Professional Documents
Culture Documents
JHGSD Arihaas+v.+SBhggas
JHGSD Arihaas+v.+SBhggas
Arias v. SB
GR. No. 81563 & GR. No. 82512
Arias v. SB
The implementation of this floodway project was entrusted to the
Pasig Engineering District headed by Data (District Engineer). In this
regard, Data formed a committee headed by Fernando (Supervising Civil
Engr) as over-all in-charge (Fernando did not face trial and remains at-large)
and 3 other subordinates. The subordinates were Mendoza & Hucom, for
acquisition and improvements, and Jose the Instrument man for surveys
(Mendoza & Jose are 2 other convicted co-accused). This committee was
tasked to inform affected lot owners affected by the floodway project and to
receive and process payments.
LOCGO
V
DIGEST #117
Arias v. SB
Among the lot owners affected was a 19, 004 sq.m. riceland
(subject matter in this case) owned by Agleham, which was previously
owned by parents of Gutierrez (private citizen & convicted co-accused)
from whom Agleham acquired his property. Gutierrez was one of those who
filed an application for payment, holding with her a Special Power of Attorney
allegedly executed by Agleham. In her application, she submitted fake and
falsified documents i.e. Tax Declaration Certificate purporting that the
land was residential with fair market value of P80/sq m.
These documents were submitted to 2 other convicted co-accused -examined by Arcaya (Admin. Officer) while Cruz (Senior Engineer)
initialed the documents & prepared a Deed of Sale. Cruz later transmitted
them to District Engineer Data. Data and Gutierrez both later signed the Deed
of Sale. These documents were sent to Director Anolin of Bureau of Public
Works, who recommended approval of the Deed of Sale and later returned to
Datas office. Hence the sale was registered and a TCT was issued in the name
of the Govt.
For this sale, a General Voucher was prepared, for the amount of
P1.5M plus with certifications of Data and his 3 subordinates (Fernando ,Cruz,
and one accountant). This general voucher and other supporting documents
were pre-audited and approved for payment by Arias (Chief Auditor),
petioner and convicted co-accused. Arias then later issued 16 PNB checks
for total sum of P1.5M plus for Gutierrez as payment of property in 1978.
In 1979, an investigation was conducted by the Ministry of National
Defense on this alleged gross overpricing of Aglehams property. Several
Government employees denied signing the certification and gave sworn
statements. One of them is Oco, an Assistant Mun. Assessor who provided
the genuine Tax Declaration Certificate, showing among others that the
subject property is actually a riceland (but classified as residential) and
overpriced at P80/sq.m. (instead of appraised value of P5/sq.m.) -showing that the officials of the District Engineering Office falsified them. The
investigators also found that the Deed of Sale was approved by Arias for
payment of P1.5, who didnt question the altered amount (snowflaked and
amount superimposed) nor checked the veracity of the fake documents.
http://naomisktichen.multiply.com
Arias v. SB
Arias v. SB
The case was on trial for 6 years, and SB found 2 petitioners ARIAS &
DATA, their 3 subordinates (CRUZ, JOSE, & ARCAYA) & private citizen
GUTIERREZ guilty of violation of Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act.
Among the 6 convicted accused, only the 2 petitioners, Arias (District
Engineer) and Data (Chief Auditor) appealed.
ISSUE: WON SB petitioners ARIAS and DATA are guilty as co-conspirators in the
conspiracy to cause injury to the Government through the irregular
disbursement and expenditure of public funds. NO
RATIO: No.
1. Under the Sandiganbayan's decision, a department secretary, bureau
chief, commission chairman, agency head, and all chief auditors would
be equally culpable for every crime arising from disbursements which
they have approved. The department head or chief auditor would
be guilty of conspiracy simply because he was the last of a long
line of officials and employees who acted upon or affixed their
signatures to a transaction. Guilt must be premised on a more
knowing, personal, and deliberate participation of each
individual who is charged with others as part of a conspiracy.
2.
3.
LOCGO
V
DIGEST #117
Arias v. SB
http://naomisktichen.multiply.com
Arias v. SB
DIGEST #117
Arias v. SB
DATAS PARTICIPATION:
The committee he formed determined the
authenticity of the documents presented to them for processing and on the
basis thereof prepared the corresponding deed of sale; thereafter, the
committee submitted the deed of sale together with the supporting documents
to petitioner Data for signing; on the basis of the supporting certified
documents which appeared regular and complete on their face, petitioner Data,
as head of the office and the signing authority at that level, merely signed but
did not approve the deed of sale as the approval thereof was the prerogative of
the Secretary of Public Works for its final approval.
HELD: SB decision SET ASIDE insofar as it convicts and sentences petitioners
Arias & Data. They are both acquitted on grounds of reasonable doubt.
Inadequacy of evidence is not sufficient to warrant a conviction.
DISSENTING OPINION OF GRINO-AQUINO: Conspiracy of Silence and
Inaction - The petitioner's partiality for Agleham/Gutierrez may be inferred
from their having deliberately closed their eyes to the defects and irregularities
of the transaction in his favor and their seeming neglect, if not deliberate
omission, to check, the authenticity of the documents presented to them for
approval. Since partiality is a mental state or predilection, in the absence of
direct evidence, it may be proved by the attendant circumstance instances.
LOCGO
V
Arias v. SB
http://naomisktichen.multiply.com