Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 26 views

    People v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 167304, August 25, 2009

    Uploaded by

    Majesticity Tax and Accounting Services
    The Sandiganbayan has jurisdiction over a case involving a Sangguniang Panlungsod member accused of failing to liquidate cash advances from the city government. The Sandiganbayan has jurisdiction over cases involving certain public officials, including city mayors and members of the sangguniang panlungsod, where crimes are committed in relation to their office. Here, the alleged crime of failing to liquidate cash advances was committed in relation to the respondent's office as a Sangguniang Panlungsod member. Therefore, the Sandiganbayan properly had jurisdiction over the case.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    People v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 167304, August 25, 2009

    Uploaded by

    Majesticity Tax and Accounting Services
    26 views1 page
    The Sandiganbayan has jurisdiction over a case involving a Sangguniang Panlungsod member accused of failing to liquidate cash advances from the city government. The Sandiganbayan has jurisdiction over cases involving certain public officials, including city mayors and members of the sangguniang panlungsod, where crimes are committed in relation to their office. Here, the alleged crime of failing to liquidate cash advances was committed in relation to the respondent's office as a Sangguniang Panlungsod member. Therefore, the Sandiganbayan properly had jurisdiction over the case.

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The Sandiganbayan has jurisdiction over a case involving a Sangguniang Panlungsod member accused of failing to liquidate cash advances from the city government. The Sandiganbayan has jurisdiction over cases involving certain public officials, including city mayors and members of the sangguniang panlungsod, where crimes are committed in relation to their office. Here, the alleged crime of failing to liquidate cash advances was committed in relation to the respondent's office as a Sangguniang Panlungsod member. Therefore, the Sandiganbayan properly had jurisdiction over the case.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    26 views1 page

    People v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 167304, August 25, 2009

    Uploaded by

    Majesticity Tax and Accounting Services
    The Sandiganbayan has jurisdiction over a case involving a Sangguniang Panlungsod member accused of failing to liquidate cash advances from the city government. The Sandiganbayan has jurisdiction over cases involving certain public officials, including city mayors and members of the sangguniang panlungsod, where crimes are committed in relation to their office. Here, the alleged crime of failing to liquidate cash advances was committed in relation to the respondent's office as a Sangguniang Panlungsod member. Therefore, the Sandiganbayan properly had jurisdiction over the case.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    People v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No.

    167304, August 25, 2009


    FACTS:
    Petitioner Victoria Amante, was a member of the Sangguniang Panlungsod of Toledo City,
    Province of Cebu at the time pertinent to this case, has been accused of violating Section 89 of
    P.D. No. 1445 by having obtained cash advances from the City Government of Toledo in the total
    amount of SEVENTY-ONE THOUSAND NINETY-FIVE PESOS (₱71,095.00), Philippine Currency,
    which she received by reason of her office, for which she is duty-bound to liquidate the same
    within the period required by law, with deliberate intent and intent to gain, did then and there,
    wilfully, unlawfully and criminally fail to liquidate said cash advances of ₱71,095.00, Philippine
    Currency, despite demands to the damage and prejudice of the government in aforesaid
    amount.

    ISSUE:
    Whether or not the Sandiganbayan has jurisdiction over a case involving a Sangguniang
    Panlungsod member where the crime charged is one committed in relation to office.

    RULING:
    Yes. The Sandiganbayan has jurisdiction over her, as stated in Section 4. Jurisdiction. – The
    Sandiganbayan shall have jurisdiction over:
    Sec. 4. Jurisdiction. -- The Sandiganbayan shall exercise original jurisdiction in all cases
    involving:
    A. Violations of Republic Act No. 3019, as amended, otherwise known as the
    Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act, Republic Act No. 1379, and Chapter II,
    Section 2, Title VII of the Revised Penal Code, where one or more of the
    principal accused are officials occupying the following positions in the
    government, whether in a permanent, acting or interim capacity, at the time of
    the commission of the offense:
    xxx
    (b) City mayors, vice-mayors, members of the sangguniang panlungsod,
    city treasurers, assessors, engineers, and other city department heads.
    B. Other offenses or felonies, whether simple or complexed with other crimes
    committed by the public officials and employees mentioned in subsection (a) of
    this section in relation to their office.

    The respondent is a Sangguniang Panlungsod member, a position with salary grade '26'. Her
    office is included in the enumerated public officials in Section 4(a) (1) (a) to (g) of P.D. No. 1606
    as amended by Section 2 of R.A. No. 7975. However, she is charged with violation of Section 89
    of The Auditing Code of the Philippines which falls under Section 4(b) of R.A. 8249 which states
    that “Other offenses or felonies whether simple or complexed with other crimes committed by
    the public officials and employees mentioned in subsection a of this section in relation to their
    office“. An offense is said to have been committed in relation to the office if the offense is
    “intimately connected” with the office of the offender and perpetrated while she was in the
    performance of her official functions.

    The petition was hereby granted and the Resolution of the Sandiganbayan (Third Division) dated
    February 28, 2005 is NULLIFIED and SET ASIDE. Consequently, let the case be REMANDED to the
    Sandiganbayan for further proceedings.

    You might also like