RA 3019 SEC 3 (e)

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:

(e) Causing any 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. This provision shall apply to officers and employees of offices or government
corporations charged with the grant of licenses or permits or other concessions.

ART 217. MALVERSTAION OF PUBLIC FUNDS

Art. 217. Malversation of public funds or property. – Presumption of malversation. – Any public
officer who, by reason of the duties of his office, is accountable for public funds or property,
shall appropriate the same, or shall take or misappropriate or shall consent, or through
abandonment or negligence, shall permit any other person to take such public funds or property,
wholly or partially, or shall otherwise be guilty of the misappropriation or malversation of such
funds or property shall suffer:

xxxx

4. The penalty of reclusion temporal in its medium and maximum periods, if the amount involved
is more than twelve thousand pesos but is less than twenty-two thousand pesos. If the amount
exceeds the latter, the penalty shall be reclusion temporal in its maximum period to reclusion
perpetua.

In all cases, persons guilty of malversation shall also suffer the penalty of perpetual special
disqualification and a fine equal to the amount of the funds malversed or equal to the total value
of the property embezzled.

The failure of a public officer to have duly forthcoming any public funds or property with which
he is chargeable, upon demand by any duly authorized officer, shall be prima facie evidence
that he has put such missing funds or property to personal use. (Emphasis and underscoring
supplied.)

Thus, the elements of malversation of public funds under Article 217 of the Revised Penal Code
are:

1. that the offender is a public officer;

2. that he had the custody or control of funds or property by reason of the duties of his
office;

3. that those funds or property were public funds or property for which he was
accountable; and

4. that he appropriated, took, misappropriated or consented or, through abandonment or

negligence, permitted another person to take them

In the crime of malversation, all that is necessary for conviction is sufficient proof that the
accountable officer had received public funds, that he did not have them in his possession when
demand therefor was made, and that he could not satisfactorily explain his failure to do so.
Direct evidence of personal misappropriation by the accused is hardly necessary in
malversation cases

Elements:
 Sec 3 (e) of RA 3019
The three essential elements for violation of
Section 3(e) of RA 3019 are: (1) that the
accused is a public officer discharging
administrative, judicial or official functions; (2)
that the accused acted with manifest partiality,
evident bad faith or gross inexcusable
negligence; and (3) that the accused caused
undue injury to any party including the
Government, or giving any private party
unwarranted benefits, advantage or
preference in the discharge of his functions
PENALTY: Any public officer or private person
committing any of the unlawful acts or
omissions enumerated in Sections 3, 4, 5 and
6 of this Act shall be punished with
imprisonment for not less than one year nor
more than ten years, perpetual disqualification
from public office, and confiscation or forfeiture
in favor of the Government of any prohibited
interest and unexplained wealth manifestly out
of proportion to his salary and other lawful
income.
Any complaining party at whose complaint the
criminal prosecution was initiated shall, in case
of conviction of the accused, be entitled to
recover in the criminal action with priority over
the forfeiture in favor of the Government, the
amount of money or the thing he may have
given to the accused, or the value of such
thing.
Malversation
1. that the offender is a public officer;
2. that he had the custody or control of
funds or property by reason of the
duties of his office;
3. that those funds or property were
public funds or property for which he
was accountable; and
4. that he appropriated, took,
misappropriated or consented or,
through abandonment or negligence,
permitted another person to take them
Malversation is committed by public officer,
who being accountable for public funds or
property or by reason of the duties of his office
appropriates the same, or takes or
misappropriates or consent to the taking
thereof by other person or permits him to take
it through abandonment or negligence.
Under the Government Auditing Code of the
Philippines, an accountable public officer is a
public officer who, by reason of his office, is
accountable for public funds or property. The
Local Government Code expanded this
definition with regard to local government
officials. Section 340 of the LGC reads:
Section 340. Persons Accountable for Local
Government Funds. – Any officer of the local
government unit whose duty permits or
requires the possession or custody of local
government funds shall be accountable and
responsible for the safekeeping thereof in
conformity with the provisions of this title.
Other local officials, though not accountable by
the nature of their duties, may likewise be
similarly held accountable and responsible for
local government funds through their
participation in the use or application thereof.
PENALTY: ART. 217. Malversation of
public funds or property.— Presumption
of malversation.— Any public officer
who, by reason of the duties of his
office, is accountable for public funds or
property, shall appropriate the same, or
shall take or misappropriate or shall
consent, through abandonment or
negligence, shall permit any other
person to take such public funds or
property, wholly or partially, or shall
otherwise be guilty of the
misappropriation or malversation of such
funds or property, shall suffer:
“1. The penalty of prisión
 correccional in its medium and
maximum periods, if the amount
involved in the misappropriation or
malversation does not exceed
Forty thousand pesos (₱40,000).

“2. The penalty of prisión

mayor in its minimum and medium
periods, if the amount involved is
more than Forty thousand pesos
(₱40,000) but does not exceed
One million two hundred thousand
pesos (₱1,200,000). See RA
10951

Section 20. Exceptions. — The Office of the Ombudsman may not conduct the necessary
investigation of any administrative act or omission complained of if it believes that:
(1) The complainant has an adequate remedy in another judicial or quasi-judicial body;
(2) The complaint pertains to a matter outside the jurisdiction of the Office of the
Ombudsman;
(3) The complaint is trivial, frivolous, vexatious or made in bad faith;
(4) The complainant has no sufficient personal interest in the subject matter of the
grievance; or
(5) The complaint was filed after one (1) year from the occurrence of the act or omission
complained of.

SEC 13 OF RA 30179 RE PREVENTIVE SUSPENSION

Sec. 13. Suspension and loss of benefits. — Any incumbent public officer against whom any
criminal prosecution under a valid information under this Act or under Title 7, Book II of the
Revised Penal Code or for any offense involving fraud upon government or public funds or
property, whether as a simple or as a complex offense in whatever stage of execution and mode
of participation, is pending in court, shall be suspended from office. .

(RE: Suspension; See Segovia vs Sandiganbayan (1998)

https://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1998/mar1998/gr_124067_1998.html)

. A public officer is defined in the Revised Penal Code as "any person who, by direct provision of the
law, popular election, or appointment by competent authority, shall take part in the performance of
public functions in the Government of the Philippine Islands, or shall perform in said Government or
in any of its branches public duties as an employee, agent, or subordinate official, of any rank or
class. Constantino was the Vice-Governor of Sarangani Province, while the petitioner, Camanay,
and Diaz were occupying the positions of Executive Assistant (at the Office of the Vice-Governor),
Provincial Accountant, and Provincial Board Member, respectively.

Second, the funds misappropriated are public in character, as they were funds belonging to the
Province of Sarangani.

Third, Vice-Governor Constantino and Camanay were accountable public officers. Under the
Government Auditing Code of the Philippines, an accountable public officer is a public officer who,
by reason of his office, is accountable for public funds or property. The Local Government Code
expanded this definition with regard to local government officials. Section 340 of the LGC reads:
Section 340. Persons Accountable for Local Government Funds. – Any officer of the local
government unit whose duty permits or requires the possession or custody of local government
funds shall be accountable and responsible for the safekeeping thereof in conformity with the
provisions of this title. Other local officials, though not accountable by the nature of their duties, may
likewise be similarly held accountable and responsible for local government funds through their
participation in the use or application thereof. (Emphasis ours.)

Local government officials become accountable public officers either (1) because of the nature of
their functions; or (2) on account of their participation in the use or application of public funds.20

As a required standard procedure, the signatures of, among others, the Vice-Governor and the
Provincial Accountant are needed before any disbursement of public funds can be made. No checks
can be prepared and no payment can be effected without their signatures on a disbursement
voucher and the corresponding check. In other words, any disbursement and release of public funds
require their approval. Thus, Constantino and Camanay, in their capacities as Vice-Governor and
Provincial Accountant, had control and responsibility over the subject funds.