP1,61Q,800.00.The Sangguniang Bauari ofLingig approved Resolution No. 229, series of2003, adopting the Annual Budget of the LGUforCalendarYear2004. AccusedLuna approvedtheResolution. The Statement of statutory andContractual Obligations .and the ProqraAppropriation and Obligation by Object provethatthe charging of the amount is not irregular.?"

Ice Lindo's .Judicial Affidavit dated Jun, 3, 2014, pp. 3-4. n109 Lindo's Judicial Affidavit dated June 3,2014, p. 3; TSN dated August 26,2014, pp. 21,24-25.17u TSN dated August 26,2014, pp. 28-29.l7l Exhibits G to G-30; TSN dated August 26,2014, pp. 28-29.172 TSN dated August 26,2014, pp. 41-42.1"13 Undo's Judicial Affidavit dated June 3,2014, p. 5.1-/4 Lindo's Judicial Affidavit dated June 3,2014, p. 3;175 Lindo's Judicial Affidavit dated June 3, 2014, p. 6.

~

DecisionPeoplevs. Luna, et al.SB-lO-CRM-O 111, etc.

x--------------------------------------------------x

38

15. The Municipal Budget Office determines thesourcesof funds for the honorarium or per diemsof the job order workers, The Municipal BudgetOfficer is the one in charge of budgeting, i.e.,charging the salaries.!"

16. He is not awarethat the audit team did not verifythe lists in the Job Orders and in the Time Bookand Payroll after accusedLuna told them that thenameslisted therein arejust dummies.171

17. When he talked to someof the job order workers,they told him that nobodyinterviewedthem."!

18. In 2004, peaceand orderwas part of the programof the Municipality. The -peace and ordercondition in the municipality wasand still is veryvolatile. Most of the barangays' in theMunicipality are mountain or mountainousbarangays. Many CPP-NPAsare operating inLingig. There are a number of clashes betweenthe NPAand governmentforcesin theseareas.!"

19. Accused Luna was abducted twice while formerMayor Henry Dano was abducted once, both bythe New People's.Army. The Municipal PoliceStation was also attacked by the NPA. Theattackers divested the local police of theirfirearms. They also went to accus~d·Luna'shouseand took all the firearmsof accusedLuna'sbodyguards.!"

20. In view of the peaceand order situation in theMunicipality, the governmentneededto intensifyits peaceand order effort by hiring informantsand confidential personswho would,monitor themovementof enemyfcrces.!"

21. He was appointed as the Secretary to theSangguniang Bayan by former Municipal Vice-Mayor Henry Dano.

22. He was not aware that Leonor Otagan was thedesignated HRMO before May 20, 2004. Theappointment of Mr. Otagan was for MunicipalGovernmentAssistant DepartmentHead.182

C7

1170 TSN dated August 27,2014, p. 5.Il7 Exhibit G; TSN dated August 26,2014, pp. 42-43.". Lindo's Judicial Affidavit dated June 3, 2014, p. 5.m TSN dated August 26,2014, pp, 35-38. . -ISO TSN dated August 26,2014, p. 36.

ISI TSNdated August 26,2014, p. 37.16' TSN dated August 26,2014, p. 15.

DecisionPeoplevs. Luna, et al.SB-lO-CRM-Olll, etc.x~------------------------------------------------x

39

Leody C. Enriqllez, ~resident of Poblacion, Lingig,183testified:

1. He is a security guard at the house of theMunicipal Mayor.

2. In 2004, he and severalotherswerehired as joborder workers by LGU Lingig. His functionsincluded, "tnaqhanap ng mgq unpormasuon samga taga barangay tungkol sa.aktibidad ng mqaNPA sa Lingig." The others were assigned indifferent barangays but he does not knowwhere.184

3. He was recommendedby Barangay KaqaioadLeticia Delagiron. Be was employed only forFebruary2004. HeandaccusedLindoknow eachother. Accused Lindo interviewed him andexplained to him his duties and functions as ajob order worker.!"

4. He was not required to accomplisha Daily TimeRecordfor his attendance.After renderingserviceas an informant, hewent to the Treasurer'sOfficeto get his salary for one month. He signed thepayroll as proof of receipt of his .salary, He wasnot required to go to the Municipal Accountant'sOffice when he applied and even until he washired.186

5. He was not required to submit an identificationcard prior to the releaseof his honorarium orcompensation, He was not hired again as a JobOrderworker."?

6. He had no issue that his compensationwas paidmonthly. What is important is that he 'wascompensatedfor his services.l~8

7. Thereare many NPAmembersin Lingig. Theyareactive in Baranqaus San Roque and Bugak.AccusedLuna waskidnapped twice by the NPA,but he was released. FormerM~yor enry Danowas alsokidnappedby the NPA.189

--- - . t7 ~18> TSNdatedSeptember29,2014, p. 6.181 Enriquez's .JudicialAffidavit datedSeptember23, 2014,p. 2; TSNdatedSeptember29, 2014, pp. 11,

25.Wo TSNdatedSeptember29,2014, p. 15.100 Exhibit F-20; Enriquez'sJudicial Affidavit datedSeptember23, 2014, pp. 2-3; TSNdatedSeptember29,

2014,pp. 12-13& 23-24.1"1 TSNdatedSeptember29,2014, p. 24.188 Enriquez'sJudicial Affidavit datedSeptember23, 2014,p. 3.10" Enriquez'sJudicial Affidavit datedSeptember23, 2014,p. 2; TSNdatedSeptember29,2014, pp. 20-22.

DeclstonPeoplevs. Luna, et al.SB-lO-CRM-Olll, etc.x-------------------------------------------------x

40

8. He doesnot recall being interviewedby an auditoror a group from COA,regarding his employmentas a job order worker.'?"

9. He doesnot know if he is the only LeodyEnriquezin their municipality. He is the Leody Enriquezreferred to in the payroll and in. the Job Order.w!

Mado Lanuza, caretaker and resident of Poblacion,Lingig, 192 testified:

1. He works at the Municipal Mayor's residenceas abantay.

2. In 2004, he was hired, for one month, as q. joborder worker and as community aide informantby the Municipality of Lingig; -He was tasked toobserve people who were not from Lingig, andreport any suspicious activities. He wasrecommended by his neighbor, ElmerVillarrruoho.Jv-'

3. He and accusedLindo know each other; Accused" ,

Lindo interviewed him and explained his dutiesand functions asjob order worker. AccusedLunaand Lindo know that he is one of the job orderworkers of the Municipality of Lingig for February2004.194

4. He was not required to go to the Office of theMunicipal Accountant when he was applying asjob order worker; he went to the office of accusedLindo.195

5. Hewas not required to accomplishany Daily TimeRecordfor attendancewhen he was employed.Hewent to the Treasurer'sOfficeto get his salary forone month. He signedthe Time Book and Payrollfor February 2004, as proof of receipt ofbissalary. AccusedFerrando did not require him tosubmit an identification card or a Community Ta.J{Certificate befor,'e he was given his salary., Hj, ,'ssalary was based on a daily rate,but it vfo.sreleasedto him at the end of the month. 196

~19U Enriquez's Judicial Affidavit dated September 23,2014, p. 3; TSl'i dated September 29,~014, p. 25. ~191 Exhibit 2-Indoyon; TSN dated September 29,2014, p. 26. . '. ",'192 Judicial Affidavit dated September 23,2014; TSN dated September 29,2014. pp. 28-30. ' "193 Lanuza's Judicial Affidavit dated September 23, 2014, p. 2; TSN dated September 29.2014. pp. ~O-3L 39.194 TSN dated September 29.2014, p. 3l. 35.

195 TSN dated September 29,2014, p. 47.19b Lindo's Judicial Affidavit dated June 3, 2014, p. 4.

DecisionPeoplevs. Luna, et al.SB-1O-CRM-Ol11,etc.x-------------------------------------------------x

41

6. He had no participatiori in the preparation of theTime Book and Payroll. Hedid not read the otherentries in saiddocument;he only signedoppositehis nameupon receivinghis pay.197

7. His name doesnot appearon the list containingthe names of municipal employeesand officialsprepared by accusedMayor Lindo and certifiedcorrect by accused Luna. His name does notappear in the job orders for January, March andApril 2004.198

8. Heis not awareif DisbursementVoucherNo. 100-2004-04-1271 was actually processed by theMunicipal Accountant.199

9. Hewasnot interviewedby the COAAudit Team.200

Accused Venus M, Carlos, Municipal Accountant ofLingig, 201 testified:

1. The paymentof honoraria and per diemsof 101JobOrder workers, for the periodJanuary to April 2004,passedthrough a regular processbefore the fundswere released.i'"

2. Under the Local GovernmentCode, the MunicipalAccountant performs two (2) functions: i]accounting; and, ii) internal audit services of theLGU.Her official duties and functions include:. . .

rJ.197 Exhibit F-20; Lanuza'sJudicial Affidavit datedSeptember23, 20iJI-,p. 3; TSNdatedse.i'!l. 29, ~014,

pp. 43-44. re~TJIOM Exhibits 0 to 0-10; TSNdatedSeptember29,2014, pp. 38-39.IOY TSNdatedSeptember29,2014, p. 47.2"" Lanuza'sJudicial Affidavit datedSeptember23,2014, p. 3; TSNdatedSeptember29,~Q14,pp. 31-32,34,

46; Exhibit F·20."01 TSNdatedJanuary 26,2015, pp. 6-7; Carlos'Judicial Affidavit datedJanuary 19, 2015, Exhibit 62, p', 1.2<Y2 Carlos'Judicial Affidavit datedJanuary 19,2015, pp. 14-15.

a. Prepareand submit financial statements tothe Municipal Mayorand the SangguniangBayan;

b. Apprise the SangguniangBayan and otherlocal governmentofficials on the financialcondition and operationsof the LGU;

c. Certify the availability of budgetaryallotment to which expenditures andobligations may be properlycharged;

d. Prepare statements of cash advances,liquidations, salaries,allowances,etc.;

e. prepare statements and liquidation ofjournal vouchers;Maintain internal audit system;f.

DecfsfonPeoplevs. Luna, et al.S8-1O-CRM-Olll, etc.x-------------------------------------------------x

g. Maintain individual ledgersfor officials andemployeesof the LGUpertaining to payrollsand deductions;

h. Prepare journals and the analysis ofobligations and maintain and keep allrecords and reports related thereto; and,

i. Exercisesuch other duties and functions asmay be requiredby law.203

3. The ALOBS for DV No. 100-2004-04-1271 wasprepared by the Office of the Municipal Mayor;the requesting official was the Mayor himself. Allthe ALOBS Wereduly signed by the MunicipalMayor. TheOfficeof the Municipal BudgetOfficerreviewedthe A~OBS!togetherwith its supportingdocuments. The ALOaS were duly signed byaccusedSaligumba. Thereafter,the ALoas wereforwardedto the Municipal Accountant's Office.204

4. Ms. Lolita Delageron-Dapitanon,the bookkeeperat the Office of the Municipal Accountant,forwarded the. subject ALOBS to her, togetherwith the supporting documents.

5. She reviewed,checked and confirmed that theALOBS were signed by accused Luna andaccusedSaligumba,certifying asto the existenceof appropriation. She also relied on the reviewand evaluarion conducted by Ms. Dapitanon;She signed all .the ALOaS, certifying as to theobligation of allotment/os

6. After reviewing the documents and certifying thecompleteness and propriety of the attachedsupporting documents, she signed DV No. 100-2004-04-1271 dated April 14, 2004. There wasno report of any irregularity as to the salaries ofthe regular employees.206

7. The cash advancepertained to the (i) salaries forthe regular employees in the amount ofPhP716,491.12;and, (ii) honorarium for the joborder employeesin the amount ofPhP1,610,800.The Audit Team did hot find any irregularity inthe cash advancefor the salaries of the regularemployeesof Lingig for April 2004. Shecertifiedthe completenes of the documents for bothsalaries of job order workers and regularemployees.2o /1

203 Carlos' Judicial Affidavit dated 19,2015, p. 2. / "1.20. Carlos' Judicial Affidavit dated January 19, 20 IS, p. 5. .'os Carlos' Judicial Affidavit dated January 19, 2015, pp. 6-7. .206 Carlos' Judicial Affidavit dated January 19,2015, pp. 7-8; TSNdated Jan· ary 27,2015, p. 14.00/ TSNdated .January 27,2015, p. 21; Judicial Affidavit, p. 7.

42

DecfalonPeoplevs. Luria, et al.SB-IO-CRM-Olll, etc.x-------------------------------------------------x

8. She signed the Job Orders for the 101job orderemployees in her capacity as MunicipalAccountant.208' .

9. Since the cashadvanct;: pertained to thehonorarium and per diems of Job Orderemployeeshired under the Officeof the MunicipalMayor, the following chargesweremade:

i. 20% Peaceand Order Funds,ii. 20% National Security Mission Funds,iii. 1011 Other Expenses,iv, 1011 Administrative Support,v. 1091vi. 101J

PhP344,000.00;648,000.00;348,000.00;80,000.00;

100,000.00;90,000.00.20~

10.The findings of the COAAudit Teamrefer to the needof a provision.in the Annual Budget for 2004 forConfidential/Intelligence Funds; .the cash advancewas for intelligence expenses. The DisbursementVoucher and the ALOBSwill readily show that thecashadvancepertains to the paymentof honorariumof Job Order employees. The Fact-Finding AuditReport indicates· to which' funds the amount ofPhPl,610,800.00 was charged. There wereprovisionsfor Peaceand Orderand NationalSecurityMission Programs in the 20% DevelopmentFund.There was no charge made to the Confidential orIntelligenceFund.210

11. The hiring of the Job Order employeeswas directlyinitiated by the Officeof the Mayor, in line with thePeaceand Order and Public SafetyProgramsof theLGUof Lingig.

12. The Mayor has the power to implement peaceandorder programs for the Municipality to ensure thesecurity and generalwelfare of the residents, TheAlP, CY2004 of Lingig providesfor Peace and OrderPrograms,and National SecurityMission Proqrame inthe 20% DevelopmentFund. . The cash advanceforthe honorarium of the Job Order employeescan beproperly chargedto the Peaceand OrderFunds, andthe National Security MissionProjectFunds.J"

13. The Job Orders wetr. consideredmaintenance andother operati~g expei ses. They are no..t considered

.. personal scrv[ces.~ .. r=208 CarIos' .Judicial Affidavit dated Januaq'1\Q, ::l)15, p. 13.

209 Carlos'Judicial Affidavit dated .January 19, 2015, p. 8. ~210 Carlos' Judicial Affidavit dated .January 19, 2015, p. 9.211 Carlos' Judicial Affidavit dated January 19, 2015, pp. 9-10 & 13. .. ... .

212 TSN dated January 27,2015, p. 16.

43

DecistcnPeoplevs. Luna, et a1.SB-lO-CRM-Olll, etc.x~------------------------------------------------x

44

14. The municipal accountant has the authority todetermine how an allotment to an expenditure orobligation would be charged, pursuant to Section157 of the Government Accounting and AuditingManual, Vol. 1. A municipal accountant cannotcertify an obligation of allotment until a certificationas to the existence of an appropriation (based onappropriation ordinance) is made by the municipalbudget officer.

15. The LGU faithfully observedand complied with themandate of Section 344 of R.A. No. 7160 in thecertification and approvalof vouchers.213

16. Pursuant to the Manual on the New GovernmentAccounting Sy~temfor Local Government Units, therequesting department/office shall prepare theALOBS for every obligation. The same shall besigned by the department or office head asrequesting official, based on the disbursementvoucher and supporting documents. Thedepartment or officehead shall forward the AkOB~and its supporting documents to the Office of theMunicipal Budget Officer. The municipal budgetofficer certifies the existenceof appropriation in theappropriation ordinancefor the purpose.Pt+

17. Under the Manual, obligationsrefer to the amountscommitted to be paid by the LGUfor any lawful actby an accountable officer for and in behalf of theLGU. Reviewing,evaluating appraising, examiningand analyzing are all part of her internal auditservicefunctiona.O>

18. It is the duty and responsibility of the MunicipalBudget Officer to certify "the existerlCe" ofappropriation legallymadefor the purpose,basedonappropriation ordinance. Prior to certifying theALOBS,the municipal budgetofficer is mandated toverify the existence of such appropriation in theappropriation ordinance.v'e

19.The departmentor officehead,as requestingofficial,forwards the ALOBSand"its supporting docurncntsto the Municipal BudgetOfficerwho shall certify theexistence bf appropriation legally made for the

/'m Carlos' Judicial Affidavt dated,JJlll1uaIy 19, 2015, pp. 2-3.

214 Carlos' Judicial Affidavit dated .January 19, 2015,~. 3; TSN t" ed.".J.fnuary 2.7.' 2Q15, PP..' 1.t-1.2, 15.215 Carlos' Judicial Affidavit dated .January 19,2015, p. 3; TSN ted .Ianuary 27,2015, p. 15.

110 Carlos'Judicial Affidavit datedJanuary 19, 2015, p. 3; TSN atedJanuary 27. 2Q15, pp. 11-12.

DecisionPeoplevs. Luna, et al.SB-1O-CRM-Oll1, etc.x-------------------------------------------------x

45

20. Thereafter, the Municipal Budget Officer forwardsthe ALOBS and its' supporting documents to theOfficeof the Municipal Accountant.s!"

2]. The Office of the Municipal Accountant reviews theALOBSand the supporting documents and certifiesas to obligation of .allotment by signing theappropriate box in the ALOBS. It is her function toobligate funds for the purpose for which any cashadvance shall be drawn.v'f She would first check ifthe Municipal BudgetOfficerhad alreadycertified asto the existenceof appropriation and had signed theALOBS.

22. Without the certification as to the completenessandaccuracy of the payrolls; the documents will notproceed to the next approving authority, i.e.,municipal treasurer.219· .

23. It was the Sangguniang Bayan of Lingig, whichapproved and passed the appropriation ordinance,through Resolution No. 229, Seriesof 2003. Hence,the alleged violation of DILG MC No. 99-144 datedAugust 11, 1999, when the amount ofPhP450,OOO.00from the Peaceand Order funds wascombined with the PhPl,OOO,OOO.OO,is betteraddressedto the SanguniangBayan of Lipgig.220

24. The COA Audit Report states that the AlP forCalendar Year 2004, includes the Peaceand OrderPublic Safety Fund amounting to PhP450,000.OOand the National Security Mission Projectamountingto PhPl,OOO,000.00.221

25. The release of PhPl,610,800.00 went through theregular, normal and-standard process. First, theHRMOin the Officeof the Municipal Mayor preparedthe Job Order and signed the same as requestingofficer, thereafter the Municipal Treasurer asdisbursing officer, the Municipal Accountant and theMunicipal Mayor signed the same. She was asignatory of said request.222

26. The Budget Officehas a logbookto keeptrack of thecharges made to various appropriations; theObligation Request is numbered accordingly forrecords purposes. As Municipal Accountant, she

tJkD

217 Carlos' Judicial Affidavit dated January 19, 2015, pp. 3-4; TSN dated January 27,2015,~l" Carlos' Judicial Affidavit dated January 19, 2015, p. 4 and 12.m TSN dated .January 26, 20 IS, pp. 17-18.22U Exhibit UUU-19; Carlos' Judicial Affidavit dated January 19, 2015, p. 13."21 Carlos' Judicial Affidavit dated January 19,.20IS, pp.12-13.zn Carlos' Judicial Affidavit dated January 19, 2015, pp. 15-16.

DecisionPeoplevs. Luna, et al.SB-lO-CRM-Olll, etc.x-------------------------------------------------x

also has a logbook to keep track of theappropriations she signedafter ascertaining theexistenceof allotment.223

After checkingthe payrolls as to their completenessand accuracy, the Municipal Treasurer's Officeprepared the Disbursement Voucher for thewithdrawal of the net payroll amount. TheDisbursementVoucherwassignedby the MunicipalTreasurerand the Municipal Mayor. ShesignedtheDisbursementVoucherin her capacityas MunicipalAccountant.

27. Thecheck,in the nameof the DisbursementOfficer,was preparedbasedon the approveddisbursementvoucher. The check was signed by the MunicipalTreasurer and the Municipal Mayor; the samewaspresented to the bank for. encashment. TheDisbursing Officer had custody of the cash beforepay-out.s-+

28. The payroll was signedby the concernedJob Orderemployeeupon receivinghis/her wagefor the periodcovered. As a general rule, daily time records areattached to the payroll. However,the COAdid notrequire submissionof the DTRsin the caseof thel O'lJob Order employees.225

29. She was not furnished a copy of the Fact-FindingAudit Report by the COA. She only learned aboutthe COA's findings, when the Office of theOmbudsman-Mindanaofurnished her with a copyinrelation to the corid'uct of a preliminary investigationagainst them.226

30. TheALOBSof DisbursementVoucherNo. 100-2004-04-1271 were supportedby job orders and payrollsfor the honorarium of the Job Order employees,andthe Payrollsfor the regular employees.v-?

31. The salaries of the .regular employeesis under theallotment for personalservices. The honorarium ofjob order employeesis chargedto the maintenanceand other operatingexpense(MOOE).228

(l

J1223 Carlos' .Judicial Affidavit dated January 19,2015, p. 16.22. Caries' Judicial Affidavit dated .January 19,2015, p. 16.225 Caries' Judicial Affidavit dated January 19,2015, p. 16.226 Carlos' Judicial Affidavit dated January 19, 2015, p. 7.22·' TSN dated January 27,2015, p. 14.

22. TSN dated January 27,2015, p. 16.

46

DecisfonPeople vs. Luna, et al.S8-1 O-CRM-O111, etc.x-------------------------------------------------x

32. She certified the completenessof the documents forboth salaries of job order employees and regularemployees.229

33. Ms. Dapitanon is in charge of checking, evaluatingand verifying the ALOBS and its supportingdocuments, and reviewingand recording the same in.their logbook.230

34. The Accounting Office checks the completenessandaccuracy of the payrolls. In particular, thebookkeeper, Ms, Dapitanon, initially reviews all thepayrolls and job orders, After checking thesedocuments, she' will forward the same to her(accusedCarlos] for finedapproval and checking.m

35. One of the biggest problems in their Municipality in2004, and, even prior thereto, is the threat- ofcommunist insurgency and terrorism in the differentbarangays. Their barangayhall was attacked by theNPA and their Mayor was twice abducted by saidgroup. The Mayorwho succeededaccusedLuna wasalso abducted by the NPA.. The constant presenceand harassments committed by the NPAhad causedso much fear and panic to the residents.w?

36. Accused Luna did not talk to her regarding thepresent caseor the performanceof her functions inrelation to the presentcase.v= .

47

Lolita D. Dapitanon, Cashier Ill, former Bookkeeperassignedat the Office of the Municipal Accountant of Lingig, 234

testified:

1. In 2004, she was a bookkeeperat the Office of theMunicipal Accountant of Lingig. She assists theMunicipal Accountant- in reviewing, checking, andevaluating the documents submitted to their Office,and verifying and checking the existence of anallotment beforecertifying as to obligation allotment,

2. Sometime in 2004, she reviewedDV No. 100-2004- .

04-1271 dated April 14, 2004 and its supportln:x\gdocuments,i.e.,payrolls for the regular ernployees.,

'. ~""" ... ""'.. 1/

AZ,g TSN dated .January 27,2015, p. 2l.230 Car1os'Judicial Affidavit dated January 19, 2015, p. 5.231 TSN dated January 26,2015, p. 17; TSN dated January 27, 2015, pp. 16.-17232 Carlos' Judicial Affidavit dated January 19,2015, pp. 9-10.233 .TSN dated January 26,2015, p. 16. . . . .

23. Dapitanon's Judicial Affidavit dated January 19,2015, p. 1; TSN dated .January 26,2915, p. 22.

DecisionPeoplevs. Luna, et al.SB-IO-CRM-Olll, etc.x-------------------------------------------------x

48

and Time Book and Payrolls for the Job Orderworkers.v=

3. DV No. 100-2004-04-1271pertains to two particulars:(i) salaries for the 0 regular employees(PhP716,491.12);and, (ii) honorarium for the joborder workers (PhP1,610,800).236

4. After reviewingand verifying the completenessof thesupporting documentsand signatures,sherecordedthe same in their Control Book and wrote thenumber in the disbursement voucher. She alsomadethe necessaryaccountingentries. Afterwards,she forwarded DV No. 100-2004-04-1271 toMunicipal Accountant CarloS.237

5. Her signature doesnot appearon the DV No. 100-2004-04-1271; it was 'accused Carlos, as theMunicipal Accountant, who certified thecompleteness and 0 propriety of the supportingdocuments.238

6. She saw accused Carlos review and check saidDisbursement Voucher. and the, supportingdocumentsand sign box B of said DisbursementVoucher.v'?

7. Disbursement Vouchers were prepared at theMunicipal Treasurer's Office, DisbursementVoucher No. 100-2004-04-1271 dated April 14,2004 shows that accusedFerrando (Cash Clerk,Municipal Treasurer's Office)0 prepared saidvoucher, being the vclaimant thereof,240 Afterpreparing the 'check, the Office of the MunicipalTreasurerreturns the DisbursementVoucherto theAccounting Office.s+!

8. TheOfficeof the Municipal Accountantof Lingighasa Control Book for all appropriationsto ascertain ifthere is available funding for any transaction orobligation.Pt-

9. The ALOBSand its supporting documentsare firstchecked by the Municipal Bud~et Officer, thenforwarded to the Municipal Accountant,/for thecertification as to obligationof allotment.

235 Dapitanon's Judicial Affidavit dated January 19,2015, pp. 3-4. r\\ ~236 Dapitanon's Judicial Affidavit dated .January ~9, 2015, p. 4. . Co /237 Dapitanon's Judicial Affidavit dated January 19,2015, pp. 2-4. Ai. o •••••

23. TSN dated .January 27,2015, pp. 7-8. ....:<39 Dapitanon's Judicial Affidavit dated .January 19, 2015, p. 5. .2.0 Dapitanon's Judicial Affidavit dated .January 19,2015, p. 5; TSN dated January ~6, 2015, p. 27. 0

2., TSN dated January 26,2015, p. 27. .2.0 Dapitanorr's Judicial Affidavit dated January 19,2015, pp. 1-2;TSN dated .January 7,7,7015, pp, 6-7.

DecisionPeoplevs.Luna, et al.SB-lO-CRM-O111, etc.x--------------------------------------~----------x

49

10. It appears that only the requesting officer and theMunicipal Budget Officer signed the ObligationRequest.s='

Ruth C. Beniga, Director n, Civil Service Commission,CARAGA Region.v+ testified:

1. Their Office does not have any records of job ordersof LGU of Lingig from January to June 2004.245

2. In her capacity as Provincial Director of the CSC,Field Office of Surigao del Sur, she issued aCertification246 as to the non-availability of the JobOrders of the Municipality of Lingig for the periodsJune to December 2003 and January to June2004,247 after they inspected the records.

3. Harold P. Pareja, PPA,was the Director of the CSC,Surigao del Sur. He assumed his position onJanuary 29, 2010. MrvPareja issued a Certificationthat there is no r:ecord as to the 101 Job Orderworkers from June to December 2003.248

4. She is aware of Civil Service Memorandum CircularNo. 24, Series of 2002, Subject: Clarifications onPolicy Guidelines for Contract of Services whichrequires the submission of Job Orders to the CSC.The validity of the job order is not affected by itsnon-submission. The submission is for recordingpurposes and for consideration of the job orderworkers as government employees. Saidrequirement was subsequently amended. The LGDsare no longer required to, submit copies of the joborder to the CSC.249 .

JoseD. Judilla, Jr., Municipal Planning and DevelopmentCoordinator of the Municipality of Lingig,250testified:

1. In 2004, he was an Information System Analyst at '

the Office of the Mun.icipal Planning .De.velopm.. ~.~"n:JtOffice. He is familiar with someof the items in ~ \

C.", 3 Dapitanorr's .Judicial Affidavit dated January 19,2015,p. 2.' f/.....r-

2•.• TSN dated February 23,2015,p. 3.'2.5 TSN dated February 23,2015,p. 6. .240 Exhibit 65;Exhibit 12for accused Indoyon.2.7 TSN dated February 23,2015,p. 6.24" TSN dated February 23,2015,pp. 8-9.2.0 Exhibit BBBB; TSN dated February 23,2015,pp. 7,13,15-16.250 TSN dated August 5,2015,p. 5.

~

DeclstonPeoplevs. Luna, et al.S8-1O-CRM-O Ill, etc.x-----------------------------------------------~-x

AlP becausehe was the onewho encodedthe samein 2004.251

2. As a SystemAnalyst, he had the followingduties:

a. Servesas the technical staff of the office;b. Handles the data bank of the office;c. Encodes documents like the annual

implementation plan; and,d. Perform· other tasks assigned by the

supervisor.252

3. His position is permanent. He is familiar with therules, standard operating procedures for tasksrelated to the Municipal Planning Office, includingcirculars of the DILGpertaining to allocations.2S~

4. The Municipal Plarming and DevelopmentOfficeprepares the AlP every year together with theAnnual Implementation Plan for the 20%DevelopmentFund as it is the secretariat of theMunicipal DevelopmentCouncil.254

5. In 2004, the form for the AlP did not specifypersonnel services,.MOOE and capital outlay;however, personnel services may be chargedthereto. In the AlP present form,' personnelservices,MOOEand capital outlay are included.s=

6. Sometimein 2004, therewasan inaurgencyproblemin their town. In fact, then Mayor Luna was twiceabducted.MayorHenryDanowasalsoabductedbythe CPP-NPA.256 He could not tell whether thecommunists are still there; some people say thatthey are in the mountains.w?

50

The parties stipulated on the following entries in theAnnual Investment Plan for Calendan Year 2004 of theMunicipality of Lingig:258

a. Thereare two (2) projectsidentified in the socialpart of the project or title: first, the NationalSecurity Issued Projects and Initiative, whichincludes the cost of services which areconfidential in nature to carry on administrativeactivities and, second,other national security

2;' TSNdated August 5,2015, p. 19.252 TSNdated August 5,2015, p. 1l.253 TSNdated August 5,2015, pp. 21-22.254 TSNdated August 5, 2015,p. 13.25; TSNdated August 5,2015, p. 15.2'" TSNdated August 5,2015, pp. 15-17.2,l TSNdated August 5,2015, p. 18.25. Exhibit R

iD/'7t,/

DecisionPeoplevs. Luna, et al.S8-1O-CRM-0111, etc.x-------------------------------------------------x

51

mission projects in thePhPl,OOO,OOO.OO[Item No. 11];

amount of

b. Item No. 14refers to Peaceand Order and PublicSafety Funds, allocated under the 20%DevelopmentFund for Calendar Year 2004, thepurpose of which is for the maintenance of thepeaceand order condition and public safety ofthe municipality; it also covers the peace andorder council's conduct of its regular .meeting,including the administration of the People'sLawEnforcement .Board in the amount ofPhP450,000.OQ;and,

c. Items No. 11 and 14 indicates that the locationis "Municipal Wide".259

Accused Nilda T. f'erraud.o; Cash Clerk I at the MunicipalTreasurer's Office of Lingig,260testified: '

1. She is a Cash Clerk I at. the Municipality of Lingig,Her basic functions as Cash Clerk include: '

a. Receivecheckpaymentsfor payrolls from theMunicipalTreasurer's Office;

b. Facilitate the encashment .of checkpayments;

c. Disburse/releasecashpaymentsof salaries,wages and hqnoraria to. municipalgovernment cfficials and employees,including job order'workers;and,

d. Liquidate the foregoingexpenses.w!

2. On April 14, 2Q04,she received,from the MunicipalTreasurer's Office, LBP Check No. 2314B 1, in theamount of Pi{P21327,29 1.32, for the payment ofsalaries of the regular (April 2004) and Job Order(January to April 2004) employees. She was thepayee. She si~ned Box E of DV No. 100-2004-04-1271.262

3. On even,date, ,.She,P,e,rS<jmallY,encashe,dLBP,C,he,C,k,No.231481 in the amount of PhP2,327,291.32at theLBP,Bislig Brq,nch,263.

r=259 TSN dated August 5,2015, pp. 7-10. ~26u Ferrando's Judicial Affidavit dated August 29, 2015; Exhibit 1-Ferrando, p. 2; TSN dated September 15,

2015, p. 6; Criminal Case No. SB-lO-CRM-Qlll26' Ferrandu's Judicial Affidavit dated August 29, 2015, p',3; TSN dated September 15, 2015, p.u~.262 Ferrando's .Judicial Affidavit dated August 29, 2015, pp. 8-9.263 Ferrando's Judicial Affidavit dated August 29,2015, p. 9.

DeoisfonPeoplevs. Luna, et al.SB-lO-CRM-Olll, etc.x-------------------------------------------------x

~2

4. In the afternoon of April 14,2004, she startedreleasing the salaries of the regular employeesforApril 2004 and the honoraria and per diems of thejob order employees.Shedid not ask the employeesto submit photocopiesof their IDs. Nothing in theTIme Book and pqyrolls will showthat valid IDs werepresentedto her.264 .

5. Shedid not ask the regular employeesto present anID when shepaid them their salary sincesheknowsall of them.265

6. As standard procedureof the Municipal Treasurer'sOffice, job order employees should personallypresent themselves and present their valididentification cards to receivetheir honoraria andper diems.

She only releasedthe payments.after ascertainingthe employees'personalidentity. Sherequired themto present their IOs with photosand comparedtheirsignatures thereon with their ~ignat1.lreson thepayroll. Shesignedthe requiredcertifications on thepayrolls.266 .

7. She liquidated said expenseonly in August 2004because she delivered'her second child, throughcaesariansection,in May2004.267

8. The COA team did not interview her about thehonoraria and per diem.s of the10! Job Orderemployees.

9. Shehad no part in the preparationof the TIme Book:and Payrolls. The payrolls for the job orderemployeesfor .Januaryto April 2004weresubmittedby the Mayor's Office,to the Municipal Treasurer'sOffice.268

10. She first saw the Job Orders when they weresubmitted to the Municipal Treaeurer'sOffice. Theywere already verified and signedby accusedLindo,the Municipal Budget Officer," Accountant, andMayor.w?

11. She did not prepare nor is she a signatory to thecheck. Marga P. Adlawan and Cynthia Cruz Cose

~2bS Ferrando'sJudicial Affidavit datedAugust 29,2015, p. 8; TSNdatedSeptember15,2015,pp: 1\1-19:266 Ferrando'sJudicial Affidavit datedAugust29,2015, pp. 7·8. '20' Ferrando's.JudicialAffidavit datedAugust 29,2015, pp. 9-10. i7J208 Exhibits F to F-32; Ferrando's.Judici..al Affidavit datedAugust 29,2015, p. 5, , ...,'26, Ferrando'sJudicial Affidavit datedAugust 29,2015, p. 11.

DecisionPeoplevs. Luna, et al.S8-1O-CRM-O 111, etc.x···-- ---- ------- --- -- - -- --- -- ---- -- ------- ---- ----x

wereassignedto preparethe voucher and the check.The municipal mayor and the municipal treasurerare the signatories of the checks.P??

12. She was designated as the claimant in thedisbursement voucher sinceshewas the CashClerk.It was her duty to releasepayment and to liquidatethe cash advance,right after payment.s"!

13. AccusedLuna has restituted the.PhP1,610,800,OQ.272

14. The COAAudit report included her as Cash Clerk I,who received the cash advance for the salaries ofregular employeesand honoraria of the job orderemployees under Disbursement Voucher No. 100-2004-04-1271 dated April 14, 2004 and becauseofthe certifications she madeon the payrolls.F'?

53

Herbert Estrada Luna, Branch Managerof Landlsank,Bislig Branch.v'= testified:

1. He was assigned to LandBank, Bislig Branch from2002 to 2004, He became its Branch Head onSeptember7, 2015. It is his duty to overseeall thetransactions involving the branch.P?"

2. He brought a photocopy of Landfsank Check No.231481, including its validation. The check wassigned by accused Lindo and Indoyon. The checkwas verified by the bank verifier, and approved forpayment by the bank cashier. The front part of thecheck was stampedpaid. by the teller who paid thecheck.276

3. He brought a photocopyand a duplicate copy of thebank statement for Account Number 2162000J04 inthe name of the Municipality of Lingig. The bankstatement shows that the amount of

PhP2,32.7'291~..·.32w sdebited fro~ said account onApril 14, 2004,27

{7.ftD

"7u TSN dated September l5, 20l5, p. 3l.211 TSN dated September is, 2015, pp. 23-24."n Ferrando's Judicial Affidavit dated August 29, 2015, p. 11.2·13 Exhibit 4; Ferrando's Judicial Affidavit dated,August 29,2015, pp. 3-4.214 TSN dated January 27, 2016, pp. 5-6.27. TSN dated January 27,2016,pp. 8-9.276 TSN dated January 27,2016, p. 14.2"17 TSN dated .January 27, 2016, p. 17.

DecisionPeoplevs. Luna, et al.S8-10-CRM-Olll, etc.x-------------------------------------------------x

54

Teofilo Q. Ml\catiog, Jr., .Records Officer I1I.,Administrative Officer V of the Office of the Ombudsman,Mindanao.v" testified:

1. He is a Records Officer at the Office of the DeputyOmbudsman, Mindanao since 1993.279

2. He received a subpoena requiring him to come toCourt.280 "

The parties stipulated on the due existence of:

1. Decision dated August 14, 2008 of theOffice of the Ombudsman-Mindanao inCase No. OMB-M-A-06':'339-J, entitled"Lu na vs. Otagan."281

ii. The Resolution dated September 24, 2007of the Office of the Ombudsman-Mindanaoin Case No. OMB-C-06-046S.282

Accused Ebrencip F. Ilutpyon, Jr., former MunicipalTreasurer of Lingig,283testified: ,

1. He was the Municipal Treasurer of Lingig from 1999until 2009.284 As such, he was a signatory of itschecks.285

2. He knows his eo-accused and the positions that theyheld.286

3. As Municipal Treasurer,responsibilities were:

his duties and

a. Take chargeof the Treasurer'sOffice;b. Advisethe Mayor, the Sangguriianfind other local

government officials concerned regardingdisposition of localgovernmentfunds and on suchother matters relative to public finance;

c. Takecustody and exerciseproper managementofthe funds of the local governmentunit concerneJ{;

d. Take charge of the disbursement of all localgovernment funds the custody of which may be

2',. TSNdated .January27.2016,p. 22. . n~279 TSNdated .January27.2016,p. 26.280 TSNdated January 27,2016,p. 30.281 Exhibit 53 to 53-H for Luna, Lindo, Carlosand Ferrando;Exhibit 28to 28-1for accusedIndoyon;TSNdate.

January 27,2016.pp. 36-37;Order dated .January27,2016,p. :1;Record,Vol. V, p. 4l2.2"" Exhibit 44 lO 44-H for accusedLuna, Lindc, Carlos lID!! Ferrando; Exhibit ~Ofor accusedIndeyon.28.3 TSNdated February 24,2016,p. 22. Criminal CaseNo,SB-lO-CRM-Oll1)2114 TSNdated February 24,2016,p. 24, '285 Indoyori's .Judicial Affidavit dated February 10,2016,p. 3;Record,Vol. V, p. 419;TSNdated FebN8fY 24,

2016,p. 25. . . . ...286 Indoyon's Judicial Affidavit dated February 10,2016.p. 3;Record,Vol. v, p. 419,

DecisionPeoplevs. Luna, et al.SB-lO-CRM-Olll, etc.x------ -------- ..-- ------------ --- -----------------){

55

entrusted to him by law' or other competentauthority;

e. Inspect private commercial and industrialestablishmentswithin the jurisdiction of the LGUin relation to the implementation of taxordinances,pursuant to the provision under l300kIII of the LocalGovernmentCode;

f. Maintain and update the tax information systemof the local governmentunit;

g. Exercise such other powers and perform suchother duties and functions as may be prescribedby ordinances.ss?

4. As the Municipal Treasurer, he signed Box C of thesubject disbursement voucher' and certified thatthere was cash available in. the amount ofPhP2,327,291.$2. The disbursement voucher wasfor the salaries and honorarium of regular and joborder workers of the Municipality.288 The names of101 workers who were paid ihonorariurn and perdiems are listed in Exhibit 1-Indoyon.289

5. He certified that cash was available on the basis offinancial statements, He certified that funds wereavailable for the Job Order workers based on therecommendation of the Budget Officer and theMunicipal Accountant. The Municipal Budget Officercertifies as to the appropriation of account. 290

6. He signed the disbursement voucher becauseit hasbeensigned by the other signatories.w'

It is not his duty to obligate. His duty is to disburseand collect. It is the Municipal Accountant whoobligates the charges to any appropriation in theLGU only when there is Cl, signature of the head ofoffice.292

7. There is an appropriation for the regular salaries ofthe employees. PhP716,49l.12 went to the salariesof the regular employees.The subject matter of thiscase refers to the salaries of the job order workersin the amount ofPhPl,610,800.00. TheamountWaS

receivedby accused Ferrando - Cash Clerk.293

8. The Municipality sourced the amount ofPhPl,610,800.00 from different offices and funds

17-·'. ..- ~2~7 indoyon's Judicial Affidavit dated February 10,2019, p. 4; Record, VQl. v, P. 420.

288 TSN dated February 24,2016, p. 26. .280 Indoyon's Judicial Affidavit dated February 10,2016, p. 4; Record, Val. V, p. 420.

""0 TSN dated February 24,2016, p. 30. ~.291 Indoyon's .Judicial Affidavit dated February 10, 2016, p. 8; Record, Vol. V, p. 424; TSI'i dated febNary 24r

2016, pp. 32 and 38. i ..

:l9"l TSN dated February 24,2016, p. 37. . .293 TSN dated February 24, 2016, pp. 27-28.

DecisionPeoplevs. Luna, et al.S8-1O-CRM-Olll, etc.x---------------------------------------------~---x

including the Office of the Mayor and the Office ofthe Treasurer.294

9. Therewereavailablefunds for the Job Orderworkerswhen the Municipal Accountant obligated as to theamount of the voucher.

10. The Municipal Accountant told him that there was aletter from the Municipal Mayor requesting foraugmentation from the appropriation for the Officeof the Municipal Treasurer. The Mayor would,therefore,beusing the fund allotted for the Officeofthe Municipal Treasurer classified as CuherServices. The Mayor requested for the amount ofPhPIOO,OOO.OOfrom the appropriation of the Officeof the Municipal Treasurer in order to augment thefunding for Job Order workers.P?"

11. He did not know nor did he inquire where theamount will beused by the mayor for the requestedaugmentation. He did not inquire where the otherfunds camefrop1.29p

12. He does not know whether the Job Order workerswho were paid from their office' fund actuallyrendered service. He does not know where saidamount was spent for.297

13. He signed based on his belief that there is nothingwrong in sourcing funds for job order workers fromthe Other Services appropriation of the Office of theMunicipal Treasurer.P'"

14. Accused Ferrando disbursed the payment as cashclerk in the payrol1.299

The signatoriesjn the payroll sign in the followingorder:

a) Foreman;b) Municipal Mayor;c. Indoyon;d. Ferrandos-"

/it' I

~94 TSN dated February 24,2016, p. 28.295 TSN dated February 24,2016, p. 40.296 TSN dated February 24, 2016, p. 39.297 TSN dated February 24,2016, pp. 33-34.298 TSNdatedFebruary24,2016, pp. 41-44.299 TSNdatedFebruary24,2016, p. 48.300 TSNdatedFebruary24,2016, pp. 46-48.

*1>

Sf)

DecisionPeoplevs. Luna, et at.SB-lO-CRM-Olll, etc.x-------------------------------------------------x

57

15. In a DecisiondatedJuly 2006, COARegionalOfficeNo. XIII denied his Motions for Reconsiderationtothe Notice of Disallowance.Their appeal to COAMain Office was denied on June 4, 2007. He alsofiled a Motion for Reconsiderationand a Commentbeforethe Officeof the Ombudsman-Mindanao.w!

16. Accused Luna reimbursed thePhPl,610,800.00, in two installments:

subject

a. P1,500,OOO.00on September 7,2010;b. P 110,800.00 on September 21,2010.302

Roberto M. Luna, Jr., then Municipal Mayor of Lingig,303testified:

1. During his lst term as Mayor in 2004, upon thesuggestionof the military to look into NPAactivitiesin the barangays,he'hired job order employees asinformants to determine if the NPA is recruitingmembers.

2. The job order workers were recommended bybarangay chairpersons and officials and otherinformal community leadersin Lingig. The identitiesof the Job Order workers are confidential. They areknown to hill} and to those who recommendedthern.s?"

3. Theinformants verballyreportedto him. Sometimes,the informants also report about drug syndicates.There were no written reports. The informationgatheredare confidential. 305

4. Job Order workers werehired from January to April2004; they werenot re-hired after. The informantswereableto gatherthe necessaryinformation duringthe periodof their employment.Thepeaceand ordersituation in Lingig improved.

5. The salaries of the Job Order workers Werealsocharged to the appropriation for Peaceand OrderFunds and other chargesof the LGUof Lingig. .heirsalaries were charged to the National Securit andMission under the 20% Development Fund. ~

301 Indoyon's Judicial Affidavit dated February 10, 2016, pp. 5-6; Record, Vo V, p. 421-422. ~302 Exhibits 3-5, Indoyon; Indoyon's Judicial Affidavit dated February 10, 2016, p. 7; Record, VOl."'Q

V, p. 423; Certification dated September 3D, 2010, Exhibit 5-Indoyon.303 TSN dated July 12,2016. '

304 Luna's Judicial Affidavit dated July 4, 2016, p. 4; TSN dated July 12, 2016, p. 23.305 TSN dated July 12,2016, pp. 20-22.

DecrstonPeoplevs. Luna, et al.S8-10-CRM-Olll, etc.x-------------------------------------------------x

58

6. The check representing the cash advance in theamount of PhP2,237,291.12 under DisbursementVoucher No. 100-2004-1271 dated April 14, 2004,passed through regular procedure. The check wasproperly liquidated; the payrolls are intact and thesupporting documents were complied with.306

7. He submitted the Certification because of the COAaudit; The Certification listed names of personsinterviewed by accused Lindo and who renderedservice as informants. He used the word "dummy'! inthe Certification, in good faith, to protect the joborder employees, who are confidential employees.He understands the meaning of the word "dummy".It was unfortunate that accused Lindo used the word"dummies" instead of "confidential employees".307

8. The Certification was prepared by accused Lindopursuant to his instructions." the same wassubmitted to and signed by him. AccusedLindo is alaw graduate, but not a member of the Bar.30B

9. He signed the Disbursement Voucher, certifying thatthe expenditure is lawful. 309

10. The COA issued a Notice of Disallowance in relationto the abovementioned transaction. He wasexpecting an exit conference but the COA did notschedule one.

11. He filed a Motion for Reconsideration of theDisallowance. However, believing that the samewould be denied, he paid ! the amount ofPhP1,610,800.00. He did not immediately pay saidamount because he was waiting for COA to conductan exit conference. The amount was paid before thecases were filed with the' Sandiganbayan. He isuncertain if he would have returned the amount ifthe instant cases were not filed.U?

12. The COA did not verify whether the individualsactually rendered services"!

13. Almost all the municip. alities of suriga~de 'Sur, and_____ in the country hire job order worke rs 3

12 ~

300 Luna's JudicialAffidavitdatedJuly1,2016,pp. 5& 7.307 TSN datedJuly12,2016,pp. 26-29,31,33-31;Luna's JudicialAffidavitdatedJuly4,2016,pp. 6-7.308 ExhibitT; TSN datedJuly12,2016,pp. 30-31. .30Y Luna's JudicialAffidavitdatedJuly4,2016,p. 6. ID310 Exhibit50and50-A;Luna's.JudicialAffidavit.da.tedJuly4, 20115, pp. 5-6. ..311 LIma'sJudicialAffidavitdatedJuly4,2016,p. 8. .

312 Luna'sJudicialAffidavitdatedJuly4,2016,p. 4.

DecisionPeoplevs. Luna, et al.S8-1O-CRM-O 111, etc.x-------------------------------------------------x

59

14. He sees to it that the Municipal Budget isimplementedin accordancewith the intent and spiritof the law.313

15. He approved the Annual Investment Plan andMunicipal Bud~et for the year 2004. The MunicipalBudget contained provisions for Peaceand Order inthe 20% Development Fund and for the NationalSecurity Mission programs.A!"

16. Heknows Mr. Otagan,a formeremployeeof the Officeof the Mayor of Lingig, Mr. Otaganfiled the instantcaseagainst him for revenge.s-"

17. The Municipality of Lingig is heavily infested withNPAs. Hewas abductedon May 10, 2010.316

18.TheJob Ordersweresignedby the Municipal BudgetOfficer and Municipal Accountant, certifying as tothe existenceof appropriation/ obligation. He signedthejob orderscertifying that the samewerePreparedby the ExecutiveAssistant at the time of -the hiringof the employees.AccusedLindo. was in charge ofpreparing the 'Job Orders and the correspondingpayrolls.P!?

19. He ran for re-election and won in the May 2004election.Uf

20. This case was filed against him in January 30,2006.319

TheCourt admittedthe following exhibits.w'

For accused Luna Il~d I,..igdo;

---

Exhibit321 Document6 Annual Budget of Municipality of Lingig, CY 2004_-----.1UUU)

7Annual Investment Plan of Municipality of Lingig, cr 2004 (Y

(R) . . n-

~J

...

".' ...?/

A'6

Jl3 Luna'sJudicial Affidavit datedJuly 4,2016, p. 3.314 Exhibits 6-10;Luna's Judicial Affidavit datedJuly 4,2016, pp. 3A.31S LIma'sJudicial Affidavit datedJuly 4,2016, p. 3.316 Luna'sJudicial Affidavit datedJuly 4,2016, p. 3.317 Luna'sJudicial Affidavit datedJuly 4,2016, p. 8.31B TSNdated.Iuly 12,2016,pp. 37-39.319 Luna'sJudicial Affidavit datedJuly 4,2016, pp. 8-9.320 ResolutiondatedAugust 8,2016; Record,Vol. V], pp. 692-693.321 FormalOfferof Evidence(ForaccusedRobertoM. Luna,Jr ..andJethro Lindo] datedJuly 15,2016;Record,

Vol. VI, pp. 159-164. . .

DecisionPeoplevs. Luna, et al.SB-I0-CRM-Olll, etc.x----------------~--------------------------------x

60

-.

8Resolution No. 229, seriesof2003 of the Sangguniang Bayanof Municipality of Lingig.

f-----

9 Statement of Statutory and Contractual Obligations.~'

Program Appropriation and Obligation by Object.10~-

Consolidated Report of the Chief of Police of ¥\.lnicipl:llity of11 Lingig; narrating the peace and order condition of the

Municipality.12 Intelligence Assessment in Lingig.

Resolution of the Office of the Ombudsman for "Fals,ifi~tion44 of Public Documents & violation of RA 3019'1 in the c!'l~e

entitled Roberto Luna, Jr. vs. Leonor M. Otaqan, Jr.1-------

45 Motion for Reconsideration.

50 Official Receipt No. 2539239 for th~ amount "Qf1-----.1 GGG) PhP1,500,000.00.

50-A Official Receipt No. 2539202 for the amount ofI-----(HHH) PhPl10,800.00.

53 Decision of the Office. of •the Ombudsman for "Omue(53-CarIos, Misconduct" in the case entitled Roberto Luna, Jr. v~. Lean-pr

et a1. M. Otqgan, Jr.

59.Judicial Affidavit of accused Jethro Lindo together with its

--attachments

for aoorrsed ln4oyq~

10 to 27 .Judicial Affiqayit dated Jan~ 19, ~015 of accusedV~Qll~

(66 to 79 M. Carlos, Municipal Accq\-mtant of the Municipiillity ofCarlos and Lingig; Surigao del Sur.

Ferrando)323L-- ~ ~ ------~~~----~~~~~~~------~--~

xhibilf dated .July 18, . 16; Re d. Vo!. VI,pp. ;3~1-32j):323 Exhibits 66 to 79 were not offered by accused Carlos and Fen do in their Formal Qffl(f QC D9C4meqtaxy

Exhibits. .

1 I Certifi~atioIl dated-June 1~, 2015 from the Office of the(T) Mayor!of Lingig.

6(E); 59 Carlos,

et a1.

I.

Exhibit322 li Document;

2 Time $00);<: and Payroll for Honorarium for February 2004 in1---_ F-20) the royOlmt of PhP100,000.0'O. .

L3 d Official Receipt No. 253923Q dated September 7, 2010, for

(50- una an PhPl 500 000.00.I--- Lindo) '1" . . I

4 Official Receipt No. 2925302 dated September21, 2010 for(50d-AL-~udnalthe amount of PhPII0,800.00.an In 0 . .

5 I Certification of Donate P. Sala.bao,GIC-Municipal Treasurerof Lingig.

Landfsank Check No. 231481 signed by accused Lindo andIndoyon,

7(D; Carlos and

Ferrando]

Disbursement Voucher No. 100-2004-04-1271 dated AprH14, 2Q04for PhP2,327,291.32.

Motion for ReCoIl~ideration;filedby. accused ImiQYP:n, Jr.before; the Office of the Ombudsman, Mindanao on August

I--- I 12, 2010., .; ...., .' IComment of accused Indoyon, .Jr. submitted to the Qffic~ ofthe Ombudsman, Mindanao . .9

8

~

DecisionPeoplevs. Luna, et al.SB-1O-CRM-0111,etc.x--------"----------------------------------------x·

61

~.- .Judicial Affidavit dated January 19, 2015 of witness LolitaD. Dapitanon, Bookkeeper assigned at the Office of theMunicipal Accountant, Lingig, Surigao del Sur.

Reply Letter of Ruth Cabilogan-Beniga, MPSM, Director n,Provincial Director of the Civil Service Cornmissicn, Surigaodel Sur Field Office.

Certification dated February 20, 2015 signed and issued byRuth Cabilogan-Beniga, MPSM, Director H, ProvincialDirector of the Civil Service Commission, Surigao del SurField Office. .

1----- 27 Original Copy at Notice cfDisallowances dated November 16,W 2005 signed by Atty. Marisol D. Legaspi of the Commission

on Audit consisting of two (2) pages.I-- 28 Decision promulgated on July 17,2006 by the COA Regional

Office No. XIII Butuan City, Regional Legal and Adjudication29 Decision promulgated on June 4, 2007 by CO/\ Head OfficeI-- . - -

30 Landfiank Certification dated August 11, 2010 issued byBranch Manager Centina P. Lumpay.

L-- L- ~

For accueedCarlos arid Verr~Jldo

Document;Judicial Affidavit dated August 29,2015 of Nilda T. FerraridoCounter-Affidavit of accused Venus M. CarIos and itsSubmission.Disbursement Voucher No. 100-2004-04-1211 dated April14,2004. -

.Journal Entry Voucher No. 100-04-02dated August 8, 2004.

Journal Entry Voucher No. 100-04~08dated August 31,2004.

Original copy of the Annual Budget of Lingig for CY 2004~

Annual Investment Plan for :CY 2004 of Lingig, Surigao delSur.Resolution No. 229, Seriesof2003 of the Sangguniang Bayanof the MUnicipality of Lingig. . .

Statement of Statutory and Contractual Obligations;

Program Appropriation and Obligation by Object.

Allotment and Obligations Slip No.100-2004~06-0807 to0834Allotment and Obligations Slip No. 100-2004-04-0862.Allotment and Obligations Slip No,-100-2004-06-0560 to0561. - . -

Resolution dated September 24, 2007 issuedby the Office ofthe Ombudsman for Mindanao in OMB-M-:-C-06-0465entitled: "Roberto MLuna, Jr. vs. Leonor vs. Otaqan, et al."

Motion for Reconsideration.

Motion fo.r Reconsideration Wity Motion for Exclusion fromLiability for the Disallowance.

('f ~I\) ~ /- F

324 Formal Offer of Documentary Exhibits in Evidencedated July 15, 2016; Record,Vol. VI, pp. 376-~96.

!1

DecisionPeoplevs. LUIla, et al.S8-10-CRM-OlI1, etc.x---------------~---------------------------------x

62

(6

53 DecisiondatedAugust 14,2008 promulgated by the Officeof

-Luria andthe Ombudsman for Mindanao in OMB-M-A-06-339-Jentitled: "Roberio M. Luna, Jr. vs. Leonor M. Otaqan. Jr." For

Lindo) GraveMisconduct

59Landlsank CheckNo.00002~1481 dated August 12,2004 in

Indoyon)the amount of PhP2,327,291.12 issued in the name ofaccusedNilda T. Ferrando.Landflank, Bislig City Branch, Bank Statement of

60 Transaction Slip for the Period CoveredMarch 31, 2004 toApril 30, 2004

62 Judicial Affidavit dated.January 19, 2015 of Venus M. Carlos

63.Iudicial Affidavit dated January 19, 2015 of Lolita D.Dapitanon--_.-Reply-Letterof Ruth Cabilogan-Beniga,Provincial Directorof

64--

the Civil ServiceCommission,Surigao del Sur Field Office.Certification dated February 20, 2015 signed and issuedby

65 Ruth Cabilogan-Beniga, Provincial Director of the Civil

---- ServiceCommission Surigaodel Sur Field Office.

(53

The prosecution.F" and accusedCarlos and Ferrando=sfiled their respectivememoranda. Accused Indoyon Tiled Cl

Manifestation that he will not file his rnemorandums-"whileaccused Luna and Lindo failed to file their respectivememor'arrda.v-"

THE CQUR.T'SFJNllINGS OF FACT

AccusedRobertoM. Luna, Jr., Jethro P. Lindo, VenusM,Carlos, Ebrencio F. IndoyonJr. and Nilda T. Ferrando werepublic officers and employeesof the Municipality of Lingig,during the periodrelevantto the instant cases. AccusedLunawas the Municipal Mayor; accusedLindo was an ExecutiveAssistantIV assignedtq the Officeof the Mayor;accusedCarloswas the Municipal Accountant; accused Indoyon was theMunicipalTreasurer;andaccusedNildaT. FerrandowasaC@.~4Clerk at the Municipal Treasurer'sOffice.329

On April 14,2004, LGDLingigreleasedLandBank CheckNo. 0000231481 dated April 12, 2004, in the amount ofPhP2,327,291.32,and payable to accused Ferrando. Thecheck was signed by accusedLindo, as ExecutiveAssiatant,Office of the Mayor, and accused Indoyon, as MunicipalTreasurer. The amount was intended for the: [i] salaries of

325 Memorandumfor the Plaintiff dated December13,2016; Record,Vol. VII, pp. 73-114.320 Memorandum

VII, pp. 14-58.327 Manifestationdated December23,20.16; Record,Vo!. VII, p. 119. / -m Resolutiondated .January 24,2017; Record,Vol. VII. p. 123. ~329 Pre-TrialOrder datedJanuary 27,2012, p. 3; Record,Vol. m, p. 54-55. .

to

DectalonPeople vs. Luna, et al.S8-1O-CRM-Ol11, etc.

x-------------------------------------------------x

63

regular employees(PhP716,491.12)for April 2004; and, (ii)honoraria andper diems ofjob orderworkers (PhP1,610,800~OO)from January to April 2004.330

On even date, accusedFerrando receivedand encashedthe said check.V!

Disbursement Voucher DV No. 100-2004-04-1271datedApril 14,2004,332coveringthe check,showsthe participation ofthe accused,as follows;

C Office~ ParUcl atiRp·1. Jethro Lindo ~(Executive . Certified that the Bxpenses/Oash. A.avqn~s

Assistant) signed on behalf necessatu, lawful, ana incurreq una~r hisof Roberto M, Luna, Jr. direct supervision;(Mayor) Approved the expense for payment

3. Ebrencio F. Indoyon, Jr. ~. Certified" that Cash is available(Municipal Treasurer)

2. Venus M. Carlos ~. Certified to t~e CompletenesS, ind pr.().pri~ty.(Municipal Accountant] I. of supportinq documt3nts/previol-ls PCJsh

advance

4. Nilda T. Ferrando la· Claimant and received payment(Cash Clerk) .,

Theamount ofPhP;1,610,800.00,for the honoraria CUlQ perdiems of the job order workers for the perioddanuary to April20041 was chargedagainst the followingfunds: ..

Vu,pd. . AmQ\Jpt1. Administrative Support 80,000,00

(1011; Office of the Mayor)

2. Other Expense 348,000.00(1011; Office of the Mayor):

3. 20% Peace and Order 344,000.00

4. 20% National Security Mission 6M3,OOO.OP5. 1091 (Office of the Treasurer) ! 100,00.0.006. 1011 90;OOP.Op

T9tld: p i)i'iO;8oo.6'b~3~'"

In April and June 2004, severalAllotment an:'--.0jli9fl,ti(JnsSlips,334 wereissued to fund the amount disbursell ~

330 Exhibit E; TSN dated January 27, 2015, p. 20; Carlos'Judicial Affidavit dated .January 19, 2015, p. p,~~. .. ~

331 Ferrando'sJudicial Affidavit da.tedAuguS.t29,2.015,p..9; LBPBialigCity Branch Statementof Transaction ..Slip for the period March 31 to April I, 2004, Exhibit 60-Ferrando.

"32 Exhibit D.m TSNdated February 24, 2016, p. 28; Carlos'Judicial Affidavit datedJanuary 19, 2015, p. 8, Exhibit p2;

Luna'sJudicial Affidavit datedJuly 4, 201p, p. 4, Record,Vol. V], p. 21; Audit ObservationM~worapdtlJllNo.2005-001datedJuly 28, 2005, Exhibit V; ALOBSmarkedasExhibits H to H-32; SummaryofMlopnentand Obligationsfor the period .Januaryto April 2004, Municipality of Lingig, Surigaodel Sur, Exhibit I.

334 Exhibits H to H-32.

DecisionPeoplevs. Luna, et al.SB-lO-CRM-O 111, etc.x-------------------------------------------------x

64

ALOBS I Job PayroU Periocl I Fund FlotQlflP,t 1 4mou. ••tOrder (Exhibit) (2004) Cia ••

(Exhibit)

100-2004-02-0822 I G-17 F-17 February Other Expense(101 il MOOE 2a,560.00

100-2004-04-0512 I g~;~F-20 February 1091 MOOE ·100,000.00

100-2004-04-0560 I F-24 January Administrative I I aO,oPp·OO(per diem) Support

(lOll)100-2004-04-0561 I I F-23 I January I 1011 1 1 30,OPO.00

_(per dierns]100-2004-04-0562 I I F-22 I January I 1011 I I ao,OOp.OO

1---(per dierns]

100-2004-06-0807 I G-12 I F-12 January to 20% National Security 1 MOOE 1 90,OPQ.00.. March Mission

100-2004-06-0808 I G-lO I F-I0 .January to 20% National Security 1 MOOE 1 @4,OOO.00. March Mission

100-2004-06-0809 I G-5 I F-5, January to 20% National Security I' MOOJ!; I S2,POO.00March Mission

100-2004-06-0810 I G-9 I F-9 January to 20% National Security MOOE pO,OOO·OOMarch Mission \

~-2004-06-081l 1G-4 T FA .January to 20% National Seqlrity MODE ~4,000.OOMarch Mission

100-2004-06-0812 1 G-6 1 F-6': January to .20% National Security 1 MOOE 1 ss.ooo.ooMarch Mission

100-2004-06-0813 I G-7 I F-7 I .January to 20% National Security 1 MOQ]l) 1 50,OPO.pOMarch Mission

100-2004-06-0814 I G-8 I F-8 I January to 20% National Sec"Qrit:r MOQE @4,OPO.00March Mission

100-2004-06-0815 G-19 F-19 FePru/iiry Other E;xpense(1011) MODE ~~,a~o.OQ

100-2004-06-0816 G-18 F-18 February Other E:K;pense(l P11) MOOE '·71,400.00

100-2004-06-0817 G-16 F-16 Februarv Other Expense'(lOll} MOOE ·•.·28560.00

100-2004-06-0818 G-15 F-15 February Other Expense (lOll) MOOljl 71.4Po.oo

100-2004-06-0819 G-13 F-13 Febr).l./iiry Other E?cpense(1011) MODE W~,fi§O.OO

100-2004-06-0820 G-14 F-14 F~bruarv' Other Expc::nsellOlll MODE as 080.00100-2004-06-0821 G-21 F-21 • Febr).l.ary Administrative'Sitpport MOOE 7UI-QP.00

(1011);Other Expense (1011)

100-2004-06-0823 I G-25 I F-25 I January to . 20% National Security 1 MOOE I' a6,OpO.00March Mission

100-2004-06-0824 I G-26 I F-28 I .January to 20% National Security 1 MOOE 1 32,000.00March Mission

100-2004-06-0825 I G-27 I F-29 I .January to Other E:3:pense(1011) MODE. ~4,POO.00March . "',. " .. ,'

100-2004-06-0826 I G-30 I F-32 I .Ianuary to Adminisjrative SllPP()rt MOOE ~-if,QOO.OQMarch (1011); . .

Other Expense {lOll}100-2004-06-0827 I G-26 I F-26 I .January to 20% Peaceand Order MOOE 44,000.00

March100-2004-06-0828 I G-27 I F-27 , I .January to 20% Peaceand Order MODE pO,OOP.OO

March·100-2004-06-0829 I G-29 I F-3l I .January to 20% Peaceand Order 1 M00J!: 1 qO,OOO,OO

March100-2004-06-0830 I G-28 I F-30 I .Ianuary to 20% National Security I MODE I 00,000.00

March Mission100-2004-06-0832 I G-3 I F-3 I April 20% National Security 1 MOOE 1 100,ooO.00

Mission100-2004-06-0833 April 20% Peaceand Order MODE 100,000·00

100-2004-06-0834 .f\pril 20% National Security IPO,OOO.OOMission

100-2004-06-0891 I G I F I April I 20% Peaceand Order MOOE

1'9"J

o~-",' . ,,-',.. ,- . ,_, -c,

Decil.ionPeoplevs. Luna, et al.S8-1O-CRM-O111,etc.x-------------------------------------------------x

65

The ALOBS show the participation of the accused asfollows:

_. _._--Officer Participatio.n

---I. RobertoM. Luna, Jr. - Mayor a. Signedas Department Head

b. Requested for allotment forthe items stilted in theALOBS

t2. Antonio C:--Saligumba- Municipal Certified as to the existenceofBudget Officer appropriation.

3. Venus M. Carlos - Municipal Certified as to obligation ofAccountant allotment,

The Time Book and Payrolls listed a total of 101 workersassigned as community aides,335informants,336 or confidentialemployees=" in LGU Lingig, paid on daily or monthly basis.

The Time Book and Payrolls shows the participation of theaccused, as follows:

Officer P--.rtlc.pa~.pp.f-:-.

Certifiedthat the payroll is correct; everyperson1. Roberto M. Luna, Jr.

(Mayor) whose name appears thereon rendered service'for the time and at the rate stated, under hisgeneral supervision.and he approved payment

1---for the payrolls.

2. Jethro Lindo certified that eachpersonwhosename appears(Exec.Asst. IV) on the payroll renderedserviceas indicated and

for the time stated.1--------

Certified that she paid in cash to each man3. Nilda T. Ferrando . .

(CashClerk) whosenameappearson the payroll, the amountset oppositetheir names, they having presentedthemselves, established their identity, andaffixed their signatures or thumbmarks on thespaceprovided therefore.

Sometime in June 2004, Leonor Otagan, .Jr, the HRMO-designate of LGU Lingig from August 1992 to May 17, 2004,.went to the Office of the Municipal Accountant to follow up onhis travel expenses. Accused Carlos reminded him of the needto sign the job orders for the period January to April 2004, whenhe was still the HRMO-designate, as the job orders werenecessary for the liquidation of the cash advance.F"

Otagan immediately proceeded to the MunicipalTreasurer's Office. But accused Ferrando said that she will jus

335 Exhibits F to F-12 and F-22 to F-32.336 Exhibits F-13 to F-19 and F-21.337 Exhibit F-20.

336 OfficeOrder dated May 17,2004, Exhibit ZZ;Appointment PaperofLeonorM.Otaganas HRMO...,'.~ .. ,.,.Exhibit MMM. ? /

~

DecisionPeoplevs. Luna, et al.S8-1O-CRM -0111, etc.x-----·-------------------------------------------x

66

approach him when she has cornpleted the necessarydocuments.s-'?

Oneweekafter, Otaganwasinformed that the job ordersarereadyfor his signature. Herepliedthat he would signthemin his Office after he confirms the completeness of thesupportingdocuments. But thejob ordersfor January to April2004 werenot forwardedto him that .dayand evenuntil he leftthe service.340

Sometime in September.2004, Mr. Otagan filed acomplaint with the Civil ServiceCommission, based on theinformation providedby his sourcethat the Pl,610,800.00 wasliquidated and that the job orders were signed by accusedLindo, and after concluding, based on his own investigation,that the job orderworkerswerenot actually hired and paid, Hequestionedthe paymenttojob orderworkersunder DVNo. 100-2004-04-1271 and claimedthat no suchworkerswerehired byLGULingig and no individuals renderedserviceas communityaides,informants, or cqnfidentialemployees.341

Theparticipation of the accusedin the executionof thejobordersare as follows:

1.Partipip..,tion

Approvedthe job order.

2.

3.

4.I ,- ..------ •.- .•.••..••..••.- .•..-...•.,.., I I

Sometimein May 2005, upon the requestof the Officeofthe Ombudsman, a COA Team was created and tasked toconduct an audit on the disbursement of Pl,610,800.00 fordummy employees.The Ombudsman'sdirectivewas basedon.the Complaint of RicoOrtila, a SangguniangBayanmemberofthe Municipality of Lingig, Theteamwascomposedof .JeremiasBucong, Sally Ladaga,and Marah Mendoza. The Audit teamstudiedthe documentsand requestedLOULingigfor a list pf itsjob order workers from January to April 2004. LGU Lingigcomplied by submitting a List of Municipal Officials qn

339 TSNdatedJuly 27, 2011, pp. 28-29.340 TSNdated .July 27, 2011, pp. 31-33.J4l TSNdated July 27,2011, pp. 57-60,70.

??A1

DecfstonPeoplevs. Luna, et al.S8-1O-CRM-O 111, etc.x--c------~---------------------------------------x

67

Employees Including Job Orders for the month of January-April2004, Local Government Unit, Lingig.342 .

Sometimein June 2005, when the Audit team was aboutto leave for the Municipality of Lingig to conduct theirinvestigation, Mr. Bucong receiveda call from accused Luna,AccusedLuna told Mr. Bucong that the employeeslisted in thepayrolls were dummies. Upon the request ofMr! BUCQp.g,accused Luna committed to submit a certification to such. .' " '. . .,'. ,.

effect.343

In a Certification dated June 16, 2005,344 submitted byLGU Lingig to the RL1\O13 COA Audit Team, accused Lunadeclared:

To Whom it may Concern:This certifiesthat the followingpersonslisted

below are just dummies who receivedthe amountout of my intelligencefund.

xxx . xxx xxx

107nameswere listed thereunder.

The audit team proceededto Lingig to pay a courtesy Gallto Mayor Luna but he was not around! Instead, theyinterviewed the other kGU officials including accused Lindo.The team requested the municipality for the addressesof thejob order workers but they werenot providedwith the sa.me,345

Sometimein July 2005, the Audit team receiveda requestto conduct an audit on the. same transaction based on theComplaint of LeonorOtagan.sw

On .Iuly 28, 2005, the audit team furnished, via. registeredmail, accused Luna and Carlos with a copy of the AuditObservation Memorandum=" of even date. The C01\ Al.Jdi,

'" Exhibit A; TSNdaredOctob« 12.2011.pp.~. 9-13;T!jN datedMay 22.2012,pp. 12,lo-n 2H5, 2.· (7343 TSNdated October 12,2011, p. 29; TSNdatedMay22,2012, pp. 49-50; TSNdated4.u~St 2~, 20q, pp.

69-71;TSNdated September25, 20i2,p. 17.

-~T .~345 TSNdated October 12,2011, pp. 30-31;TSNdatedMay22,2012, pp. 52-53;TSNdatedOctober24. ~Q121 .. ...

pp. 20-21.346 Exhibit WV; TSNdatedOctober 12,2011, p. 40; TSNdatedOctober 13.2011, pp. 10-11;TSti 4ate4May··

22,2011, pp. 72-73; TSNdatedSeptember25,2012, p. 19.347 Exhibit C

DecisionPeoplevs. Luna, et al.S8-1O-CRM-Olll, etc.

x-------------------------------------------------x

68

Team did not conduct an exit conferencebecauseof the peaceand order situation in the municipality.v'"

On November16,2005, COAissued Notice of DisallouranceNo. 2005-001 (2004),349 for the per diems and honoraria in theamount of PhP1,610,8pO.00paid by LGU Lingig to job orderworkers. The NoticeofDisallowance found accusedRobertoM.Luna,Jethro P. Lindo,VenusM. Carlos,NildaT. Ferrando,EbrencioF. Indoyon and Antonio C. Saligumba to be liable for thedisbursement. The Audit InvestigationReport was releasedonDecember1,2005.350

On September7,2010 and September21,2010, accusedLuna paid to the Office of the Treasurer of Surigao del Sur theamounts of PhP1,500,QOO.00.and PhPI10,800.00.35I

The Civil Service Commission Regional Office did notreceive copies of any job order contract for January to April2004 from LGU Lingig.352 .

Luzviminda Basanez, whose name appears on the joborder and Time Book and PayrQi[353for February 2004354 deniedhaving been hired as a job order worker for LGU Lingig, Shealso denied receiving compensation from .Ianuary to April2004.355 Death Certificate No. 1805(F-79)showsthat a certainEdna Badang of Barangay Sabangpassedaway on .Iune ~3?1979.356 The name Edna Badang of Barangay Saban~isincluded in the List submitted by LGU Lingig to COJ\, ThenameEdna Badang is listed as a job order worker in the Time j3polcand Payrolls357and job orders. 358

LeodyEnriquez and Marlo Lanuza testified that they wen~

hired as confidential. age.nt and community. aide. infi.o..r.m:n....·.~.'.respectively for February 2004 and that they worked ...clreceivedcompensation as such at the end of the month,a

348 TSNdatedJune 26, 2012,p. 21; TSNdatedAugust28,2012, p.63; TSNdatedSeptember25,2012, pp.

8,23; TSN.datedJuly 25,2012, pp. 16-17. . /J'.< -.'..349 Exhibit W .- .350 TSNdatedDecember7,2011, pp. 11-15. r»351 Exhibits 50 and 50-a . -: .352 Exhibit FFF6; TSNdatedFebruary:?3,2015,pp. 10-11.353 Exhibits F, F-7, F-21, F-23 and F-30. • CO354 Exhibits G, G-7, G-22and G-28.'355 TSNdatedFebruary26,2013, pp. 42-43;SwornAffidavitdated.January21, 2013 of Basanez,SeT!l-SPeand ...

Lanuza,Exhibit HHHH.356 Certificateof Deathof EdnaBadang;Exhibit AAA.357 Exhibits F, 1'-7,F-21, F-23 and F-30.358 Exhibits G, G-7,G-22and G-28.359 Enriquez'.Iudicial Affidavit dated September23, 2014, p 2; Lanuza'sJudicial Affidavit datedSeptj:mber

23,2014; TSNdatedSeptember29,2014, pp. Ip-11, 15,30-31,35,39. .

DectstonPeoplevs. Luna, et al.SB-IO-CRM-OIIl, etc.x------------------------------------------------~x

69

Accused Luna testified that the names listed in hiscertificationareactual namesof real persorrs.w?

PISCl1SSION

To avoid repetition, the order of discussion will be asfollows:

a) Falsification of PubZi(: llocume1J.t(SB-12-CRM-0065);b) Malversation 0/Public Funds (SB-12-CRM-OOp4); andc) Violation of Se~tion3(~),R.A. NQ. 301,9 (SB-IO-CRM-

0111).

Falsification of Public Document:

The Information in SB-12-CRM-0065charges accusedLuna, Lindo and Carlos of falsifying the job orders and timebook and payrolls, by. making it appear that 101 job orderworkersrenderedserviceas informantsand communityaideofthe Municipality of Lingig from .Januaryto April 2004 CUlP,receivedsalariesin the total amountofPl,610,800.00, fromthe :cash advancedrawn under DV No. 100-2004-04-1271,whenthere were no such job order workers who worked and whoreceivedsalariesduring saidperiod.

Article 171, Paragraph2 oftheRemsedPe""' Codereads:

Article 171. Falsification. by public officer,employee or notary or ecclesiastical'minister. Thepenalty of prisiori mayor and a fine not to exceed5,000 pesos shall be imposed up<;>nany publicofficer, employee,or notary who, taking advantageof his official position, shall falsify a document bycommitting any of the followingacts:

xxx xxx xxx

2. Causing it to appear that persons haveparticipated in any act or proceeding when they did notin fact so participate;

JOQC xxx xxx

Theelementsthereofare: (7icial Affidavit dated July 4. 2016,pp. 6-7. 1'8Ndated July 12.201:/)26-29. 31.33-34.

DecisionPeoplevs. Luna, et al.SB-lO-CRM-Olll, etc.x-------------------------------------------------){ .

70

1. The offenderis a public officer, employee,ornotarypublic;

2. Hetakesadvantageofhis officialposition;and,

3. Hefalsifiesa documentby causingit to appearthatapersonorpersonshaveparticipatedin anyact or proceedingwhenthey did not in fact soparticipate.w-

The offender is a public officer,employee, or notary publfc.. .

-------------------------------------r--------

The first element is present.

Accused Roberto M. Luna, Jr., Jethro P. Lindo, and VenusM. Carlos admit that they were public officers of LGO Lip-gigandwere occupying the following positions, during the periodrelevant to the instant ease:

Acc~~ed Fq.filtiQQ

1 Luna! Municipal Mayor2 Lindo : ExecutiveAssistantIV3 Carlos . Municipal Accountantws

He takes advantageof pisofficial position.---------------------------------------

In People vs. San(ltY"f1.b."yan,363 the Supreme Court heldthat the offender is consideredto have taken advantage of hisofficial position when:

1. He has the duty to make or prepare orotherwiseto intervenein thepreparationoradocument;or

2. Hehas the officialcustodyof the documentwhichhefalsifies. .

AccusedLuna and Carloshad the duty to, and accusedLin.\(dQ .was tasked by accused Luna to, prepare and intervene in thepreparationof thejob orderssubjectof the case.AccusedLunahad .

361 Tan vs. Matsuura, 688 SCRA 263, 285 (2013).362 Pre-Trial Order dated January 27,2012, p. 3; Record, Vol. IH, p. 54-55.363 765 SeRA 321,338 [2015].

L'7

1J

DecisionPeoplevs. Luna, et al.

S8-1 O-CRM-O] 11, etc.

x-----~-------------------~--------------·--------x

71

theduty to, andhetaskedaccusedLindo,to prepareandintervenein thepreparationof thesubjectTimeBook and Paurolls.

Under Section 77 of the Local GovernmentQpdel theLocalChief Executiveis responsiblefor human resources,anddevelopmentincluding the employmentof job order workers,VlZ:

Section 77. Responsibility for Human Resourcesand Development. - The chief executiveof every localgovernment unit shall be responsible for humanresourcesand developmentin' his unit and shall takeall personnel actions in accordance with theConstitutional provisions on civil service, pertinentlaws,and rules and regulationsthereon, including suchpolicies, guidelines and standards as the Civil ServiceCommission may establish: Provided,That the localchief executive may employ emergency or c~.u.lemployees or laborers pa.id on a da.ily wa.c;' 'e:':•.piecework basistand bired througb job order. forlocal projectsauthorizedby the sanggunianconcerned,without need of approval or attestation by the CivilServiceCommissi6n:Provided,further, that the periodof employment of emergency,or casual laborers asprovided in this; Section shall not exceed six (6)months.w+

AccusedLuna signedthejob orders=> asMunicipal Mayor,and the Time Book and payrolls for January to April 2004,366 inhis capacity as Municipal Mayor, Superintendent/ForemaninCharge,certifying that: .

"the roll is correct; every person whosename appears (hereon)rendered servicefor the time and at the rate stated,under(my) general supervision and I approvedpaymentfor this roll."

He also tasked accusedLindo to perform the functions ofHRMO, which includes the p.r.eparationof the jO~b.ord rs ..andtimebook: and payrolls and signingsaid documents.ss"

. .../13M Emphasi~and-:~derscoringsupplied. ~'.;', ...365 Exhibits G to G-30,'360 Exhibits F 10 F-32_ ,367 Lindo's Judicial Affidavit dated June 3, 2014, p. 2; TSN dated October 22, 2013, p, 9; Luna's .Judicial

Affidavit dated July 4, 2016, p. 3,

DeciaionPeoplevs. Luna, et al.S8-1O-CRM-OI 11, etc.x---------------------------------------"---------x

72

ACCUSED LINDO

Accused Lindo, as Executive Assistant at the Office of theMayor, prepared the job orders and Time Book and Payroll~,368

He claims that he performed the functions of an HR-MO uponthe directive of accused Lindo during the period relevant to thepresent cases. He admits that he prepared the job orders andclaims to have reviewed andcertified the TimeBook and Payrallspertaining to the job order workera.w?

ACCUSED CARLOS

Accused Carlos signed the job orders for .January to April2004.370As Municipal rAccountant, she certified as to the"obligation of allotment!' for the wages of the job order workers,pursuant to her functions under Section 474 of the .f.,g~"JGovernment Code, viz:"

Section474. Qualifications, Pourers and Duties.

xxx xxx xxx

(b) The accountant shall take charge of both theaccounting and internal audit services of thelocal government unit concerned and shall:

xxx xxx xxx

(4) Certify to the availability of budgetaryallotmf:nt to 'which exp'enditures andobligations may be properly charged;.

i '

(5) Review supporting documents beforepreparation of vouchers. to determinecompletenessof requirements.

Accused Carlos did not sign the Time Book and PayrQll~.But she submitted and endorsed the same together with DV No,100-2004-04-1271 to 'the Provincial Auditor of Sq.figaQd~lSur.371

Clearly, accused Luna, Lindo and Carlos tOQ~aq.V'»ltfl.g~of their respective positions when they prepared, p~rtHle~d~.approved and signed the job orders and time book and paYrQlls.

ses TSNdated Augu" 27, 2104, p. 5; Lindo's .JudicialAffidavit datedJ=, 3, 2014, pp. 3-4; Exhibita 'H .<-.30.' _

369 Exhrbirs G to G-30; Exhibits F to F-32; TS~ dated August 27, 2104, p. s, Lindo's .Judicial !\ffid~vi~altte~."_.>, ,.June 3,2014, pp. 3-4,.

370 Exhibits G to G-30 _. .,'371 Exhibit Q .' '

~

DecfsionPeoplevs. Luna, et al.SB-1 O-CRM-0111, etc.x--------------·----------------------------------x

73

He falsities a document bycausing it to appear that aperson or persons haveparticipated in any act orproceeding when they did not,in fact, so participate.

To determine if the accused falsified the job orders andTimebook: and Payrolls, it is first necessaryto determineif job orderworkerswereindeedhired, and if hired, indeedworkedand receivedcompensation.

First. The testimony of Luzviminda Basanez supports aconclusionthat not all personslisted in the January to April 2004TimeBook and Payrolls actually receivedpayment,and that not allof them wereactually hired by andworkedfor LGDLingig.

Luzviminda Basanez,372 whose name together with. asignature, appeared in the job order and TimeBook and Payrollfor February 2004 denied that she was hired by, or that aheworked for, and received any compensation from, LGU Lingigfrorn January to April 2004.373 She disowns the signaturebeside her name in thejob order and the time book and payrollfor the period of February 2004. The defense did not presentany evidence to show that a different Luzviminda Basanezwasactually hired and paid by the municipality.

Second. Death Certificate No. 1805-(F-79) of one EdnaBadang, who passed away on June 23, 1979, proves thatcontrary to what was certified by accused Luna and Lindo inthe job orders and Time Book and Payrolls, .Edna Badang wasnot hired, nor did she work for and receive compensation fromLOU Lingig from January to April 2004.374 .

The accused did not present evidence to refute theauthenticity of the death certificate of Edna Badang, nor thetruthfulness of the facts stated therein. There is also noevidenceto show that the Edna Badang listed in the job ordersand timebook and paytll is not the Edna Badang referred to inthe death certificate. /7

/X1' 4 .372 Time Book and Payrolls marked as Exhibits F, F-7,F-21 -2 d F-30;Job Orders marked as Exhibits

0, 0-7, 0·22 and 0·28.an TSNdated February 26,2013, pp. 42-43;SwornAffidavit dated January 21,2013of Baaanez,Seraspeand

Linaza, Exhibit HHIIH. .3H Certificate of Death of Edna Badang, Exhibit AAA. Exhibits F. F-7.F-21,F-23and F-39;Exhibits Q, G-7,

0·22 and 0·28.

DecisionPeoplevs. Luna, et al.SB-1O-CRM-Ol11, etc.x-------------------------------------------------x

74

Third. This Court concludes that those who receivedpayment did not perform work for LGU Lingig. The followingcircumstancesled the Court to its conclusion:

1. The supposedhonoraria were releasedon April 14,2004 even before the allegedjob order workers forApril weresupposedto completetheir tasks on April30, and months after the allegedjob order workersfrom January and February 2004 had performedtheir functions.V>

2. There was no proof that the job order workersactually performedwork for LGULingig. Therewereno daily time records, and no documents tocorroboratethe claim of accusedLuna that the joborder workers~reporteddirectly to him, Therewereno written reports that the peace and ordersituation improved because of the work of theconfidential job order workers. Even accusedLuna's claim that there was improvement in thepeaceand ordersituation in Lingigis negatedby thetestimonies of the prosecution and deferisewitnesses that there continues to be peace andorderproblemin Lingig in 2005and evenuntil 2010when accusedLuna wasabductedby the NPA.376

Fourth. The Cqurt concludesthat there were no joborder workers actually hired to perform work for LGULingi&.The Court arrived at its conclusion after considering thefollowingcircumstances:

1. AccusedLuna initially claimed,when he called Mr.Bucong and later through his certification, that thenames of the workers are "dummies" allegedly toprotect their identities. Later he testified that thoselisted are real names of the job order workers andthat he only said they were dummies to protectthern.F?

The Court finds it incredulous that accusedLunaneededto hidethe identitiesof thejob orderworkersfrom the COAaudit teamfor the job order workers'safetyand security.

Accused Luna gaveno reason why the COAAuditTeam's knowledgeof the real identities of the job f?

375 DV No. 100-2004-04-1271 dated April H, 2004, Exhibit D; Time Book and Payrolls mark!to F3, 1"-11, F-22 to F-30-e; F-21-d to F-21-"e.

3"1. '~SNdated .July 25,2012, pp. 12, 16-17; TSN dated September 2?, 2012, p..8; TSN dated August 26l ;tD.. .2014,p.36. _

377 TSNdated August 26,2014, pp. 35-38.

DecisionPeoplevs. Luna, et al.SB-IO-CRM-Olll, etc.x-------------------------------------------------x

75

order workers will place the job order workers' livesand security in danger. The Court finds no reasonto concludethat the life and security of the supposedjob order workers will be placed in jeopardy if theiridentities are made known to the COA audit team.AccusedLuna tried to distancehimself from the useof the word "dummies'! in the Certification datedJune 16, 2005378by pointing to accusedLindo, whohe said had unfortunately erroneouslyused the word"dummies". H~ explained that he meant to use theword "confidential employees."379It appears thatLuna told the ~OA Audit team that the names aredummies to prevent the COAaudit team, who wereabout to leave for Lingig, from investigating andinterviewing the listed job order workers.· .

2. Thejob orders;(from January to April 2004) dip notbear the signaturesof severalof the allegedjob orderworkers.380The number of signatoriesare as follows:

r-r-r-Pc~iod of wo~k No. of NaQJcBJob Order l(~. of !Ii.pat .•.••.~••

(Exhibit)

G Aprilil-30, 2004 20 9G-2 ApriD-30, 2004 20 0r----

JanujilY 1-31~2004 9 0G-6: and

March 1-31,2004

G-7 .Iamiary 1-31,2004 15 0and

March 1-31 2004

G-12 .January 1-31,2004 15 14and

March 1-31 2004

G-18 February }-29, 2004 15 13G-19 February 1-29,2004 9 0G-20 February 1-29,2004 6 50-21 February 1-29,2004 14 140-22 Febntaryl-29,2004 15 13G-23 .January 1-31,2004 9 0

andMarch 1-31,2004

G-28 .January 1-31,2004 15 13and

March 1-31 2004

3. AccusedLindo testified that job order workers wererequired to submit their biodata with pnoto.381 ButLGU Lingig did not submit said documents to theCOAAudit team to justify the disbursement of thejob orders' salaries. Notably, the audit wasconducted just one year from the date of thedisbursementof fund~. Neitherweresaiddocumentsoffered in evidenceto/establish the identities of thejob order workers.

.r : .379 TSN dated .July 12,2016, pp. 26-29, 31, 33-34; Luna's Judicial Affidavi~ ;atU July 4,2016, pp. 6-7.380 Exhibit 0 and 0-2, G-6 to G-7, 0-19 and 0-21.381 TSNdated August 26,2014, p. 19.

DecisionPeoplevs. Luna, et al.SB-lO-CRM-O 111, etc.x-------------------------------------------------x

76

4. Accused Lindo claims that only residents of theMunicipality of Lingig 'can be hired as Job Orderworkers,382but the Time Book and Payrolls do notindicate the addressesof the job order workers.383The biodata were not attached to the job orders evenwhen accusedLindo claimed that it is a requirementfor hiring of the workers.384

5. The job orders were prepared and signed after LBPCheck No. 0000231481 was issued and encashed;and after the proceedsthereof were distributed. Thejob orders for .January to April 2004 were preparedand signed by.accused Lindo as HRMO designate,when his designation was only effective on May 20,2004. Otagantestified that he was asked to sign thejob order contracts in June 2004, two (2) monthsafter the check was encashed.P"

6. Even the testimonies of defense witnesses LeodyEnriquez and Marlo Lanuza that they applied forand worked as job order workers are not worthy ofbelief. They testified that they receivedtheir salariesand signed the, Time Book and Pauroll upon receiptof their salaries, at the end of the nlOnth.386aut LBPCheck No. 231'481 was encashed only on April 14,2004, a month and a' half, after they claim to haverendered their: services on, February 2004 to LGULingig. There ",as no mention that there was delayin the releaseof their salaries. There were no dailytime record tq show that the job order workersreported for work.

Frorn the foregoing, the Court concludes that: a)LuzvimindaBasanezand Edna Badang,werenot hired, did potwork for and did not receiveany compensationfrom LOU Lingigfrom January to April 2004.; b) the other persons li&te4including Enriquez and Lanuza and who signed in' theTirneBookand Payroll,and in thejob orders,may havereceivedthe money, but were not hired as job order workers, did potwork asjob order workers and receivedthe monieslisted in theTimeBool~and Payroll without rendering any servicefor LOULingig.

(lpp, 19,20, ~

383 Exhibits F to F-32 -384 TSNdatedAugust 26,2014, p. 19.385 Exhibit E; Exhibit NNN;TSN dated July 27.2011,pp. 24-25,30-31;TSN dated January 27,201~,p, ~l.- Enriquez' Judicial Affidavit dated September23',2014,pp. 2-3;TSN dated September29,2014,pp. 12-

13.23-24.31-32.34;Exhibit F-20..

DectsionPeoplevs. Luna, et al.S8-1 O-CRM-0111, etc.x-------------------------------------------------x

77

The job orders and the time book and payrolls containedseveralfalsestatements,including:a)thenamesandsignaturesof Ednr:Badangand LuzvimindaBasanezaspersonswhowerehired,whoworkedandwhoreceivedpayment,in thejob orders,and timebook and payrolls;

As discussed, accused Lindo prepared the job orders.AccusedLuna signedthe job orders and approvedthe same.

AccusedLindo alsosignedthe time bookandpayrolls andcertified that "each person whosename appears on this rollrenderedserviceas indicated and for the time stated." WhileaccusedLuna signedthe timebook and payrolls andcertifiedthat11 ••• this roll is correct;everypersonwhosenameappearshereonrenderedservicefor the time'and at the rate stated7 under mygeneralsupervisionand I approvedpaymentfor this roll."

Clearly,Luna and Lindo madefalsestatementsin the joborders and the Timebook and Payrolls, by making it appearthatjob orderworkerswerehired and renderedservices,whensuchwerenot the truth. All the elementsfor Falsificationof PublicDocuments are, therefore, present as to accused Luna andLindo. The evidenceestablishedtheir .guilt beyondreasonabledoubt.

On the otherhand, accusedCarlossignedthejob ordersto"certify" asto the appropriation/obligation"on the availabilityofobligation.The said statement,as will be discussedlater, is afalsity. However,the Information in SB-12-CRM-0065did notcharge the accusedof committing such falsification. Hence,accusedCarlos cannot be convictedfor said false statement.AccusedCarlos did not perform any overt acts towards theobjective of showing that 101job order workers worked andreceivedcompensationfor the period from January to April2004. Hence,shecannotbeheld liable for falsification,by herpersonalindividual action,nor in conspiracywith accusedLunaand Lindo,as chargedin the Information.

Malversation of Public Fund~.3

The Information in SB-12-CRM~0064 charges accusedLuna, Lindoand Carlos,assignatoriesof the: a) Disbursement .Voucher; b) job orders; and, e) timebook and payrolls, ~i /misappropriating or permitting others to take the' amount A

Aif?

DecistonPeoplevs. Luna, et aJ.88-1 O-CRM-O 111, etc.x-------------------------------------------------x

78

PI,610,800.00, part of the proceeds of the cash advancereceivedby Nilda Ferrandounder DV No. 100-2004-04-1271.3~7

Malversation of Public Funds under Article 217 of theRevised Penal Code is committed as follows:

Article ~17. Malversation ofpublic funds orproperty; Presumption. of· malversation. - Anypublic officer Who,by reason~f the duties of hisoffice,is accountablefor public funds or property,shall appropriate the same or shall take ormisappropriate or shall consent, throughabandonment or negligence, shall permit anyother person 'to take such public funds, orproperty,wholly or partially, or shall otherwisebeguilty of the misappropriationor malversationofsuch funds or property, shall suffer:

xxx xxx xxx

The failure of a public officer to have dulyforthcoming any public funds or property withwhich he is chargeable,upOhdemandby any dulyauthorized officer, shall be prima facie evidencethat he has put such missing funds or property .to personaluse.

The elementsof Malversation of Public Funds under Article217 of the RevisedPenalCodeare:

1. The offenderis a public officer;

2. He had custody or control of funds orproperty by reason of the duties of hisoffice; .

3, Thosefunds or property werepublic fundsor property for which hewasaccountable;and,

4. He appropriated, took, misappropriatedorconserited .or, through abandonment ornegligence,'permitted another person totake them..

The Offender is a

(7~387 Information dated March 1,2012, pp. 1-2; Record,S8-12-CRM-0064,pp. 1-2.

DecisionPeoplevs. Luna, et al.SB-1O-CRM-Oll1, etc.x--------------------------------------~----------x

79

As above discussed, accused Luna, Lindo and Carlosadmitted that they were public officials at the time material tothis case.

Accused had custody orcontrol of funds orproperty by reasonof theduties of his office.

Thefunds or property werepuhlic funds or propertyfor which the accused.wasaccountable.

ACCUSED LUNA

It is settled that municipal mayors have custody, controland responsibility overthe funds of the municipality. In PeqpJf1vs.Pq.ntaZeon,388 the SupremeCourt held: .

As a required standard procedure, thesignatures of the mayor and the treasurer areneededbeforeany disbursementof public fundscan be made. Nocheckscan be preparedand nopaymentcan be effectedwithout their signatureson a disbursement voucher and thecorresponding' check. In other words, anydisbursement<;lndreleaseof public funds requiretheir approval.:Theappellants,therefore,in theircapacities as mayor and treasurer, had controland responsipility over the funds of theMunicipality of CastiHejos.389

Here, accused Luna, as Municipal Mayor, gave accusedLindo the authority, and, the latter signed DV No. 100-2004-,04-1271,390certifying that the cash advance was necessary,lawful, and incurred under his direct jsuperviaion , . AccusedLuna also signed to approve the release of the amount ofPhP2,327,291.32, which included the! Pl,610,80P~OQfor thehonorarium and per dierns of job' order workers from .Januaryto April 2004. Without his authority, approval and §ignatur~inthe disbursement voucher, PhPl,610,800.QOof tpe requestedPhP2,327,291.32would not havebeenreleased.

3811 581 seas 140[20091.389 At p. 161. Underscoring supplied390 Exhibit D

~

Dechsiol.lPeoplevs. Luna, et al.S8-10-CRM-Olll, etc.x------------ ------------------------------- -------x

80

The amount of PhPl,610,800.00 was sourced from thefunds of the Municipality of Lingig, Hence,the sameare in thenature of public funds, for which accused Luna wasaccountable.

Clearly, accused Luna, by reason of his position as' theMunicipal Mayor of Lingig, had control over and wasaccountable for the public funds subject of this case.

AccusedCarlosand Lin$lo~

AccusedCarlos,asMunicipalAccountant,and accusedLindo,as ExecutiveAssistant of the Mayor are not accountablefor publicfunds. However,they II}ay still be held liable far Malversation. ofPublic Funds if they eve proven to have conspired with anaccountablepublic officer.

In Barriga vs. Sanc:ffg"nbClycJ(1,391 the Supreme Courtstressed that "a public: officer who is not in charge of publicfunds or property by virtue of her official poaition, or even.a.private individual, may be liable for malversation or illegal useof public funds or property if such public officer or privateindividual conspires with an accountable public officer tocommit malversation or illegaluse of public funds or property.'!

Accused appropriated,took, misappropriated .orconsented or, throughabandonment ornegligence, permittedanother person to takethem.

Accused Luna, Lindo andCartes acted inCOilSpiracy.

AccusedLuna, Lindo and Carlos,through their overt actions,conspiredto allow other personswho werenot entitled thereto, totakeandmisappropriatepublic[unA ~ .

'"' 457 seas30 I. 314 120051_

~

DecfsionPeople vs. Luna, et al.S8-1 O-CRM-O 111, etc.x----------------------------------------~--------x

81

Accused Luna

As previously discussed, the evidence supports aconclusionthat therewerenojob orderworkerswhowerehired,who worked and who received compensation for workperformed. Yet, accusedLuna acquiescedto accusedLindo'spreparation of the job orders and payrolls.392 AccusedLunasignedthe job orders long after the money were releasedbyaccusedFerrando.He signedthe time book and payrolls evenwhen no such workers were hired by and worked for LGULingig.

He also allowed the release of PhP1,610,800.00 aspayment for the honoraria and per diems of non-existingjoborder workers under PV 100-2004':'04-1271even when thesupportingdocumentswerenot complete.Without his directiveand approval,P1,610,~OO.OOin public monieswould not havebeendisbursed to personswho werenot entitled thereto. His •belatedapprovaland signingof the Time Book: and Payrolls toserveas supporting documentsto the diaburaementvouchershow that he knew that the supporting documents wereincompleteat the time of the disbursement.s'"

TheCourt finds that accusedCarlosand Lindoperformed.overtacts,and actedin conspiracywith accusedLuna, tnwardsthe unlawful disbursementof P1,610,800.00.

ACCUSED LINDO

Accused Lindo prepared and signed the timebookandpayrolls, job orders and DV No.. 100-2004..,04-127upon thedirectiveand on behalfof accusedLuna. 394

The amount of PhP1,610,800.00for payment of thehonorariumand per diernsof the fictitious workerswould nothave been releasedwithout the participation of Lindo, liebelatedlypreparedthe TimeBook arid Payrolls, as supportingdocuments for Disbursement Voucher No. 100,..2004-04-1271.395AccusedLindo, in obedienceto the order of accusedLuna, approved the job orders, the payroll and thedisbursement voucher. Accused Lindo performed the

392 Exhibits reto F-32; ExhibitsG to G-30.393 Exhibits F-F-32.39'1 TSN dated August 26,2014, p. 15 and 28.395 TSN dated August 26,2014, pp. 21, 33; TSN dated August 27,2014, p. 5. .?7A

DecistonPeople vs. Luna, et al.SB-lO-CRM-O Ill, etc.x---------------··---------------------------------x

82

foregoing acts knowing fully well that there were no jobworkerswho werehired and who worked,and that thosewhoreceivedpayment did pot work for LGU Lingig. AccusedLindo clairns that he interviewedeachof thejob orderworkersbefore they were hired. But his bare claims were notsupportedby any credibleevidence.

ACCUSED CARLOS

AccusedCarlos,as Municipal Accountant, signedBoxB ofDV No. 100-2004-04-1271 and certified to the "completenessand propriety of supporting documents/previous cashadvance."396

Under Section474(b)(4)and (5)of the LQcal QQv~rnm~,..tCode, the powersand duties of the accountant, includes:

(1) Certify to the availability of budgetary allotment towhich expendituresand obligations may be properlycharged;

(2) Review aupportjng documents before preparation ofvouchers to determinecompleteness of requirements;

Theevidenceshowsthat whenaccusedCarlossignedDVNo. 100-2004-04-1271, the available budgetary allotmentwas not sufficient and,the supporting documents were notcomplete.

First. The evidenceshows that severalof the ALOBStransferring the funds 'from the budget of various offices tothe Office of the Mayor for the honorarium of job orderworkers were prepared and approvedonly in June 2004.3~7State Auditor Mendozatestified that the number 06 in theALOBSrefers to the month of June.398The NewGovernmentAccounting SystemManual statesthat the numbering for theALOBSis as follows:

xxoooo-cooo

IIL#l•.•.,••.• se.ri..a. 1 Number(oneseriesfor

. eachyear)....,.".;".,;:.;;;_Month

; :~~~II\!!. I. Year

",<"",''''''" ,,-_.•M••"""Z •• Allotment Class

~~. ..... [for l'{apon!i1. Sy ,ment Accoun. ,

390 Exhibit D; l'SN dated January 27,2015, p. 21.397 Exhibits H to H-19, H-21, H-2S to "'-32.39" TSN dated May 23, 2012, p. 26; Manual on the New Gove

Government Agencies), Vol. I, Chapter 3, Section 12.

DectstonPeoplevs. Luna, et al.S8-10-CRM-Olll, etc.x-------------------------------------------------x

a3

Second. Notall thejob orders borethe signaturesof thesupposedjob orderworkers.w?Theacknowledgmentportionof thejob ordersfor January, FebruaryandApdl2004 remainunsigned.w" Further, severalof the job orders and the timebook and payrolls werenot signedby then HJ<MO designateOtagan, but by accused Lindo. In fact, the" timebook: a-ndpayrolls and job orders werenot yet signedby the HRMO~tthe time the funds weredisbursed.

Even with the said deficiencies,accusedCarlos signedDV No lOO-2004-04-1~71.The funds would not have beepreleasedto accusedFerrandoandto the recipients, if accused.Luna,Lindo and Carlosdid not signthe disbursement voucherand the time book and payrolls.

That accused Luna returned the total amount ofPl,610,800.00 on September7,2010 and September21, ~OlO,after the Information for violation of Section3(e),R.A. No.3019was filed and more than 4 years and 9 months after theissuanceof Noticeof DiaallowancedatedNovember16,2005,401is not a valid defenseand will not exemptthe accusedfrom, norwill it extinguish their qriminal Iiability. Neithercan the belatedreturn of the funds be appreciated as a mitigatingcircumstance.

In Cimafranca, Jr. V$. S"ndiganbayan,402 the SupremeCourt held:

This Court has made the consistentpronouncement that the return of the funds rnalversedis not a defense and will not be an exemptingcircumstance nor a ground for extinguishing thecriminal liabilityof the accused. At best, it can be lamitigating circumstance.

The sameprinciple should apply when the subjectmatter of the malversation is public property. However,when as in this case, it tOQkthe petitioner severalyearsbefore he returned the government property, suchcircumstance cannot be considered a &pecialmitigating'circumstance aniilogous to voluntary surrender, as thetrial court did credit to the petitioner. 'Saidgovernmentproperty appear to be under the control and possessionof petitioner all the time. There was 0.0 reason why hecould not return the samepromptly if not soonest to thegovernment. The much delayed return of the property

.'/7r".r-399 Exhibits G to G-2, G·6 to G·7, G-19, G-27.400 Exhibit G, G·2, G·6, G-7, G-19 and G-21401 Exhibit w402 194 SeRA 107119911"

ID

DecfstonPeoplevs. Luna, et al.S8-1O-CRM-OIll, etc.x---------------------------------------~---------x

must be a desperateact and afterthought of petitionerwhen he realized that all possible hope of exonerationwas lost during the trial. 403

&4

Hence,the accusedare not entitled to an acquittal, nor toa mitigating circumstanceakin to voluntary surrender.

Violation of Section 3(eh li~p"blic.f\ct l'TQ~3019

The Information .in SB-1O-CRM..,O111 charges accusedLuna, Lindo, Carlos, Indoyon, Saligumba and Ferrando ofcausing undue injury to the Municipality of Lingig bydisbursing public funds in the amount of Pl,610,I)QP,OO, byway of Cash Advancethrough DisbursementVoucher No, lOQ~2004-04-1271, as payment for the honoraria and per diettie ofonehundred one (101)Joborder workers from .Ianuary to April2004 despitethe followingdeficienciesand irregularities:

1) There was no appropriation :ordinance or lawauthorizing the releaseof said funds;

2) The funds utilized for the payment of the honorariaand per diems of the 101job order employees weretaken out of the following:

a. 20% DeveJopP1erttFund allocatedfor:

i. Peaceand Order and Public Safety-P 344,OOO.QOii. National Security MissionProjects

and Initiatives -. 64fJ,OOO.OO.OQ

b. The appropriated funds intended for:

i. Administrative Support Servicesinthe Officeof the Municipal Mayor

ii. Other Servicesin the Officeof theMunicipal .'Mayor

iii. Other Servicesin the Officeof the Municipal Treasurer

80,000.00

90,OOO.OP

lOO,PPO.PP

adversely affecting the execution of other budgetaryservices and/or programmed activities of LGU Lingig,as the transaction· is void for want of necessaryauthority from the Sangguniang Bayan of Lingig orappropriation ordinance.w-

31 The cash advance was not obligated at the time of itsapproval;

4) The check covering the amount of the cash advance ofPl,61O,800.00 .was released on April 12, 2Q04, twodays ahead of the approval of the caah advance;

---_._------

5) The workers hired through Job Order Contracts were"designated" as Community Aide, Informant and

403 Al p. 113. Underscoringsupplied.

404 Information dated January 30, 2009, pp. 2-3; Record, VQl. H, pp. 2-3.

)1.r''.? .

•".,-. ",. .•".? ,,",

. .

DecisionPeoplevs.Luna,et al.SB-lO-CRM-O Ill, etc.x-------------------------------------------------x

85

Confidential EmployeeAssistant with the names ofthe workers asappearingin the Job OrderContractsand Time BookPayrollsbeing"assumednames";

6) Therewereno DailyTimeRecordssubmitted to showthat the job order employeesrendered servicesforthe period January to April 2004;

7) TheTime Book and Payroll showsthat the job orderemployees were paid different rates of monthlycompensationinstead of daily or hourly wages;

8) The job order employees were paid despite theincomplete entries in the Time Book and Payrollspertaining to the number, date,placeof issue of theresidence certificates .and the absence of thesignatures of witnesses;

9) The job order contracts were not submitted to theCivil ServiceCommisaionfor its reviewpursuant toCSCMemorandum Circular No. 17, seriesof 2002,or also known as the Policy Guidelinesfor Contractsof Service and :CSCMemorandum Circular No. 24,series of 2002, or : the Clarification on PolicyGuidelinesfor Contracts of Service.

Section 3(e)of R.A. No..3019 provides:

Section 3. Corrupt practices of public officers. Inaddition to acts oromi~sions of public officers alreadypenalized by existing law, the following shall constitutecorrupt practices of any public officer and are herebydeclaredto be unlawful:

xxx )OD( xxx

(e)Causingany undue injury to any party, includingthe Government,Of giving any private party anyunwarranted benefits, advantageor preferencein the dischargeof his official administrative orjudicial functions through manifest partiality,evident bad faith or gross inexcusablenegligence.This provision shall apply to officersand employees of offices or governmentcorporations chargedwith the grant of Iicensesor permits or other concessions.

The elements of violation of Section 3(e), R.A, No. 3019are:

1. The offenderis a public officer;

/';40

DecisionPeoplevs. Luna, et al.S8-1 O-CRM-O 111, etc.x-------------------------------------------------){

2. The act was done in the dischargeof the publicofficer's official, administrative or judicialfunctions;

3. The act was done through manifest partiality,evident bad faith, or gross inexcusablenegligence;and,

4. Thepublic officercausedanyundue injury to anyparty, including the Government,or gave anyunwarranted benefits', advantage orpreference.F"

86

All the elementsof violation of Section3(e),R.A. No.3019are present.

Theoffenderis a public officer.

As previouslydiscussed,accusedLuna, Lindo and Carlosadmittedthat they werepublic officialsduring the time materialto this case.

Disbursement Voucher No. 100-2004-04-1271and tilesubject check showthat accused Indoyon signedas MunicipalTreasurer.406

On the other hand, accusedNilda T. Ferrando's ServiceRecord shows that she was a Cash Clerk at the MunicipalTreasurer's Office of Lingig, from March 20, 2002 untilSeptember30, 2010.407

The act was done in thedischarge of the publicofficer's official,administrative or judicialfunctions.

The accused were charged for performing the following acts:

[

- Lindo Certifyin.g.. on behalf of L. una...D.V...No...1..00.'.-2004-04-1271 as to the legality and veracityof the cash advance incurred under hisdirect supervision and approving paymenttherefor also on behalf of accused Luna .

405 Zapanta vs. People,757 SeRA 172, 189 [20l5j.406 Record, Vo!. JII, p. 55.407 ServiceRecord,Exhibit 11.

ftO

./J.t .'.

DecisionPeoplevs. Luna, et al.SB-lO-CRM-O111, etc.x------------- --- ----- -------- --------- -----------x .

87

Carlos certified on the cash advance voucher as.tothe cornpleteness and propriety of

~--- supporting documents.Indoyon Certified on cash advance voucher as to

cash availability.Ferrando Receiving the amount of P1,61O,800.00 as

payment of the honorarium and per diem of101 workers hired through job ordercontracts from January to Apri12004.

ACCUSED LUNA, LINDO AND CARLOS.

As previously discussedaccusedLuna, Lindo and 'Carlossigned the disbursement voucher and the job orders in the.performance of their official functions as Mayor, ExecutiveAssistant and Municipal Accountant respectively. ACCU&edLuna and Lindo also signed the timebook: and payroll as mayorand executiveassistant, respectively. AccusedLuna directedaccusedLindo to act a~HRMO.

ACCUSEDINDOYON

Accused Indoyon is the Municipal Treaeurer. Thefunctions of a Municipal Treasurerinclude:

ARTICLE 11THE TREASURER

Section470. Appointment, Qualifications, Pourersand Duties. - xtx

xxx xxx xxx

(d) The treasurer shall take chargeof thetreasury office?perform the duties provided forunder Book11of this Code,and shall:

(1) Advise the governor or mayor, as thecase may be, the sanggUnian, and other. localgovernment and national officials concernedregarding disposition of local government funds,and on such other matters relative to publicfinance;

(2) Take custody and exercise propermanagement of the funds of thelocfll governmentunit concerned.

~

(Ai

Deci6io~Peoplevs. Luna, et al.S8-IO-CRM-Olll, etc.x-------------------------------------------------x

xxx xxx xxx

(e) Exercisesuch other powersand performsuch other duties and functions as may beprescribed by law or ordinance.

88

AccusedIndoyon certified as to the availability of cash inDV No. 100-2004-04-1271. He also signed LBP Check No.0000231481.408

ACCUSED FERRANDO

AccusedFerrando,a cashclerk at LGULingig from March20, 2002 to September:30,2010,409performedthe functiona ofa disbursing officer. She receivedand encashed the subjectcheckas a disbursing officer.4IO

Under the New Go.vemmentAccol(ntlng S!l~t_mM(UJ14"'for LGUs, the duties of ~ disbursing officer include: ., .

1. Preparationof the Reportof Diabur-semerrtsand submit the original and duplicate copywith vouchers/payrolls/petty cashvouchers to the,Accountant;

11. Encashment' of check and payment toc1aimant~; .' ' ,

lll. Record disbursement in Cashbook - CashAdvances;

iv. Return of unused cash to the TreasurerICashier;~nd,

v. Preparation of Report of Disbursement,attach paid payrolls/ supportingdocumentsand copyof ORfor unused cashadvance, returned to Treasurer/ Cashier;signing "CertifiedCorrect"portion of Reportof Disbursement 'andsubmit to AccountingUnit.

40,; Exhibit E

«lII Ferrando's Service Record, Exhibit IT,410 Ferrando's Judicial Affidavit August 29,2015, p. 3.m Exhibit E412 Ferrando's Judicial Affidavit dated August 29,2015, p. 9.

,/?".,>,'

" »:

~

DecisionPeoplevs. Luna, et al.SB-IO-CRM-Olll, etc.x--------------- --------------------------------x

89

She signed the 32 Time Book and Payrolls certifying thatshe "paid cash to each man whose name appears on the aboveroll, the amount set opposite his name, he having presentedhimself, established his identity, and affixed his signature orthumbmark on the spaceprovided therefore. XXX"413

Clearly, accusedLuna, Lindo, Indoyon, Carlos and Ferrandoacted in the perforrnanceof their respectiveadministrative andofficial functions.

The accused acted withmanifest partiality,evident bad faith, or grpssinexcusablenegligence.

In Albert vs. Sq,ndiga.nbayan,414 the Supreme Courtexplained the three modes, i.e., manifest partiality, evident badfaith and gross inexcusable negligence,through which violationof Section 3(e), R.A. No. 3019 may be committed:

The secondelementprovides the differentmodes by which the crime may be committed,that is, through "manifestpartiality," "evidentbadfaith," or "gross inexcusable negligence." InUriarte v. People, this Court explained thatSection3(e)of RA3019 may be committedeitherby dolo, as when the accusedactedwith evidentbad faith or manifest partiality, or by culpa, aswhen the accusedcommitted gross inexcusablenegligence.Thereis "manifestpartiality" whenthere is a clear, notorious, or plain inclination orpredilection to favor one side or person ratherthan another. "Evident bad faith" connotesnotonly bad judgmentbut alsopalpablyand patentlyfraudulent and dishonest purpose to do moralobliquity or conscious wrongdoing for someperversemotive or ill will. "Evident bad faith"contemplates .a state of mind affirmativelyoperatingwith furtive designor with somemotiveor self-interestor ill will or for ulterior purposes."Gross inexcusable' negligence" refers tonegligencecharacterizedby the want of eventheslightest care,' acting or omitting to act in asituation where there is a duty to act, notinadvertently but willfully and intentionally, with.

~413 Exhibits 7-A to 38-A414 580 SCRA 279 [2009J

~

DecisionPeoplevs. Luna, et aJ.SB-1O-CRM-O Ill, etc.x--------------- ---------------------------------x

90

consciousindifferenceto consequencesinsofar asother personsmay be affected.f!"

Proof of any of the three modes is sufficient to sustainaconviction.v'v

a. Improper and Illegalcharging of publtc funda toappropriations notintended for the purpose.

The Information chargedaccusedfor certifying and approvingDV No. 100-2004-04-127.1despite the following irregularities:

1)There was QO appropriation.ordinance or lawauthorizing' the release.of said funds;

2) The funds utilized for the payment of thehonoraria and per diems of the 101job orderemployeesweretaken out of the following:

a. 20% DevelopmentFund allocatedfor PeaceandOrder and Public Safety- P344,OOO.QO andNational Security Mission Projects andInitiatives - P64~,OOO.OO.OO;and

b. The appropriated funds intended for:

i. Administrative Support Services in theOffice of. the· Municipal Mayor(P~O,POO.OO);

ii. Other. Services in the Office of theMunicipal Mayor (l»90,OOO.OO);

iii. Other Servicesin the Officeof the MunicipalTreasurer(PlQa,OOO.OO);

adversely affecting the execution of otherbudgetary services and/ or programmedactivities of the LGUof Lingigas the transactionis void for want of necessaryauthority from theSangguniangBayan of Lingig or appropriationordinance.f l? .

3)Thecashadvancewasnot obligatedat the timeof its approval;

Sectio¥ 336 of the WCfll· Government C04fl expresslyprovides:

••• atp. 29r ~,oo"ng supplied, t7~"6 Sison vs. Peopl ,614 SCRA670,679 (2010) .417 InformationdatedJanuary 30, 2009,pp. 2-3; cor 01. 11, pp. 2-3.

Decjsjo~Peoplevs.Luna,etal.SB-lO-CRM-O 111, etc.x-------------------------------------------------x

9l

Section336. Use of Appropriated Funds and Sauinqs, -Funds shall be availableexclusivelyfor the specificpurpose.forwhich they have been appropriated. No ordinance shall bepassedauthorizing any transfer of appropriationsfrom one itemto another. However,the local chief executiveor the presidingofficer of the sanggunian concerned may, by ordinance, beauthorized to augment any item in.the approvedannual budgetfor their respectiveofficesfrom savingsin other items within thesameexpenseclassof their respectiveappropriations.

The.evidenceshows that thePl,610,800.00 was chargedfrom the following:

---.--~~~-----._~~-~~--~~--~~~_.--------~~--------r_------~----------~ALOBS Job Payroll Period Fqnd iAI10tmept AlptlMPt

Order (Exhibit) (2004) Cl.,.(Exhibit) .

100-2004-02~0822 G-17 F-17 February Other Expense(1011) MOOE 281560.00

100-2004-04-0512 ~_;~ F-20 February 1091 MOOE 100,000.00

100-2004-04-0S60.. F-24 .January Administratiye Support 30,000.00(perdiem) (1011)

---- ----------~~~~~~~~--~--------~~------~r_----~r_--~~~~~100-2004-04~OS61 F-23 .January 1011 30,000.00

(perdiems] .

100-2004-04-0S62 F-22! J&IlU<lI}' 1011 30;000.pP(perdiems)

100-2004-06-0807 G-12 F-12 .January1:0 20°;';National Security MOOE 60,000.00March Mission .

100-2004-06-0808 G-lO F-lO jJanu!uy to 20%National Security MOOE 24,OQO.()0i March . Mission . .

100-2004-06-0809 G-5 F-S i J&IlU<lI}'to 20%National Security MOOE 3~,()OQ.00March Miaston .

100-2004-06-0810--------n-9 F-9 .Januaryto 20%National Security MOOE 60,000.00. .March Mission

- 100·2004-06-0811 G-4 F-4 January to 20%National Security MOOE 24,OOP.00ME!Ich Mission

100-2004-06-0812 - G-6 F-6 .Januaryto 20%National Security MOOE 36,000.00, March Mission

100-2004-06-0813 G-7 F-7· J&IlUI;lIYto 20%National Security MOOE 60,OOQ.QOMarch Mission

100-2004-06-0814 G-8 F-8: January to 20%NationalSecurity MOQE 24,000.00March .Mifision·

100-2004-06-0815 G-19 F-19 February OtherEXPense(lOll) MOOE 't~,a4Q.OO

100-2004-06-0816 G-18 F-18: Februm Other Expense(lOP) MQaE. 7f,400;QO

100-2004-06-0~17 G-16 F-16 February OtherExp~nse(lOm MQa~~&,5I5P:QQ

100-2004-06-0818 G-1S F-15 February OtherExp~nse(1011) MOOE n,400:00

- 100-2004-06-0819 G-13 F-13 February OtherExpimse(1011) MOOE 2~,5150.00

100-2004-06-0820 G-14 F-14 FebT4ar'V OtherExpense(lOll) MOOE 38080.00100-2004-06-0821 G-21 F-21 February Administrative, SllPPPJ:1:¥.OOE 7l.400.00

(1011); Other Expense .(lQ111

100-2004-06-0823 G-25 F-25 .Januaryto 20010 National Security MODE 36,000.00March Mission

100-2004-06-0824 G-26 F-28. .Januaryto 20% National Security MQQJJ; 3~,POp.00March Mission

100-2004-06-0825 G-27 F-29 J&IlUm to Other Expense(1011) f-,100JJ; ~4,OOO:00March ..

100-2004-06-0826 G-30 F-32 .Januaryto Administrative Support MOOE; 24,000,00March. (1011);· Other EJcpenlle .

(1011) .

100-2004-06-0827 G-26 F-26 .Januaryto 20%Peaceand Order MO~E; @4,000.OpMarch

100-2004-06-0828 G-27 F-27 January to 20%Peace!IDdOrder MOOE. pq;OOO.OOMarch

100-2004-06-0829 G-29 F-31 January to 20%Peaceand Order MOOE. '60.00Q~OO~~ • . ~J

--_. . . ~

\,0

.J14..,

I'D /J"'.;';'. ..'

. ,,'

DectsionPeoplevs. Luna, et al.S8-1 O-CRM -0 I 11, etc.x-------------------------------------------------x

9~

_.__.... .. ~.~---20% National Security MOOE 60,000.00100-2004-06-0830 0-28 F-30 Januaryto

March Mission100-2004-06-0832 0-3 F-3 April 20"/0 National Security MODE 100,P<lQ.00

..f--. Mission100·2004-06-0833 0-2 F-2 April 20"/0PeaceandOrder MOOE 100,000.00100-2004-06-0834 G-l1 F-ll April 20% National Security 100,000.00

-.-- .. _. Mission100-2004-06-0891 G F April 20%PeaceandOrder MOOE 100000.00

Total ~.6~O!eOQ·OO

The honoraria and per diems for job orders are potproperly chargeableagainst the (i)200/0 DevelopmentFund.

DILG Memorandum Circular (MC) No. 99-66dated April ~3~1999418 providesan exclusive list of the programs,projectsandactivities chargeableto the 200/0 DevelopmentFund. The list iscomposedof 3 main cat~gQries:.

a. Social Development;b. Economic Development; and,c. Infrastructure Development.

For obvious rea.sons, the per diems for confidential joborderworkers cannot fall within the 2nctandSrd categories.

On the other hand, the social development aspect is

cornposedof the following; . .

program, Project and Activity Coverage

Expenditures from out of the 20% Development Fundshall be limited to thefollowing sectoral prograrn~, projectsor activities:

1. SocialDevelopment

(a) Human and EcologicalSecurity Initiatives (20%of the20% DevelopmentFund] which shall include, but notlimited to the following:

(i) Comprehensive solid waste management,including the purchase of brand new equipment,such as garbage trucks and garbage compactortrucks, as well as, the purchase of land forsanitary landfill purposes;'

(ii) Purchase of lot for hospitals, health centers, daycare centers and similar facilities, including theirconstruction, maintenance or repair;

(iii) Purchase of lot for the resettlement of squatters,including the construction of 'liQ4sing ttnit1>~ndfacilities; .

(iv) Purchase of lot for public· parks, inc1Udl{ingmaintenance, as Wen.as, IflboI]-intensive cleaning

.". ExhibitZ, woo"di". DlLG MC No. 95-216 d,tOO D~=b~ 14.1995. . .: . /"l)t;

DecisionPeoplevs. Luna, et al.S8-1O-CRM-Olll, etc.x-------------------------------------------------x

93

and greening of built-up areas, and communityreforestation projects;

(v) Purchase of medicines and other medicalsupplies and equipment, and basic commodities'assjstancefor the displaced and the needy intimes of disastersand calamities; and

(vi) Youth Welfare and DevelopmentPrograms, e.g.,drug abuse prevention, control andrehabilitation, out-of-schoolyouth education,jobplacement and referrals, community-basedphysical fitness and sports development, andother related projectsor activities;

(b) Purchaseof fire trucks,patrol cars, patrol jeeps,andother relevantequipmentfor purposesof maintaininglaw and orderand public safety;

(c) Tourism Developmentand Promotion;andi

(d) Other I;jocialdevelopmentundertakings which arehighly supportive of job generation and livelihoodopportunities.

DILG MC No. 99-114datedAugust 11, 1999amendedPILQMC No. 99-66 and added Peace and Order Council (POe)programs, projects and activities, including the Barangay atPulisya Laban sa Krimen, to the SocialDevelopmentSector.419

Viz:

In addition to the sectoral programs, projects oractivities provided under Memorandum Circular No. 95-216, as amended, the following concerns may also befunded from out of the 20% DevelopmentFund, namely:

1. Peace and Order Council (POC) programs,projects and activities, to include theBarangay at PulisyaLaban sa Krimen underthe SocialDevelopmentSector;

A careful reading'qfpILG MCNo.99-66would easilyrevealthat the expenditures allowed under the 200

/0 DevelopmentFund pertain to the purchase, construction, maintenance orrepair of properties, facilities, equipment and supplies or thefunding of the programs enumeratedthereunder. There is noindication that funds for job orderemployeesfor purposeaotherthan those listed are included as an authorizedexpenditure.

Similarly, DILGMCNo.99-144 only allowsexpendituretosupport the programsand initiatives of the local peace:~Iordercouncil including their operationalrequirements.Th) n

419 Exhibit AA

.~/l

DecisionPeoplevs. Luna, et al.SB-lO-CRM-O 111, etc.x-------------------------------------------------x

94

is no indication that job orders hired by the local chief executivefor intelligence purposes is an authorized expenditure.

Even if we were to consider the amount as properlychargeable against the 200/0 Development. Fund, theappropriation was still insufficient at the time of thedisbursement. The record show that only P992,000.00 wascharged against the development fund. The rest were belatedlycharged against various MODE funds under administratiuesupport and other expenses.420 .

Moreover, the evidencealso shows that the ALOBS werebelatedly issued as shown by the number "06", in the ALOaSwhich represents the Month of June.

In short, at the time DV No. 100-2004-04.,,1271 wasprepared and approved, and at the time LBP Check No,0000231481 was issued and encashed, there was insufficientallotment, if at all, for thehonorariumand per diem of job orderworkers.

This expenditure of funds without or insufficientappropriation corrstitutes evident bad faith, and at the veryleast, gross inexcusable negligence.

4. The check covering the amount of the cashadvanceof P1,610,800.00was releasedon April12, 2004, two (2)daysaheadof the approvalofthe cashadvance.

LBP Check No. 0000231481 was dated April 12.,2004, or2 days earlier than the April 14,2004 date of DV No. 100-~OQ4-04-127l. The Court, however, notes that the date of a check

. .. . . , . .

is not necessarily the date that it wasissued or released.

Accused Ferrando testified that she encashed LBP CheckNo. 0000231481 on thesame day thatit was released to her.421

The Court notes that said check was encashed on April 14?2004. There was no evidence,to show that the check wasreleasedor issued on April 12,2004, or at any time prior to theapproval date (April 14, 2004) of DV No. 100-2004-04-127l.Hence, accused cannot be said to have acted with m~:.f~partiality, evident pad faith or grossinexcusablenegligen~ 0"'" Audit Observation Memorandum No, 2005-001 dated July 28,2005, Exhibit V; ALOBS marked as Exhibit H-H-32; Summary IIf

Allotment and Obligations for the period .January to April 200'1, Municipality of Lingig, Surigao del Sur, Exhibit I, . .~... _" ,

-., '''''''''0', .Judicial ""' avit dated August 29, sois, ,. s. t ....

~

DectstenPeoplevs. Luna, et al.SB-IO-CRM-Olll, etc.x--------------------------------------~----------x

95

Deficiencies .and irregularities in thesupporting documents

,

5) The workers hired through Job Order Contracts were"designated" as Community Aide, Informant andConfidential EmployeeAssistant with the names ofthe workers as appearing in the Job Order Contractsand Time Book Payrolls being "assumed names";

6) There were no Daily Time Recordssubmitted to showthat the job order employees rendered services forthe period January to April 2004.

7) The Time Book and Payroll shows that the job orderemployees were paid different rates of monthly,compensation instead of daily or hourly wages;

8) The job order employees were paid despite theincomplete entries in the Time Book and Payrollspertaining to the residence certificate, i.e., number,date, place of issue and the absence of thesignatures of witnesses;

9) The job order contracts were not submitted to theCivil Service Commission for its review pursuant toCSC Memorandum Circular No. 17, series of 2002,also known as the "Policy Guidelines for Contractsof Service" and CSC Memorandum Circular No. 24,series of 2002, also known as the "Clarification OnPolicy Guidelines for Contracts of Service;

The use of assumednamesin the time book and payrollconstitutes evidentbad faith.

While accusedLuna statedin the CertificationdatedJune16, 2005 that the names appearing on the Time 800k andPayrolls aredummiesor ~'a:ssulllednames," he testifiedthat thenames are the actual or real names of persons.422. AccusedLindoalsotestifiedthat thenamesareactualnamesofjob orderworkers.v-"

LuzvimindaBasaneztestified that shewasnot hired, shedid not work for and WqS not paid by LGULingig. Hence,whileactual names of persons are used, their names are notnecessarilythe namesof the personswhoreceivedthe payment.

r)1J

·m Exhibit T.423 Lindo's Judicial Affidavit dated June 3,2014, p. 3; TSNdated August 26,2014, pp. 21, 24-25.

DecfsionPeoplevs. Luna, et al.S8-1 O-CRM-0 Ill, etc.

x--------------------------------------~----------x

96

Next, there were indeed no Daily Time Recordsto snowthat thejob order workersactually reportedfor work, Likewise,the evidenceconfirms that the time bookand payrollswerepotcompletelyfilled up asto the detailsof the residencecertificatesof the job ordersand the signatureofwitnesses.

As previously discussed,the Court finds that there is noproof that the recipients of the payments actually renderedservicesto LGU Lingig..

"

That paymentwas madeevenwhen there was no proof ofwork accomplishedor at least physical attendanceconatitutesevident bad faith and at the very least, gross iriexcuaablenegligence. /

In Office of the Qm"'Ud~m"nvs. TQrrea,424 the SupremeCourt said that the DTR·is primarily, if not solely, intended toprevent damageor loas to the governmentas would result ininstanceswhere it paysan employeefor no work done,viz:

xxx The evident purposeof requiring government. 'employees to keep 'a time record is to show theirattendancein officeto work and to bepaid accordingly,Closelyadhering to the policy of no work-no pay, a DTRis primarily, if not solely,intendedto preventdamageorloss to the government as would result in instanceswhere it paysan employeefor no work done.

"'" • j

xxx xxx xxx

But it cannot evenbeeaid that no damagewassuffered by the government. When respondentscollected their salaries on the basis of,falsified DTRs,they causedinjury to the government; The falsificationof one's DTR to cover :UP' one's absencesor tardinessautomatically results in financial losses to thegovernmentbecauseit enablesthe employeeconcernedto be paid salariesand to-earn leavecredits for serviceswhich were never' rendered., Undeniably, thefalsification of a DTR foists a' fraud involvinggovernmentfunds.

The time book and paurolls confirm that the job orderemployeeswere paid by F\ monthly rate, instead of F\ dail~o~~Jhourly rateo However,this, by itself, will not jllsti1'y till' n~"~. 0

424 543 SCRA 46 120081,

~Jtf.COllou

DecisionPeoplevs. Luna, et al.SB-lO-CRM-O Ill, etc.x----------------~--------------------------------x

97

payment of the salaries of the job workers, if work was indeedperformed. Nor would it constitute evident bad faith.

Finally, it was proven that the subject job orders were notsubmitted to the Civil Service Commission Regional Office forReview. The Certification dated August 22, 2011425 issued bySurigao del Sur, Director 11,Harold P. Pareja of the Civil ServiceField Office, Tandag City, states that "there are no availablecopies of Job Orders for the period January 2004 to April 2004of 101 Job Order workers hired by the Municipality of Lingig,Surigao del Sur in our office after inspection of our office recordand files."

The accused did not present any evidence to showotherwise.

CSCResolution No. 020790 mandates the submission. ofjob orders to the Civil Service Commission Regional Office(CSCRO)for review, within 30 days from its execution: Thesame Resolution provides that no services shall be renderedpending review by the CSCROof the jOQ orders. Nonetheless,non-aubmiasion of the contract shall not invalidate the same.The pertinent provisions read:

Section 5. SqbD.lb~sionof Contract/M04or Job Order for lteview. - The contract ofservice, MOA or job order shall be submitted tothe CSC ReBional Office (CSCRO) havingjurisdiction over the government agency forreview of its stipulations within thirty (30) day&from the execution and signing of the contract ofservice, MOA Of job order which shall be the dateindicated on the said instrument.

Section ~. No Rendition of Servic~s - Noservice shall be rendered under the contract ofservices, MOA or job order pending its review bythe CSCRO.

Section ~. ~ff~ct of Non-~llbmlJJJJioQ.QfContract / M(l.A.- Failure of submission of thecontract or MOA for review by the CSCRO shallnot invalidate the same. However, this would bewithout prejudice to th,e filing of the cha,rge JiO, ,r" 'Neglect of Duty against the HRMO of the hiring

------_._--

." ''''''b''MM . . , ~

Ai••

DecisionPeoplevs. Luna, et al.SB-lO-CRM-O 111, etc.x-------------------------------------------------x

98

agency and the officer who signed the same.Furthermore, services rendered under saidcontract or MOA shall not be accredited asgovernmentservice.

This must be so because Section 77 of the LocalGovernmentCodeitself allowsthehiring by the LGUofjob orderworkerswithout needof CSCapprovalor attestation. Perforce,since the non-submission doesnot invalidate the job orders,suchwould not justify non-paymentof servicesrenderedtinderajob contract. The possible administrative consequenceofnon-submissionof thejob ordercontractsis providedfor underCSCResolutionNo.020790,i.e., possibilityof chargeof neglectof duty against the HRMO and such servicerenderedshall potbe credited as governmentservice. Such payment despitefailure to submit the job order contracts to the CSCthereforedoes not constitute evident bad faith, manifest partiality orgrossinexcusablenegligence..

In sum, the acts of accusedLuna, Lindo, Indoyon andCarlos in certifying, approvingand signing DV No. 100-2004-04-1271, despiteinsufficient appropriationconstitutes evidentbadfaith and grossinexcusablenegligence.On the otherhand,by their act of certifying the disbursementvoucherwithout thenecessarysupportingdocuments,and cashallotment, accusedCarlos and Indoyon acted with evident bad faith and grossinexcusablenegligence. AccusedFerrando, in releasingthefunds evenwhen therewasno proofof identity, alsoactedwith.grossinexcusablenegligence.

The public officer causedany undue injury to Anyparty, including theGovernment, or gave anyunwarrant.ed benefits,advantageor preference

In Llorente vs. ~al1dig"l1bayan~426 the SupremeCourtheld that undue injury is interpreted as actual damage,andshouldbeprovenas an elementof the offense. Towit:

x x x. Unlike in actions for torts, undue injury inSec.3[e] cannot be presumedevenafter a wro;agor violation of a right has been established. Its . .'

'" 287 scsx 382, 399 [199B[ .. (?

~

DecisfonPeoplevs.Luna,etal.SB-lO-CRM -0 Ill, etc.x--------------------------------------~----------x

99

existencemust be provenas one of the elementsof the crime. In,fact, the causingof undue injury,or the giving of any unwarranted benefits,advantage or preference through manifestpartiality, evidentbad faith or gross inexcusablenegligence conatitutes. the very act punishedunder this section. Thus, it is required that theundue injury be specified,quantified and provento the point of moral certainty. .

In jurisprudence, "undue injury" isconsistently interpreted as "actual damage".Unduehasbeepdefinedas"morethan necessary,not proper, [or] illegal;" and injury as "any wrongor damagedoneto another, either in his person;rights, reputation or property]; that is, the]invasion of any legally protected interest ofanother." Actual damage,in the context of thesedefinitions, isakin to that in civil law.

As explained by, the Supreme Court in c;q,brerq P~.Sancligatlbayan,427 proof of either undue injury or the ~vip.gof unwarranted benefits, &dyantageor preference,or both i§sufficient. To wit:

In fine, the delictual act of the accusedlllay giverise to or cause either an undue injury to anyparty, including the government;or the giving toany private: party unwarranted benefits,advantage or preference,or both undue injuryand unwarranted benefits, advantage Ofpreference.As.explained by the Court in Bautistav. Sandiganbayan:

Indeed,SecvS, par. (e),RA3019"as amended,providesas qneof its elementsthat the publicofficershouldhaveacted,by causingany~pclueinjury to any party, including th~ government,or by giving .any private partyiunwarrantedbenefits, advantage or preference in thedischarge of his functions. The use of thedisjunctive term "or" connotesthat either actqualifies as ~ violation of Sec.3, par. (e),or asaptly held in Santiago, as two; (2) differentmodes of committing the. offense. This doesnot, however, indicate that ' each modeconstitutes a distinct offense,but rather, that

an=;ay. e Char..ged.under either modeor under both.' .

. . 77'" 441 SCRA 377. 386·387 (20041. citingBautista vs. san!flyan. 332 SCRA 126 (2000).

DecisionPeoplevs. Luna, et al.SB-lO-CRM-O 111, etc.x----------------------------------------------~--x

98

agency and the officer who signed the same.Furthermore, services rendered under saidcontract or MOA shall not be accredited asgovernmentservice.

This must be so because Section 77 of the LocalGovernmentCodeitself allowsthe hiring by the LGUofjob orderworkerswithout needof CSCapprovalor attestation. Perforce,since the non-submission doesnot invalidate the job orders,suchwould not justify non-paymentof servicesrenderedunderajob contract. The possible administrative consequenceofnon-submissionof thejob ordercontractsis providedfor underCSCResolutionNo.020790,i.e., possibility of chargeof neglectof duty against the HRMO and such servicerenderedshall notbe credited as government service. Such payment despitefailure to submit the job order contracts to the csethereforedoes not constitute evident bad faith, manifest partiality orgrossinexcusablenegligence.

In sum, the acts of accusedLuria, Lindo, Indoyon andCarlos in certifying, approvingand signing DV No. 100-2004-04-1271, despite insufficient appropriation constitutes evidentbadfaith and grossinexcusablenegligence.On the otherhand,by their act of certifying the disbursementvoucherwithout thenecessarysupporting documents,and cashallotment, accusedCarlos and Indoyon acted with evident bad faith and grossinexcusablenegligence, AccusedFerrando, in releasingthefunds evenwhen there wasno proof of identity, alsoactedwithgrossinexcusablenegli~ence.

The public officer causedany undue injury to ~nyparty, including theGovernment, or gave anyunwarranted benefits,advantageor prefererice

In LZorente vs. Sal1diganbayan,426 the SupremeCourtheld that undue injury is interpreted as actual damage,andshould be provenas an elementof the offense.Towit:

x x x. Unlike in actionsfor torts, 'uridue injury in

Sec.3[e]cannot bepresumedevenafter a wr0:f(gor violation of a right ~as beenestablished. Its

'" 287 SCRA 382. 399119981 ~

4i

DecisionPeoplevs. Luna, et al.SB-1O-CRM-Ol11,etc.x--------------··----------------------------------x

100

In Crue vs. SartdiganlJ"yan,428 the Supreme Courtquoted with approval the Sandiganbayan'sexplanation thatdamageis caused to the government'when money from itscofferswas used by someoneelsewithout paying interest andwithout authority for its use. TheSupremeCourt alsostressedthat the refund of the amount subject of the prosecution forviolationof Section3(e)of R~A.No.3019is not oneof the modesenumeratedunder Article 89 of the RevisedPenal Codethatwould totally extinguish criminal liability, viz:

Finally, it is puerile for petitioner tocontend that Kelly Lumber's act of refunding theamount subject of .doublepqyment arguesagainst the idea of the government sufferingdamages. The injury sufferedby the governmentis beyond cavil. This conclusion was aptlyexplained by the Sandiganbayanin the followingwise:

Dama~e to the government in thatinstance [referring to the alleged doublepayment] is in~itable for the simpl~ reason thatmoney taken! from the coffers was used· bysomeone else!for about two years and withoutpaying intere~t and without authority for its use(N.B. 19 March 1997 is only two months shortof two years from filing of this case),

Moreover,refund of the amount subject ofthe prosecution is not one of those enumeratedunder Article 89 of the RevisedPenal Codewhichwould totally extinguish criminal liability, Article89 of the Revised Penal Code applies in asuppletory characterasprovidedfor under Article10 of the sameCode.429 .

Accused Luna returned the. amount of PhPl,610,800.00 inSeptember 2010, or almost 5 years after the amount was encashedand disbursed without basis. . The illegal disbursement of saidamount deprived the LGU of Lingig of the use of the foregoingamount. This constitute undue injury to the Municipality of Lingig,Likewise, the release of the funds to persons who did not performany work for the Municipality constitutes giving of unwarrantedbenefit.

Conspfracy

To hold an accusedguilty of conspiracy, he must have .Participaled_inthe transactionwith a viewto the furtheranceW..f

". 467 seRA 52,117-68 (2005)H<J at pp. 67-68. .

/'!1

DecisionPeoplevs. Luna, et al.SB-lO-CRM-Olll, etc.x-------------------------------------------------x

101

the comrnon design and purpose; he must be shown to haveperformed an overt act in pursuance or furtherance of thecomplicity. The Supreme Court ruled:

To reiterate, in order to hold an accusedguilty as a eo-principal by reasonof conspiracy,he must beshownto;haveperformedan overtactin pursuance or furtherance of the complicity.Conspiracycan be inferredfrom, and establishedby, the acts of the accusedthemselveswhen saidacts point to a joint purpose and design,concerted action and community of interests.What is determinativeis proof establishing thatthe accusedwereanimatedby oneand the samepurpose. Theremust beintentional participationin the transaction with a view to the furtheranceof the commondesignand purpose. Conspiracymust, like the crime itself, be proven beyondreasonabledoubt for it is afaciledeviceby whichan accusedmaybeensnaredand kept within thepenal fold. 'Suppositions based on merepresumptions and not on solid facts do notconstitute proofbeyondreasonabledoubt.430

Here, the acts of accused Luna, Lindo, Carlos, Indoyonand Ferrando pointed to a common purpose, disbursement ofthe amount of PhP1,610,800.00 even when there was no basistherefor. Their individual and concerted acts resulted to theunlawful disbursement of the amount of PhP1,610,800.00 fromthe Municipality's Funds to the damage and prejudice of LGULingig.

By directing the disbursement of the funds and affixingtheir signatures on Disbursement Voucher No. 100-2004-04...1271 to signify their certification or approval in relation to theperformance of their duties, accused Executive Assistant Lindo,Municipal Accountant Carlos and Municipal Treasurer Indoyongavethe assailed disbursement voucher a semblance of legalityand regularity. For his part, accused Luna was fully aware ofthe disbursement and 'gavehis acquiescencethereto. AccusedLindo signed LBP Check No. 231481, which was subsequentlyencashed and released by accused Ferrando to persons whoseidentities she failed to Verify, and who did not actually performwork for LGU Lingig.

~{ " ,

@ Zapantavs. People,Supra,"I pp. 192-19~

DecisionPeoplevs. Luna, et al.S8-10-CRM-Olll, etc.

102

x--------------- ----------------------------------x

Penalty

On May 22, 2012, accused Luna, Lindo and Carlosvoluntarily surrenderedto the Tagum City PoliceStation andeachposted their respectivebail bond with the RegionalTrialCourt in Tagum City.431Accused Indoyon and Ferrandosurrenderedto the Sandiganbayanon February 10, 2011 andJune 19,2013, respectivelyand eachpostedbail on evendate.Hence,said accusedareentitled to the mitigating circumstanceof voluntary surrender.

The SupremeCourt, in Valle vs. SClndtg(lnb"JJ"n,'t32 heldthat the trial court properlyappreciatedvoluntary surrenderasa mitigating circumstance since nothing in the records showthat therein accusedhad beenarrestedprior to his postingof acashbailbond.

SB-12-CRM-0065 - FA~5IFICJ\.'tION,

The penalty for Falsification. of Public Document tmderArticle 171 of the RevisedPenalCode,is Frisian Mayor and afine not to exceedPhPS,OOO.OO.The Court will not apply thepenaltyof a fine not to exceedPhPl,OOO?OOO.QO,under R~A.No.10951sincethe samewould not benefit the accused.

With one mitigating circumstance in their favor, thepenaltyirnposableupon accusedLuna and Lindo is 6 yearsand1 day to 8 years of Prisiori Mayor. Applying the IndeterminateSentenceLaw,accusedLuna and Lindo can eachbe metedtheminimum penalty ranging anywherefrom 6 months and 1 dayto 2 yearsand 4 months of Frisian Correccional,

SB-12-CRM-0064 - MJ\.~V:aRSATION

Thepenalty for Malversation of Public Funds, under Article217 of the RevisedPenal Code,is Reclusion Temporal in itsmaximum period to reclusion perpetua, if the amount involvedis more than P22,000.00. As ameridedby R.A. No. 10951,wherethe amount involvedis morethan PhP1,200,00Q.00putdoes not exceedPhP2,400,OOO.OO,the prescribed penalty is

431 Return of Warrant of Arrest dated May 22, 2012, SB-12-CRM-0064 Record, Vol. I, p. 2;W4;Letter dated May 24,2012 addressed to the Executive Clerk of Court, Sandiganbayan,Sa-12-CRM-0064 Record, VeL I, p. 210; RTC Orders all dated May 22, 2012, SB-l(2-CRM-0064Record, VoL I, pp, 211, 220 and 228.

·m 214 SeRA 532 (1992).

.C71J

DecisionPeoplevs. Luna, et al.SB-I0-CRM-Olll, etc.x-------------------------------------------------x

,:ERTiF!FD fRUE C~j

~linPrision Mayor in its maximum period to Recluits minimum period.

In all cases,a person guilty of malyersationshould alsosufferthe penaltyofperpetualspecialdisqualificationand afineequalto the amount of the funds malversed.

With one mitigating circumstance in their favor, thepenalty imposableupon the accusedis 10 years and 1 day to11 years, 6 months and 20 days of Prisiori Mayor, maximum.Applying the Indeterminate Sentence Law, the minimumpenalty is anywherefrom 6 years and 1 day of prisiori mayor,minimum, to 10yearsof Prision Mayor, medium.

SB-10-CRM-0111 - Section 3(e) of Republic Act No. 3019

The penalty for violation of Section 3(e), R.A. No. 3019 isimprisonment for 6 years and 1 month to 15years. Under the'Indeterminate Sentence Law, an accused can be meted aminimum penalty not lower than the minimum penalty and amaximum penalty not higher than the maximum penaltyimposedby law.

The accusedshall also be metedthe accessorypenalty ofspecialdisqualification from holding public office.

WHEREFORE, this Court resolvesas follows:

1. SB-10-CRM-0111:

Accused ROBERTO M. LUNA, JR., JETHRO P.LINDO, VENUS M. CARLOS, EBRENCIO F.INDOYON,JR., and,NILDAT. FERRANDO,arefoundGUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of Violation ofSection 3(e) of Republic Act No. 3019, and each ofthem is sentencedto:

a. Suffer an indeterminate penalty ofimprisonmentof Six (6) years and One (1)

month, as m:;:r.nimm, to Eight (8) years, asmaximum;and,

/?

)i

DecisionPeoplevs. Luna, et al.S8-10-CRM-Oll1, etc.x-------------------------------------------------x

t:KTiFIED rRUE c@4

b. Suffer the accessory penspecial disqualification fr·office.

mr~rpetualholding public

2. SB-12-CRM-0064:

Accused ROBERTOM. LUNA,JR., JETHROP. LINDO, and VENUS M. CARLOS, arefound GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt ofMalversation of Public Funds under Article217 of the RevisedPenal Code, and each ofthem is sentencedto:

a. Six (6)yearsand One(1)day of Prision Mayor,asminimum, to Ten(10)yearsand One(1)dayof Prision Mayor, as maximum;

b. Pay a fine in the amount of One Million SixHundred TenThousandEight Hundred Pesos(PhPl,610,800.00);and,

c. Suffer the accessory penalty of perpetualspecial disqualification from holding publicoffice.

Since accused Luna has returned the full amount ofPl,610,800.00, no civil liability is imposed.

,.3. SB-12-CRM-0465:

AccusedROBERTOM. LUNA,JR. and JETHROP.LINDO are found GUILTY beyond reasonabledoubt of Falsification of Public Documents,underArticle 171, Paragraph 2 of the Revised PenalCode,and each of them is sentencedto:

1. Six (6) months and One (1) day of PrisionCorreccional, as minimum, to Six (6)years andOne(1)dayof Prision Mayor, asmaximum; and,

11. Pay a fine in t;Whamo nt. of Five ThousandPesos (PhP5,OOO.OO) .

. /7)D

DecisionPeoplevs. Luna, et al.SB-lO-CRM-Olll, etc.

x-------------------------------------------------x

I hUE: COP)-105

AccusedVENUSM. ~ARLOSis ACQUITTEDfor failure of the prosecution to prove herguilt beyond reasonable doubt for theoffenseof Falsification of Public Documents.

SO ORDERED.

QuezonCity, Metro Manila.

i->~".n.J.~~ T.'FERkANDEZ

AssociateJustice

WE CONCUR:

'~~OTAJE-n~~Pre~stice

Chairperson

TO R. FERNANDEZociateJustice

ATTESTATION

I attest that the conclusionsin the abovedecisionwerereachedinconsultation beforethe casewas assignedto the writer of the opinion ofthe Court's Division.

~AR~AJE.U' _~ tice

.CERTIFICATION

Pursuant to Article VIII, Section 13 of the Constitution, and theDivision Chairperson's Attestation, it is hereby certified that theconclusionsin the abovedecisionwerereachedin consultation beforethecasewasassignedto the writer of the opinion of the Court's Division.

~M~TAJE\TPresi .ng ustice

Chairperson