THE Sandiganbayan has affirmed the December 16, 2021 decision of a trial court convicting a former municipal treasurer of Pagsanjan, Laguna of malversation of public funds and sentencing him to an imprisonment of four years and nine months to seven years and four months and imposing a fine in the sum of P493,529.31.
Associate Justice Rafael R. Lagos, chairperson of the Fifth Division of the Laguna regional trial court, penned the 17-page ruling with the concurrence of Associate Justices Maria Theresa V. Mendoza Arcega and Maryann E. Corpus-Mañalac.
Based on the assailed RTC decision, accused Elizalde Gabaleño was found guilty of embezzling P483,529.31 public funds representing shortage in his collections as determined by government auditors.
Prosecutors presented the testimonies of State Auditors Rebecca Ciriaco and Nora Federizo that they discovered the missing amount in the General Fund, Special Education Fund, and Trust Fund under the defendant’s custody by comparing the records of official receipts and comparing these with Gabaleño’s remittances to the municipal government’s official account with the Land Bank of the Philippines.
In his defense, the accused claimed that he was robbed at gunpoint while riding a passenger jeepney on his way to deposit his collections but did not report the incident out of fear for his life.
He said the two robbers threatened to shoot him if he tells other people about what happened. He added that he suspected that there was an informant among his co-workers.
To replace the amount lost, he said he resigned from his post in the hope that his separation benefits would be enough to cover what was stolen. However, he failed to restore the sum when the amount he was expecting was withheld by the municipal government.
The court gave little weight to the defendant’s tale in the absence of any record to support his narrative since he did not report the robbery to the police, his superiors, or filed a request for relief of liability.
In his appeal, Gabaleño argued that the prosecution relied only on the testimony of state auditors but failed to prove by direct evidence that there was a shortage in his collections and by how much.
The Sandiganbayan however pointed out that the accused had already confirmed that he was the officer-in-charge (OIC) of the Municipal Treasurer’s Office during the time material to the case, hence he was an accountable officer who had official custody of government funds.
“In this case, the prosecution was able to establish and prove that accused-appellant failed to return the audited cash shortage upon demand,” the court said.
It sustained the prosecution’s position that the prima facie presumption of malversation applies where the burden of evidence is shifted to the accused to adequately explain the whereabouts of the funds or property under his custody to disprove that he appropriated the missing funds for himself.
