A LAWYER’S oversight nearly sent a former official of the Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD) straight to prison for 24 to 34 years for losing her chance to appeal her conviction for graft and malversation of public funds.
Former DSWD chief accountant Leonila Hayahay has been allowed by the Sandiganbayan to elevate her cases to the Supreme Court to challenge the May 27, 2022 decision of the anti-graft court’s Third Division convicting her and former DSWD undersecretary Mateo Montaño of two counts of violation of Section 3 (e) of RA 3019 and one charge of malversation.
The cases involved alleged irregularities in the utilization of P9.4 million government fund from the Priority Development Assistance Fund allocations of former North Cotabato Rep. Gregorio Ipong in 2007.
Prosecutors said the amount was supposed to fund projects for the poor and marginalized sectors of North Cotabato’s second legislative district through medical missions, health materials, and distribution of medicines.
Records showed the money was first released to the DSWD before being transferred to the Economic and Social Cooperation for Local Development Foundation Inc. (Ecosoc), the chosen non-government organization (NGO) partner.
On-site verifications by Ombudsman graft investigators, however, revealed that majority of the supposed beneficiaries did not receive any assistance. This was supported by certifications and affidavits from city, municipal and barangay officials.
Inquiry into Ecosoc’s background disclosed that the NGO had no financial capability to undertake multi-million-peso projects because it only had P56,000 in capital.
The identified supplier of medicines, Ace Pharmaceuticals, likewise denied engaging in any business transaction with Ecosoc.
In the assailed decision, Hayahay and Montaño were sentenced to six to eight years for each graft case or and 12 to 18 years for the malversation charge.
Hayahay’s motion for reconsideration seeking reversal of her conviction was denied on July 22, 2022.
But instead of filing a notice of appeal as required under the Revised Internal Rules of the Sandiganbayan, her lawyers filed a motion before the Supreme Court asking for extension of time to file a petition for review on certiorari.
On Sept. 8, 2022, the defense lawyers realized their mistake and filed a notice of appeal (with explanation and apology) in which they owned up to the mistake.
The Sandiganbayan initially barred any more appeal from Hayahay, noting that the 15-day deadline for the filing of her notice of appeal expired on Aug. 10, 2022.
It held that the period for appeal having expired, the assailed decision and resolution had already attained finality.
But in a separate resolution dated Jan. 29, 2024, the anti-graft court set aside its 2023 ruling and accepted the notice of appeal as well as the apologies of the defense counsel.
It acknowledged that the defendant’s intention to appeal and assert her innocence had been “clear and unmistakable” from the moment she was convicted.
At the same time, the court noted the admission of mistake on the part of her lawyers and the absence of any indication that she did anything contributory to the loss of her right to appeal.
“In the present case, we characterize the mistake of Hayahay’s counsels as regards the choice of the mode of appeal to be gross and reckless, owing to the grave consequences of an error regarding this matter, that is, the loss of liberty without being able to exercise the right to appeal,” the Sandiganbayan said.
