Republic of the Philippines
Sandiganbayan
Quezon City
Second Division
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,
Plaintiff,
CRIM. CASE NO. 26495
Present:
SANDOVAL, J.
VILLARUZ, Jr. &
MARTIRES, JJ.
- versus -
GEORGE D. CAMHIT, et.al
Promulgated:
Accused.
September 13, 2006
x- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x
DECISION
SANDOVAL:,
Accused GEORGE D. CAMHIT and PERFECTO B.
MARTINEZ stand indicted before this Court for having violated
Section 3(e) of Republic Act No. 3019 in an Information textually
reading as follows:
“That on or about June of 1999, or sometime
prior or subsequent thereto, in the Municipality of
Claveria, Cagayan, Philippines, and within the
jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named
accused GEORGE D. CAMHIT, Regional Director,
Bureau of Local Government Finance (BLGF),
Regional 02, Tugegarao, Cagayan and PERFECTO B.
MARTINEZ, JR., Provincial Treasurer, Provincial
Capitol, Bayombong, Nueva Viscaya, and at the same
time, President of the Regional Association of
Assessors and Treasurers of Region 02 (REGATA-02),
while in the performance of their official functions,
committing the offense in relation to their office, and
taking advantage of their official positions, acting with
manifest partiality, evident bad faith, did then and
there, willfully, unlawfully and criminally, in conspiracy
with each other, cause undue injury to BLGF, to the
government as a whole and to the public interest, and
at the same time give unwarranted benefits to
DECISION
Crim Case No. 26495
People vs. George A. Camhit
Page 2 of 31
x- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x
REGATA-02, a private organization composed of
treasurer and assessors of Region 02, by then and there,
holding a conference at Claveria, Cagayan on June 24
until June 26, 1999 wherein a conference fee of
P2,500.00 was to be collected per participant, the
aggregate amount of which is THREE HUNDRED
TWENTY THOUSAND PESOS (P320,000.00),
supposedly collected by BLGF but instead, it was
REGATA-02 who collected the same, to the damage
and prejudice of BLGF, to the government as a whole
and to public interest while giving unwarranted benefit
to REGATA-02 in the aforestated amount.
CONTRARY TO LAW.”
Accused Camhit posted bail1 for his provisional liberty on
February 15, 2001 while accused Martinez posted bail2 on February
12, 2001. Then they filed a Motion to Quash/For Reinvestigation
dated February 16, 20013 to which the prosecution filed its
Manifestation and Opposition4.
In a Resolution promulgated on May 2, 20015, this Court
denied the Motion to Quash/For Reinvestigation of the accused.
Taking issue to the said ruling of the Court, accused filed a
Motion for Reconsideration dated June 4, 20016 which elicited an
Opposition dated July 3, 2001 from the prosecution. The Court
denied the said Motion for Reconsideration in its Resolution of
September 21, 20017.
The Supplemental Motion for Reconsideration dated
November 13, 2001 subsequently submitted by the accused was
1
pp. 30-36 Record.
pp. 122-127 Ibid.
3
pp. 36-111 Ibid.
4
pp. 135-136 Ibid.
5
pp. 139-140 Ibid.
6
pp. 158-165 Ibid.
7
p. 193 Ibid.
2
DECISION
Crim Case No. 26495
People vs. George A. Camhit
Page 3 of 31
x- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x
adjudged by this Court as moot and academic on account of the
denial of the principal motion, albeit it ruled that the issues cited
therein are mere matters of defense which can be ventilated in a full
blown trial8.
Consequently, accused were arraigned during which they
interposed their individual pleas of not guilty9 to the offense
charged. After the pre-trial, in the course of which parties arrived at
a Joint Stipulation of Facts10, trial ensued.
After the termination of the presentation of prosecution’s
evidence, plaintiff filed its formal offer of exhibits11 eliciting a
Comment dated June 20, 200412 from the accused. After the
prosecution’s Exhibits “A” to “M” were all admitted13, accused
thereafter started to present their evidence. With the completion of
the testimony of accused Perfecto B. Martinez, the defense offered14
Exhibits “1” to “6” which were all admitted15 by the Court. On
manifestation of the parties, to consider the case submitted for
decision upon the submission of their respective memoranda, the
Court now renders this decision.
EVIDENCE FOR THE PROSECUTION
In seeking to secure the conviction of the accused and in
order to establish a strong case for Violation of Section 3(e) of
Republic Act No. 3019, the prosecution presented five (5) witnesses
and offered Exhibits “A” to “M”.
8
p. 248 Ibid.
pp. 251-252 Ibid.
10
pp. 264-268 Ibid.
11
pp. 490-561 Ibid.
12
pp. 564-565 Ibid.
13
p. 569 Ibid.
14
pp. 577-611 Ibid.
15
P. 617 Ibid.
9
DECISION
Crim Case No. 26495
People vs. George A. Camhit
Page 4 of 31
x- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x
Sans nonessentials, it was the declaration of ALEXANDER
CABASAL y UMAGIG16, who at the time he took the witness
stand was 52 years old, married, a government employee, and a
resident of La Torre St. Bayombong, Nueva Vizcaya that:
He was the Financial Management Officer I of
the Province of Nueva Vizcaya in 1999. As such, he
checks the cash allocation of documents that passes
through him.
In June 1999, in the performance of his duties as
such, he found out that the supporting document of
the voucher of Manuel Reyes was irrelevant to the
claim. He noticed that as an attachment to the voucher
was a receipt from Regatta. It should be a government
receipt issued by the Bureau of Local Government.
Considering that the said voucher was all about the
conference conducted by the Bureau of Local
Government Finance (BLGF) on June 24 to 26, 1999
at Claveria, Cagayan, he requested confirmation from
the participant and after that nagkompirma ako sa
regon.
That BLGF, as per the said voucher, paid
P2,000.00 to grassroots cooperative. Finding
irregularity on the said voucher, he filed a complaint
against herein accused in the Office of the
Ombudsman.
To buttress the prosecutions stance, witness ORLANDO
MINA y DE LEON17, 51 years old, married, OIC Regional
Director of the Bureau of Local Government Finance (BLGF) of
Region 1 and a resident of Cabarroguis, Province of Quirino,
testified:
That he was then Assistant Regional Director of
the Bureau of Local Government Finance (BLGF for
16
17
TSN dated March 19, 2002.
TSN dated October 15, 2003
DECISION
Crim Case No. 26495
People vs. George A. Camhit
Page 5 of 31
x- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x
brevity), Region 2, Tuguegarao in June 1999. He knew
that REGATA-02 stands for Regional Association of
Treasurers and Assessors Region 2. That a conference
(2nd Quarter Regional Conference Program) of Regata02 was held on June 24 to 25, 1999 at Claveria,
Cagayan. He was invited thereat and gave the opening
remarks during the said occasion.
Several BLGF staff, i.e. Fe Rosario G. Acacio,
Lina T. Divina, Marvie Q. Alvarez, Marlene Maganto,
Zuriel P. Pedro, Milagros B. Gumabay, Amalia G.
Cadatal, Estefena F. Cadelina, Romeo M. Matutino and
Noel C. Agapito were present too in the said
conference because they were authorized by Regional
Director, Mr. George Camhit, to be present thereat as
per Regional Office Order No. 99-09 dated June 21,
1999 (Exhibit H)18.
The first five staff mentioned were tasked to
register the participants, collect fees and dues,
preparation of Certificate of Appearances and other
management support services while other staffs were
tasked for (a) documentation of conference
proceedings and (b) distribution of kits and other
support services.
Present too in the said conference was the driver
of BLGF, Noel C. Agapito.
The participants to the said conference were the
provincial, city and municipal treasurers and assessors
of Region 2. They were invited to attend the said
conference under Regional Memorandum Circular No.
99-15 dated June 1, 1999.
He said that BLGF allows treasurers and
assessors to attend BLGF conferences and meetings
charging their expenses to public funds. The office
authorized too REGATA-02 members to charge
registration fees.19
They do not allow payment of registration fee to
private organization like REGATA-02. As far as he
18
19
p. 5 Ibid.
p. 13 Ibid.
DECISION
Crim Case No. 26495
People vs. George A. Camhit
Page 6 of 31
x- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x
knew, if a BLGF Regional Memorandum Circular
authorizes expenses in conferences and meetings to be
charged to operational funds of the Local Government
Unit (LGU), what is necessary in the liquidation thereof
is for the claimant to present a certificate of travel
accomplished, certificate of appearances and the receipt
of the registration or conference paid which must be
official receipt of the Republic of the Philippines.20
He further said, that BLGF does not allow
REGATA-02 to schedule and conduct quarterly
regional conferences of the assessors and treasurers.
The conduct of a conference is part of the office plans
and programs of the BLGF hence it is the BLGF
which is authorized to conduct the quarterly regional
conference21.
When asked by the Court, he said that BLGF
normally holds conference-seminar for treasurers and
assessors every after three (3) months and collects
conference fee for that to cover the costs for supplies,
materials and honorarium for the speakers. The Local
Government Unit shoulders the expenses for each
participant.22
TESSIE MANGACCAT y SARANDI, 50 years old,
married, a Local Treasury Operations Officer IV and designated
OIC of the Barangay Local Government Finance Unit, Regional
Office No. 02, Tugegarao, Cagayan and a resident of Maddela,
Quirino, declared:
She was the Local Treasurer Operation Officer
IV of the Bureau of Local Government and designated
as Secretary of the REGATA-02. She has been with the
BLGF since 1981. REGATA-02 is a private
organization registered under the Securities and
Exchange Commission.
20
p. 14 Ibid.
p. 16 Ibid.
22
pp. 16-17Ibid.
21
DECISION
Crim Case No. 26495
People vs. George A. Camhit
Page 7 of 31
x- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x
Mr. Perfecto Martinez, Jr., the President of
REGATA-02, designated him as Secretary of
REGATA-02 in 1995 as shown in the Minutes of
REGATA-02 Meeting held at Governor’s Garden
Hotel, Solano, Nueva Vizcaya on May 25, 1995. As
secretary of REGATA-02, she holds office at the
BLGF Regional Office in Tugegarao, Cagayan. As far
as he knew REGATA-02 has no staff.23
That she was able to attend the conference held
on June 24 to 25, 1999 at Claveria, Cagayan and used
BLGF Regional Office’s vehicle – Tamaraw Fx driven
by Noel C. Agapito. Together with her were Mrs.
Mercuria Donato, the Administrative Officer II and
Ms. Rosario G. Acacio, the Senior Bookkeeper of
BLGF.24
BLGF staffs went to the conference to provide
administrative (registration & collection of registration
fees) and support services to the regional conferenceseminar. That BLGF staffs did not pay for the
registration fees, it was only the participants – the
provincial, city and municipal treasurers who paid the
registration fees of P2,500.00 each drawn against the
fund of the Local Government Unit25.
Participants therein were issued certificate of
appearance as she is in possession of the duplicate
originals issued to them.26 BLGF staffs present in the
said conference were not issued certificates as they
merely provide administrative and support services.
The registration fees collected by the BLGF staff
were turned over to the Treasurer of the association,
Mr. Gilbert Pagulayan.27
On cross-examination she said, it was the
objective of REGATA-02 to uplift the treasury and
assessment operations, uplift the capability, intelligence
or educational background or integrity of treasurers
and assessors, and to conduct seminars, trainings to
23
p. 11 Ibid.
p. 13 Ibid.
25
P. 15 Ibid.
26
Pp. 17-18 Ibid.
27
Pp. 19-20 Ibid.
24
DECISION
Crim Case No. 26495
People vs. George A. Camhit
Page 8 of 31
x- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x
professionalize treasury assessment operations. She
affirmed that REGATA-02 was created for the purpose
of promoting the general welfare of the assessors and
treasurers of the region.
She knew too that in the subject conference, the
treasurers and assessors attended the same with the
authority of their agencies and it was their agency
concerned which paid the fees anent the same.28 That
the money collected as fees became money of
REGATA-02, a private corporation, hence a private
fund.
When asked by the Court, she said that there are
instances where BLGF sent their personnel to attend
seminars conducted by private groups like Philippine
Association of Local Treasurers and Assessors.29
MERCURIA DONATO y PAGULAYAN30, 62 years old,
widow, and resident of No. 5 Blumentritt St. Tuguegarao City, has
this to testify:
“She was the Administrative Officer of the
Bureau of Local Government of Region II. She recalled
that BLGF held a conference in Claveria, Cagayan on
June 24-25, 1999. She was issued an Office Order to
attend thereat. She, with Ricardo, took a bus in going to
Claveria, Cagayan from Tuguegarao and it took them
five (5) hours to get there. They went to Claveria on
June 23 to 26, 1999. As per instructions of the Regional
Director per Regional Office Order No. 99-09 dated
June 21, 1999, she was supposed to act as Chairman of
the Secretariat, take care of the accommodation of the
resource speakers, official guests and participants as
well, see to it that the conference is conducted in an
orderly and efficient manner. She supervised the
employees in-charge of the registration of participants
and the documentation of the conference proceedings.
28
P. 21-22 Ibid.
P. 23 Ibid.
30
TSN dated April 12, 2004.
29
DECISION
Crim Case No. 26495
People vs. George A. Camhit
Page 9 of 31
x- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x
That the most difficult and challenging duty for
her at that time was the securing of the lodging houses
for the participants and the accommodation.31
They issued Certificates of Appearance to the
participants. Minutes of the meeting and the news of
the conference were prepared. After the 25th of June,
there were no activities and some participants went
home and others stayed until the 27th.
The secretariat took care too of the sound
system. As a whole, in effect they took care of the
logistics, documentation, certificates, smooth flow of
the conference and the accommodation.32
At that particular seminar, the participation of
REGATA-02 was that it provided the information to
the Provincial Treasurers and Assessors regarding
policies, regarding instructions from the Central Office,
Department of Finance, plans for their budget, budget
appropriation and activities, trainings and others.33
She affirmed that REGATA-02 has no private
staff. Secretariat received monetary consideration from
REGATA-02 (Exhibit M, paragraph b.3)
On cross-examination she said that she being a
Chief of the Secretariat of REGATA-02 is merely an
additional function or a function separate and distinct
from her being an Administrative Officer of the Bureau
of Local Government Finance, Region 2. She functions
as Chief of the Secretariat whenever seminars were
sponsored by REGATA-02.
She could no longer recall having received a sum
from REGATA-02. That in 1999, four (4) seminars
were conducted by REGATA-02 jointly with the
Bureau of Finance. Previous seminars were conducted
too by REGATA-02 attended to by Treasurers and
Assessors of different towns of Region II. Their
respective agencies paid the fees thereof.
31
Pp. 17-18 Ibid.
pp. 37-38 Ibid.
33
P. 38 Ibid.
32
DECISION
Crim Case No. 26495
People vs. George A. Camhit
Page 10 of 31
x- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x
On re-direct, she said she received per diem from
BLGF during the seminar. During the seminar in
question he worked thereat for BLGF though she was
the Chairman of the Secretariat in view of the Order
from BLGF. Day one of the seminar was BLGF affair
while the second day was REGATA-02 affair which
lasted for 1 ½ hours.34
After paying all the expenses anent the seminar,
the remaining balance was turned-over to REGATA-02
because it was the practice.
When asked by the Court, she clarified that the
practice was that the Regional Director and the
President of REGATA-02 will plan the program and
plan as to who the speakers will be at the conference.
The actual invitation to speakers and delegates is being
done by BLGF and not REGATA-02.35
FE ROSARIO ACACIO y GANACE was called to testify
too by the prosecution. However, in view of the following
stipulations entered into by the parties, to wit:
34
35
Pp. 54-56 Ibid.
Pp. 65-67 Ibid.
1.
That witness Fe Rosario G. Acacio
was the one in-charge of the
collection of the registration fees
from the participants of the
regional conference of the Regional
Association of Assessors and
Treasurers of Region 2 (REGATA02) held in Claveria, Cagayan on
June 24-25, 1999;
2.
That the said witness was able to
collect the total amount of
P325,000.00 from the participants
of that conference;
3.
That out of the money collected in
the amount of P325,000.00, the
witness caused to be paid the
DECISION
Crim Case No. 26495
People vs. George A. Camhit
Page 11 of 31
x- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x
expenses
for
the
venue,
accommodation and meals of the
participants, honoraria for the
officers and resource persons of
REGATA-02;
4.
That the witness made an
accounting of the funds collected
and the amounts spent which
accounting she turned over to Mr.
Gilbert Pagulayan, treasurer of
REGATA-02;
5.
That the balance left in the amount
of P91,636.75 was turned over to
Mr. Gilbert Pagulayan.
her testimony was dispensed with.
After the presentation of the witnesses, the prosecution
offered the following documentary evidence:
Exhibits
Description
A to A-9
Minutes of the REGATA II Board Meeting held
at Governor’s Garden Hotel, Solano, Nueva
Viscaya on May 25, 1999, consisting of ten (10)
pages;
A-9-a
Name and signature of REGATA II Secretary,
Tessie S. Mangaccat;
A-9-b
Name and signature of accused Perfecto B.
Martinez, Jr., President of REGATA II and
Provincial Treasurer of Nueva Viscaya;
B
Regional Memorandum Circular No. 99-15 June
1, 1999;
B-1
Bracketed entry in Exhibit B directing the
collection of P2,500.00 from each participant
chargeable against the operational funds of the
public office of each participant;
DECISION
Crim Case No. 26495
People vs. George A. Camhit
Page 12 of 31
x- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x
C
Opening Program of the 2nd Quarter Regional
conference of Provincial, City and Municipal
Treasurers and Assessors of Region II, Claveria,
Cagayan on June 24-26, 1999;
C-1
Bracketed entry of Exhibit C pertaining to the
Opening Remarks of witness Orlando L. Mina,
Director I, BLGF, RO-02;
D
Summary of Receipts issued to participants
during the BLGF 2nd quarter regional conference
by the REGATA II, consisting of six (6) pages;
E to E-6
List of Certificates of Appearances issued by
accused Regional Director George D. Camhit to
participants on June 25, 1999 (consisting of
seven pages);
E-7
E-8 to E-27
Bracketed entry in Exhibit E pertaining to the
name and signature of witness Administrative
Officer Mercuria P. Donato;
Duplicate originals of the Certificates of
Appearance issued by accused Camhit;
F
Certification dated June 30, 1999;
G
Disbursement Voucher No. 9906 for P2,000.00
paid to Claveria Grassroots Multi-purpose
Cooperative;
H
Certified True Copy of Regional Office Order
No. 99-09 dated June 24-26, 1999;
H-1
Designation of Secretariat for BLGF Second
Quarter Conference on June 24-26, 1999;
H-2
Names of BLGF staff assigned as members of
the Secretariat of the BLGF second quarter
conference;
H-3
Name and signature of accused George P.
Camhit, CESO V, Regional Director;
DECISION
Crim Case No. 26495
People vs. George A. Camhit
Page 13 of 31
x- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x
H-4
Bracketed entry of Exhibit “H” designating
witness Mercuria P. Donato as Chairman of
Secretariat;
I
Certified True Copy of Letter dated June 7, 1999
addressed to Atty. Angelina M. Magsino, OIC
Exec. Director, BLGF from accused Camhit;
I-1
REGATA II schedule of BLGF Second Quarter
Regional conference;
J
Certification dated October 3, 2003 from
REGATA II Treasurer Gilbert G. Pagulayan;
J-1
Bracketed entry representing total collections of
P325,000.00 by REGATA II Treasurer;
J-2
Name and signature of Gilbert G. Pagulayan,
REGATA II Treasurer;
K
Statement of Disbursement of REGATA II for
Second Quarter Regional Conference on June
24-26, 1999;
K-1
Balance of P91,636.75;
K-2
Bracketed entry of Exhibit “K”, name and
signature of Gilbert G. Pagulayan, REGATA II
Treasurer;
L
Minutes of the Second Quarter Regional
Conference of Provincial, City and Municipal
Treasurers and Assessors of Region II, held on
June 24-26, 1999 at Claveria, Cagayan (consisting
of 2 pages);
L-2
Bracketed entry in Exhibit L names and
signature of BLGF staff Estefana Cadelina and
Amalia Cadatal.
M,M-1 to M-3
Minutes of the REGATA II General Assembly
Meeting held at the grassroots multi-purpose
cooperative, Inc. Claveria, Cagayan on June 24,
1999.
DECISION
Crim Case No. 26495
People vs. George A. Camhit
Page 14 of 31
x- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x
EVIDENCE FOR THE ACCUSED
To counteract and offset the People’s evidence, the defense
presented one (1) witness and offered Exhibits 1 to 6.
Stripped
of
needless
PERFECTO MARTINEZ Jr.
allegations,
the
testimony
of
y BULLECER36, 59 years old,
married, Provincial Treasurer for the Province of Nueva Vizcaya and
residing at Bayombong, Nueva Vizcaya is as follows:
“As Provincial Treasurer of Nueva Vizcaya it
was his duty to collect provincial taxes, fees and
charges and to disburse funds for the province. He
started as an OIC-Provincial Treasurer in 1979 and was
appointed as regular Provincial Treasurer of the
Province in 1980 up to the present.
He is a member and President as well of
REGATA-02 which stands for Regional Association of
Treasurers and Assessors of Region 2. REGATA-02 is
a non-stock, non-profit association of the local
treasurers and assessors in Region 2 to include Ranking
Officers of the regional office of the BLGF in Region 2
of the local treasury and assessment offices in Region 2.
It is registered with the Securities and Exchange
Commission and has its own Articles of Incorporation
and By-laws. Its members are local treasurer and
assessors of Region 2, including ranking officers of the
regional office of the Bureau of Local Government
Finance (BLGF) and ranking treasury and assessment
officers of Region 2. Its mother association is the
Philippine Association of Treasurer and Assessors, Inc
(PHALTRA) composing of the provincial, city,
municipal including their assistant treasurers and
assessors nationwide, including ranking officers of all
regional offices and local treasury and assessment
officers nationwide.
36
TSN dated November 4, 2004.
DECISION
Crim Case No. 26495
People vs. George A. Camhit
Page 15 of 31
x- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x
As President, he acts as Presiding Officer of
REGATA-02 and it is his duty to call conventions and
general assemblies of the association. Likewise to see to
it that all promulgated rules and regulations are being
observed and exercised or implemented. REGATA-02
was established for the purpose of uplifting the general
interest of the local treasurers and assessors. It is
established too for the purpose of enhancing the
efficiency, integrity, ideals of the association by
fostering unity among ourselves and by maintaining
harmonious relationship with local officers and other
concerned agencies towards improving the quality of
service.
Regional Director George Camhit acts as adviser
of REGATA-02. REGATA-02 is a partner of BLGF in
the implementation of its programs for the current
year. Provincial Treasurers and members of the
association sit down with their Regional Director
including his staff and discuss strategies, the revenue
collection of the local taxes, the concerns affecting the
interest of the Board.37
REGATA-02 was sanctioned by the Civil
Service Commission and the Bureau of Finance.
That on June 24-26, 1999 REGATA-02
sponsored a conference-seminar held at Claveria,
Cagayan with more or less 125 participants. Conference
fee of P2,500 was collected from the participant,
charged from the Local Government Unit represented
by each participant. The fee collected was utilized to
pay conference expenses such as meals, lodging of the
participants, including the secretariat, for supplies,
honoraria, for resource speakers and other related
conference expenses. The fee collected by REGATA02 became private fund because the REGATA, the
sponsoring association, is a private association.38 Like
with PHALTRA, the nature of the fund collected
therein are likewise private fund.
REGATA doesn’t have employees hence in case
of seminars, as a matter of arrangement with the
37
38
p. 11 Ibid.
p. 14 Ibid.
DECISION
Crim Case No. 26495
People vs. George A. Camhit
Page 16 of 31
x- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x
regional office, it is the regional office which provides
for selected staffs who are given incentives in the form
of honoraria by REGATA.39
He further said that the savings of the
association is being deposited in LandBank Tuguegarao
City Branch and used as financial assistance to be given
to BLGF for the procurement of equipments,
improvement of office and repairs of equipment upon
approval of the Board of Directors of REGATA-02.
As proof thereof, several vouchers of REGATA-02 in
the name of Director George Camhit were presented,
i.e. (1) reimbursement of expenses paid for the
improvement of the newly rented building and for the
transport of office files, materials, furniture and
equipment amounting to P26,911.00; (2) payment of
financial assistance to the Regional Office, Region 2
[P50,000]; (3)reimbursement of expenses paid for the
purchase of typewriter, ribbon and stencil for use of
REGATA [P16,330.00]; (4) covering the expenses for
the payment of one (1) unit typewriter and other
expenses.
There was no suspension or disallowance issued
by the Commission on Audit on the expenses for the
attendance of the subject conference-workshop40.
Director Orlando Mina is one of the
incorporators of REGATA-0241. That as far as he
could recall, Director Mina filed a similar case against
REGATA-02 anent Skills Development Workshop
held at Tuguegarao City which was dismissed by the
Office of the Ombudsman.42
That there was no public fund involved
extended as financial assistance to BLGF-02 because
the fund of the REGATA-02 is private in nature.
On cross-examination, he said that he cannot
show a certificate of accreditation from the Civil
39
p. 17 Ibid.
p. 20 Ibid.
41
p. 22 Ibid.
42
pp. 24-25 Ibid.
40
DECISION
Crim Case No. 26495
People vs. George A. Camhit
Page 17 of 31
x- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x
Service Commission. That it was REGATA’s mother
association, PHALTRA, which was accredited.43
That the financial assistance extended by
REGATA-02 to BLGF is in the nature of donation.44
He agreed that the financial assistance given to a public
entity becomes public fund.45
Though it was his position that BLGF officers
are automatic members of REGATA, there was no
mention from the By-laws of REGATA that they were
indeed the same.46
He affirmed that REGATA-02 doesn’t maintain
any staff. That whenever staffs are needed, like during
the June 24-26 conference, REGATA-02 utilizes
BLGF staffs.47
When asked by the Court, he maintained that the
P2,500.00 conference fee collected from the
participants of the seminar was used for seminar
expenses like food, lodging, honoraria of the resource
speakers, supplies, rental of the training facilities and
other related expenses. That REGATA-02 was
authorized by the BLGF to conduct this particular
seminar however only an
invitation
was
shown/presented to the Court not an authorization.48
The Commission on Audit does not conduct audit of
the funds of REGATA-02, it conducts audit only to
the funds of the BLGF49.
To further rebut the evidence submitted by the prosecution,
accused offered the following documentary evidence:
Exhibits
Description
“1” to “1-e” Certificate of Registration of the Articles of
Incorporation, and By-laws of REGATA-02,
43
p. 29 Ibid.
p. 35 Ibid.
45
p. 36 Ibid.
46
p. 38 Ibid.
47
p. 39 Ibid.
48
pp. 43-44 Ibid.
49
P. 44 Ibid.
44
DECISION
Crim Case No. 26495
People vs. George A. Camhit
Page 18 of 31
x- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x
Inc. issued by
Commission;
Securities
and
Exchange
“2”
Memorandum Circular of the Civil Service
Commission signed by the Patricia A. Sto.
Tomas, Chairman dated October 14, 1993;
“3”
National Budget Circular No. 442, March 29,
1995;
“4” to “4-e”
Certification dated February 21, 2002 signed by
Benjamin Geronimo; Certification dated
February 1, 2002 signed by Manuel E. Leycano,
Jr.; Certification dated February 20, 2002 signed
by Ricardo G. Laron; Certification dated
February 11, 2001 signed by Ma. Ana A. Cabiso;
Certification dated February 19, 2002 signed by
Rodel Santos; Certification dated February 19,
2002 signed by Amelia L. Barongan;
“4-f” to “4-f-4”
Certification dated February 18, 2002 signed by
Gilbert G. Pagulayan, REGATA-02 Treasurer as
to amount and purposes of financial assistance
REGATA o2 extended to theBureau of Local
Government Finance, Region II through
Director Camhit and the corresponding
vouchers related thereto;
“5”
Letter dated May 15, 2000 addressed to
REGATA-02 President Perfecto Martinez
signed by Peregrino G. Cornel, Jr.;
“6”
Resolution dated March 10, 2000 signed by
Ismaela B. Boco and approved by Ombudsman
Desierto;
DISCUSSION
Accused allegedly violated Section 3(e) Republic Act No. 3019
as amended which provides:
DECISION
Crim Case No. 26495
People vs. George A. Camhit
Page 19 of 31
x- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x
“Section 3. Corrupt practices of public officers. – In
addition to acts or omissions of public officers already
penalized by existing law the following shall constitute
corrupt practices of any public officer and are hereby
declared to be unlawful:
x
x
x
(e) Causing undue injury to any party, including
the government, or giving any private party any
unwarranted benefits, advantage or preference in the
discharge of his official, administrative or judicial
functions through manifest partiality, evident bad faith
or gross inexcusable negligence. x x x”
To fall thus within the parameters of the aforequoted law, the
following indispensable elements must be clearly established:
1.
that the accused is a public officer
discharging administrative or official
functions or private persons charged in
conspiracy with them;
2.
that he must have acted with manifest
partiality, evident bad faith or gross
inexcusable negligence; and
3.
that his action has caused undue injury to any
party including the government or has given
any party unwarranted benefit, advantage or
preference in the discharge of his functions.
(Pacifico C. Velasco vs. Sandiganbayan, et.al.,
452 SCRA 593)
There was no dispute as to the existence of the first element.
It was stipulated upon by the parties as contained in their Joint
Stipulations of the Facts and Issues dated March 18, 2002 that
“Accused GEORGE D. CAMHIT and PERFECTO B. MARTINEZ,
JR. were public officers, being the Regional Director of the Bureau of Local
DECISION
Crim Case No. 26495
People vs. George A. Camhit
Page 20 of 31
x- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x
Government Finance and Provincial Treasurer of Nueva Vizcaya, respectively,
during the period alleged in the Information”.
Moreover, Regional Memorandum Circular No. 99-15 dated
June 1, 1999 (Exhibit B) as well as Regional Office Order No. 99-09
dated June 21, 1999 (Exhibit H), concerning the 2nd Quarter
Regional Conference-Seminar in question, shows that accused
Camhit was discharging his official function as Regional Director at
the time he issued and signed the same orders. As a matter of fact,
he used official letter heads and used the heading pertaining to the
Bureau of Finance, Bureau of Local Government Finance.
In discussing the second and the third element, let us keenly
travail on the evidence presented by the parties viz-a-viz the duties
and function of the Bureau of Local Government Finance office in
order to arrive at a proper perspective of determining whose project
or work was the 2nd Quarter Regional Conference-seminar in
question. This factual issue could be crucial since it will give us the
proper and clear view anent the propriety of the act of turning over
to the REGATA-02 the amount collected as conference-seminar fee
from the participants supposedly for BLGF. In essence, the
determination of the alleged unwarranted benefit causing undue
injury to the government thru the Bureau of Local Government and
Finance could revolve around this incident.
At first glance, if WE are to peruse the records on hand giving
preferential attention to the stipulation of facts of the parties that:
“5.
The
REGATA-02
conducted
conference/seminar on June 24-26, 1999”
a
DECISION
Crim Case No. 26495
People vs. George A. Camhit
Page 21 of 31
x- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x
further disquisition on the charge herein may somehow be needless.
The word “conduct” implies a leader’s supervision, his responsible
guidance in a course which he determines; It is synonymous with the
words “manage, control, direct”(Webster Third New International
Dictionary). Hence, when the prosecution sweepingly stipulated such
with the defense, it follows then that it had recognized the role of
REGATA -02 in the seminar in question as if the latter was the one
who managed, controlled and/or directed the said seminar for the
benefit of its individual members. Where then is the unwarranted
benefit and the undue injury to BLGF in particular and to the
Government in general as a result of the turning over to the
REGATA-02 of the P320,000.00 collections when these proceeds of
the seminar should properly be turned over to the one who
conducted the same.?
In connection with this matter, allow US to quote pertinent
manifestation of the prosecution that the People, impliedly, did not
deny the fact that it was REGATA-02 who indeed conducted, albeit
supposedly illegal, the seminar in question, viz:
ATTY. CORPUZ:
Your Honor, may I invite the attention of your
Honors to the fact that the parties have already
stipulated to the fact that it was the REGATA II
who conducted conference/seminar, No. 5 of
the Joint Stipulation of Facts, that REGATA II
conducted a conference/seminar on June 24-26,
1999.
PROS. LUCERO:
We are not proving, Your Honors that on those
dates, the REGATA II was not allowed to
DECISION
Crim Case No. 26495
People vs. George A. Camhit
Page 22 of 31
x- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x
conduct the seminar, your Honor. It is the
Department of Finance, Your Honors and not
REGATA II.
AJ VICTORINO:
Is that in your joint stipulation? Is that your
manifestation alone, counsel?
ATTY. CORPUZ:
Your Honor, no, Your Honor. That is part of
the Joint stipulation of Facts.
PROS. LUCERO:
Yes, Your Honors, and now we are proving that
what the REGATA-II did in conducting a
conference and seminar on June 24-26, 1999,
Your Honor is illegal. That is what our witness
is testifying now, Your Honors. Regata II was
not allowed to conduct the seminar.
AJ VICTORINO:
So, you mutually agreed that the seminar
was conducted by REGATA II.
ATTY. CORPUZ:
Yes, Your Honor. (emphasis ours; p. 11-12, TSN dated
March 19, 2002)
Premising from the said manifestation, it was the stand of the
prosecution that REGATA-02 was not allowed to conduct the
seminar hence the conduct of the same was illegal. We are not
persuaded. There is no law nor circular and the prosecution has not
attempted to show, prohibiting the REGATA-02 to conduct a
seminar for the benefit of its members. In the absence of any law or
statute, we are not prepared to conclude that REGATA-02 was
prohibited from doing so. In fact, the Department of Finance thru
DECISION
Crim Case No. 26495
People vs. George A. Camhit
Page 23 of 31
x- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x
Assistant Secretary Benjamin A. Geronimo even certified that
REGATA-02 “has been conducting quarterly conferences in coordination with
the Regional Office (Region II) of this Bureau, and as such is authorized to
receive registration fees and disburse the same subject to the regulations prescribed
by its Constitution and By-laws.” (see Exhibit 4).
Aside from these, we cannot just disregard which even
Exhibit A50 of the prosecution affirmed, that the seminar in question
was not that of REGATA-02, viz:
“IV. New Business
4.1
2nd Quarter Regional Conference
Date: June 24 to 26, 1999
Venue: x x x
Note: After consultation
with the Chairman the
venue was changed to
Claveria, Cagayan.
The Information charging accused herein only mentioned, as
unwarranted benefit, the act of REGATA-02 in collecting and
receiving the conference fee of the participants supposedly for
BLGF. We feel there is nothing wrong nor irregular thereat since
REGATA-02 conducted the said seminar.
In a nutshell, the prosecution’s stance that BLGF toiled and
troubled the said seminar, and yet the fruits thereof were turned over
to REGATA-02 has no leg to stand on.
The defense had moreover satisfactorily explained and
clarified the alleged clouds of irregularity and illegality pointed out by
50
MINUTES OF THE REGATA II BOARD MEETING HELD AT THE GOVERNOR’S
GARDEN HOTEL, SOLANO, NUEVA VIZCAYA ON MAY 25, 1999.
DECISION
Crim Case No. 26495
People vs. George A. Camhit
Page 24 of 31
x- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x
the prosecution. The People had alleged that it was BLGF who paid
P2,000.00 to CLaveria Grassroots Cooperative, the place where the
seminar in question was held, as evidenced by a Disbursement
Voucher (Exhibit G) but looking at the said Exhibit G alone does
not establish that the amount of P2,000.00 was debited from the
funds of BLGF. The Disbursement Voucher was not even signed by
accused George D. Camhit. Be it noted that the certification portion
of the said Disbursement Voucher acknowledging that the amount
requested was necessary, lawful and incurred under his direct
supervision indicated the name of accused Perfecto B. Martinez, Jr.,
REGATA President, as signatory. More so, the certification portion
of the same as to the adequacy of the fund requested contains the
name of Gilbert Pagulayan, REGATA Treasurer, as signatory. Those
portions were not signed by the signatories indicated therein but it
conclusively showed that the said Disbursement Voucher pertains to
REGATA-02 expenses and affair. These facts may lead to the
conclusion that the money came from the fund of REGATA-02,
and not from BLGF, only that the Disbursement Voucher Form (a
government form) of the office of BLGF was used. The use of the
said form, though improper, could properly be explained when the
prosecution witnesses testified that REGATA-02 holds office in the
office of BLGF. Moreover, the defense had established that
REGATA-02 is consistent in the use of the said form in disbursing
its funds. (see Exhibits 4-f-1, 4-f-2, 4-f-3 & 4-f-4 which pertains to
funds of REGATA-02 extended as financial assistance to BLGF
through Regional Director Camhit.) The undue injury suffered by
BLGF in giving the alleged unwarranted benefit in the amount of
P2,000.00 is thus bereft of basis and foundation.
Moreover, the issue that BLGF staffs were utilized in the
seminar as evidenced by Exhibit H as well as the issue that the
DECISION
Crim Case No. 26495
People vs. George A. Camhit
Page 25 of 31
x- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x
Certificate of Attendance given to the participants were signed by
Regional Director Camhit alone, can not be considered as
“unwarranted” benefit accorded to REGATA-02. The term
“unwarranted” is defined as “lacking adequate or official support;
unjustified; unauthorized” (Webster Third International Dictionary,
p. 2514); or “without justification or adequate reason” (Philadelphia
Newspapers, Inc. vs. U.S. Department of Justice, C.D. Pa 405 F
Supp. 8, 12, cited in Words and Phrase, Permanent Edition, vol. 43A 1978, Cumulative Annual Pocket Part, p. 9). It must not be
forgotten that the seminar had was conducted by REGATA-02 in
coordination with the Regional Office of the Department of Finance
(Exhibit 4).
Even if it be considered “unwarranted” for the sake of
argument, the giving of the alleged unwarranted benefit must be
characterized with manifest partiality and evident bad faith as
mentioned in the Information. Under the law, to be punishable, the
actuation of the accused must have been characterized by manifest
partiality, evident bad faith or gross inexcusable negligence. In other
words, mere absence of good faith on the part of the accused does
not expose them to liability. If accused acted with manifest partiality,
it must be palpable, easily, readily and instantly perceived by the
senses and to quote from Marcelo vs. Sandiganbayan, 185 SCRA
356, “clear, notorious or plain inclination or predeliction to favor
one side rather that the other.” And if they acted in bad faith it must
be manifest deliberate intent to do wrong or cause damage.
A cursory perlustration of the prosecution’s evidence shows
that the supposed benefit, accorded to REGATA-02 as aforestated
is justified. The Court is not persuaded that accused Camhit, in
allowing some of his staff to be the secretariat for the said seminar
DECISION
Crim Case No. 26495
People vs. George A. Camhit
Page 26 of 31
x- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x
and signing the Certificate of Attendance alone, which after all is in
accord and incumbent with his position as Regional Director of
BLGF, is characterized by manifest partiality and evident bad faith.
The records do not bear out that accused was actuated with
dishonest purpose or ill will partaking of a fraud or some furtive
design to do wrong and cause damage as the records were replete of
proofs that BLGF and REGATA-02 are coordinates in their plans
and programs affecting the local treasury and assessment operations
of the local government units within Camhit’s jurisdiction. Exhibit I1 of the prosecution says so:
“The xxx REGATA-II in coordination with this
Office, has scheduled our Second Quarter Regional ConferenceSeminar on June 24-26, 1999 at Claveria, Cagayan, with the
theme: ‘Developing Strategies for Effective Implementation of the
Revenue Generation Programs of LGUs”.
The coordination between the two proved well and effective.
In fact, as previously discussed, it was even recognized by the
Department of Finance thru Assistant Secretary Benjamin A.
Geronimo. Moreover, no suspensions/disallowances were found by
the Commission on Audit at the respective local government units
concerned anent the seminars held by REGATA-02 particularly this
seminar at bar (see Exhibits 4-C to 4-e).
As an observation, the prosecution had mentioned the use by
REGATA-02 of the office of the BLGF as its office and the use of
government form, particularly the Disbursement Form, of BLGF
but that alone would not suffice to tar and feather it as unwarranted
benefit and could not have possibly caused undue injury to the
government. Admittedly, REGATA-02 has no complements or staff.
DECISION
Crim Case No. 26495
People vs. George A. Camhit
Page 27 of 31
x- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x
The use of the government office of BLGF anyway, if such is the
case, is tolerated by the government. The tolerance practiced and
effected by the government dissipates any possible undue injury
supposedly visited upon to BLGF.
With the above discussion, this Court is bound to acquit both
accused. The prosecution’s evidence must stand by themselves to
sustain a verdict of conviction. It may be that the proofs marshaled
by the prosecution casts some suspicion that herein accused had
perpetrated the offense as charged, but the oft-repeated principle
that has been dinned into the ears of the bench and bar has always
been:
“. . . Accusation is not, according to the
fundamental law, synonymous with guilt, the
prosecution must overthrow the presumption of
innocence with proof of guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
To meet this standard, there is need for the most
careful scrutiny of the testimony of the State, both oral
and documentary, independently of whatever defense is
offered by the accused. Only if the judge below and the
appellate tribunal could arrive at a conclusion that the
crime had been committed precisely by the person on
trial under such an exacting test should the sentence be
one of conviction. It is thus required that every
circumstance favoring his innocence be duly taken into
account. The proof against him must survive the test of
reason; the strongest suspicion must not be permitted
to sway judgment.
To emphasize, the foundation of the ruling of
acquittal is reasonable doubt, which simply means that
the prosecution's evidence was not sufficient to sustain
the guilt of the accused-petitioner beyond the point of
moral certainty — certainty that convinces and satisfies
the reason and the conscience of those who are to act
upon it. It is such proof to the satisfaction of the court,
keeping in mind the presumption of innocence, as
precludes every reasonable hypothesis except that
DECISION
Crim Case No. 26495
People vs. George A. Camhit
Page 28 of 31
x- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x
which it is given to support it. An acquittal based on
reasonable doubt will prosper even though the
accused's innocence may be doubted, for a criminal
conviction rests on the strength of the evidence of the
prosecution and not on the weakness of the defense.
And, if the inculpatory facts and circumstances are
capable of two or more explanations, one of which is
consistent with the innocence of the accused and the
other consistent with his guilt, then the evidence does
not fulfill the test of moral certainty and is not
sufficient to support a conviction, and, thus, that which
is favorable to the accused should be considered.
For (a)ll experience has shown that a party may
be wholly innocent to the offense of which he is
accused, although appearances may be against him. The
law, therefore, to guard against injustice, requires that
the offense be established by evidence beyond
reasonable doubt. It is a serious matter, not only to a
party, but to the state as well to take a person from the
ordinary avocations of life, brand him a felon, and
deprive him of his liberty, appropriate his labor, and
cast a cloud upon his future life, and humiliate his
relatives and friends, and to authorize the state in doing
this, there should be no reasonable doubt of his guilt.”
(Amelita dela Cruz vs. People of the Philippines. G. R. No.
150439 July 29, 2005)
IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, the Court renders
judgment ACQUITTING both accused GEORGE D. CAMHIT
and PERFECTO B. MARTINEZ, JR. on the basis of reasonable
doubt with cost de oficio.
The facts from which civil liability might arise not being
indubitable, there is no pronouncement as to the same.
The Hold-departure Order issued by this Court in this case as
against both the accused are hereby lifted and aside. Let the Bureau
DECISION
Crim Case No. 26495
People vs. George A. Camhit
Page 29 of 31
x- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x
of Immigration and Deportation be notified accordingly. The
bailbonds posted by them are hereby ordered cancelled.
SO ORDERED.
Quezon City, Philippines.
EDILBERTO G. SANDOVAL
Associate Justice
Chairman
We concur:
FRANCISCO H. VILLARUZ, JR.
Associate Justice
EGS/onie
07/04/06
SAMUEL R. MARTIRES
Associate Justice
DECISION
Crim Case No. 26495
People vs. George A. Camhit
Page 30 of 31
x- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x
ATTESTATION
I attest that the conclusions in the above decision were
reached in consultation before the case was assigned to the writer of
the opinion of the Court’s Division.
EDILBERTO G. SANDOVAL
Associate Justice
Chairman
CERTIFICATION
Pursuant to Article VIII, Section 13 of the Constitution and
the Division Chairman’s Attestation, it is hereby certified that the
conclusions in the above decision were reached in consultation
before the case was assigned to the writer of the opinion of the
Court’s Division.
TERESITA J. LEONARDO-DE CASTRO
Presiding Justice
EGS/onie
DECISION
Crim Case No. 26495
People vs. George A. Camhit
Page 31 of 31
x- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x