Module 5

SIQUIAN v PEOPLE March 13, 1989 | Cortes, J. J . | Falsification of public documents PETITIONER : Manuel L. i!uian RESPONDENTS: "he #eople of the #hilippines, and "he Court of $ppeals SUMMARY: i!uian appointed Jesusa Carreon as a cler% in the office of the municipal secretar&, sa&in' that her salar& (ould be included in the bud'et. )pon her appointment, a certification of the a*ailabilit& of funds (as issued b& i!uian and addressed to the CC. +o(e*er, it must be noted that the municipal council of sabela failed to enact the annual bud'et for the pre*ious Fiscal -ear  19/019 19/019. . 2o position position for cler% in the office of municipal municipal secretar& (as a*ailable. Carreon (or%ed for / months but did not recei*e her salar& of 14  pesos, e*en upon approachin' the municipal treasurer. i!uian (as found 'uilt& of falsification of public documents. $ll the elements for falsification (ere met especiall& (hen i!uian stated that funds (ere a*ailable for the position to (hich Jesusa Carreon (as appointed (hen he %ne( that, in realit&, the position itself did not e*en e5ist and no funds had been appropriated. DOCTRINE: "he elements of falsificati falsification on of public public documents documents are: 6a7 "hat the offender ma%es in a document untruthful statements in a narration of facts 6b7 that he has a le'al obli'ation to disclose the truth of the facts narrated b& him and 6c7 that the facts narrated b& the offender are absolutel& false.

ISSUES: 1. F?;>, the appealed decision bein' in conformit& (ith la( and settled settled urisprud urisprudence, ence, the same is $FF;M>@ $FF;M>@ and the instant petition is hereb& @>2>@. RATIO:

1.

.

3.

.

FACTS: 1. Jesusa Carreon Carreon (ent (ent to the office office of of Manuel Manuel i!uian, i!uian, the municip municipal al ma&or  of sabela, to appl& for a ob in the office of the ma&or. . i!uian i!uian then appoi appointed nted her her as a cler% in the the office office of the municipa municipall secretar& secretar& and e*en said that her salar& (ould be included in the bud'et. 3. $ccompan&in $ccompan&in' ' her appointmen appointmentt is the certificat certification, ion, amon' amon' others, others, of the the a*ailabilit& of funds throu'h a form issued b& i!uian and addressed to the CC, pursuant to the re!uirements of the latter. . t should should be noted noted that the the Municipal Municipal council council of sabela sabela,, failed to enact enact the annual bud'et for the municipalit& for the Fiscal -ear 19/0. /. $s such, the annual annual bud'et bud'et for the pre*iou pre*iouss Fiscal Fiscal -ear -ear 190/ 190/,, (as deemed re0enacted. 2o such position e5isted then. . Carreon Carreon (or%ed (or%ed for fi*e fi*e months months and (as (as supposed supposed to recei*e recei*e her her salar& of  of  #14. he approached the municipal treasurer to as% for the mone& but the latter latter said that that there there (as no mone& mone& &et. &et. he then sued i!uia i!uian n for  falsification of a public document. . "he ;"C ;"C and C$ ruled ruled in fa*our fa*our of Carreon. Carreon. i!uian i!uian interpo interposed sed the defense defense of a lac% of criminal intent.

/.

.

.

8. 9.

+e (as found found 'uilt& under under par  of art art 11, Ama%in' Ama%in' untruthf untruthful ul statements statements in a narration narration of factsB the elements of (hich are: 6a7 "hat the offender  offender  ma%es in a document untruthful statements in a narration of facts 6b7 that he has a le'al obli'ation to disclose the truth of the facts narrated b& him and 6c7 that the facts narrated b& the offender are absolutel& false. n this case, case, all the elemen elements ts for falsific falsificati ation on (ere met especia especiall& ll& (hen (hen i!uian stated that funds (ere a*ailable for the position to (hich Jesusa Carreon (as appointed (hen he %ne( that, in realit&, the position itself did not e*en e5ist and no funds had been appropriated. t is further further bolst bolstered ered b& the the fact that that (hen the bud'e bud'ett (as deemed deemed re0 enacted, there is no such position as Cler% to the Municipal ecretar&, the  position to (hich Carreon (as appointed. $nd $nd there is also no appropriation made in the $nnual ud'et for the Fiscal -ear 190/ for such position, thus renderin' i!uianDs statement in his certification utterl& false. i!uia i!uian n also had the le'al le'al obli'at obli'ation ion to disclo disclose se the truth truth of such such facts. facts. )nder )nder the ci*il ci*il ser*ic ser*icee rules rules and re'ula re'ulatio tions, ns, a certifi certificat cation ion of the a*ailabilit& of funds for the position to be filled up is re!uired to be si'ned  b& the head of office or an& officer (ho has been dele'ated the authorit& to si'n. $s an officer officer authorise authorised d b& la( to issue issue the certificat certification, ion, i!uian i!uian has has a le'al obli'a obli'atio tion n to disclose disclose the truth truth of the facts narrated narrated b& him in said certification (hich includes information as to the a*ailabilit& of the funds for the position bein' filled up. +e also too% too% ad*anta'e ad*anta'e of his his official official position position in falsif& falsif&in' in' the documen document. t. $buse of public office is considered present (hen the offender falsifies a document in connection (ith the duties of his office (hich consist of either  ma%in' ma%in' or preparin' preparin' or other(ise other(ise inter*enin' inter*enin' in the preparation preparation of a document. n this case, i!uian (as char'ed (ith the dut& of issuin' the certification necessar& for the appointment of Carreon. Lastl& Lastl&,, the e5istenc e5istencee of a (ron'ful (ron'ful intent intent to inure inure a third third person person is not necessar& (hen the falsified document is a public document. "he C relied on the Eo "io% case in statin' that (ron'ful intent on the part of an accused to inure inure a third third person person is not an essential essential element element of the crime of  falsification of public document. "his is because because the principal principal thin' thin' punished punished in falsif& falsif&in' in' public public documents documents is the *iolation of the public faith and the destruction of truth. i!uian i!uian cannot cannot use the the defence defence of 'ood 'ood faith. faith. +e (as full& full& a(are of of the fact

that there (as no bud'et nor an open position for the cler% of the municipal secretar&.

Nizurtado v. Sandian!a"an @ec , 199 | ")E, J. | PETITIONER : Feli5 2iGurtado RESPONDENTS: andi'anba&an and #eople of the #hilippines SUMMARY: $ccused (as a aran'a& Captain (as 'i*en #14,444 supposedl& used for the aran'a& Li*elihood #ro'ram (hich the HHH ecratariat (ould appro*e, selected from the modules de*eloped b& HHH. nstead, he loaned the mone& out to himself and other council members in the amount of #/44 and #1444. +e induced the aran'a& "reasurer to si'n the unaccomplished resolution indicatin' that the mone& (as appro*ed and (as to be used for a " hirt Manufacturin' proect.

FACTS: 1. nformation accused Feli5 2iGurtado of ha*in' committed C?M#L>I C;M> of mal*ersation of public funds throu'h falsification of public documents . @ RATIO: olEen a'rees (ith andi'anba&an in all aspects e5cept that he committed the • crime of falsification of a public document, ho(e*er the court ruled that )2L> the findin's of fact of the andi'anba&an are bereft of substantial e*idence, the findin's are 2@2E on this court. >lements of Mal*ersation 6art 17 6all elements (ere satisfied, hence, 'uilt&7 • o ?ffender is a public officer o Custod& or control of funds b& reason of his office o Funds in*ol*ed are public funds for (hich he is accountable o +e has misappropriated, or consented to, or throu'h abandonment or ne'li'ence permitted the ta%in' b& another person of such funds "here could be no ustification in loanin' the said funds to council members as • these (ere not amon' the modules in (hich the HH H ecretariat could select *en more so, the 'ain or dama'e is not necessar&

?fficials of both or'aniGations entered into a mer'er a'reement and si'ned the $rticles of ncorporation of a ne( mer'ed or'aniGation called the 5aana Con&o%idat$d Arra&tr$ St$v$dorin S$rvi'$&/ In' . B5CASSI

and Liabilities of the a'an'a Consolidated $rrastre0te*edorin' er*ices, nc., b& then and there for'in' and simulatin', the si'nature of the treasurer thereof, altaGar #a'aduan, thus ma%in' it appear that the said document (as made, prepared and si'ned b& the said #a'aduan, thereb& attributin' to the latter participation and inter*ention in the ma%in' and preparation of said document •

altaGar #a'aduan (as a member and its mana'er since 19

o

•

#a'aduan (as elected "reasurer 

$fter the e5ecution of the $rticles of ncorporation and the "reasurerDs $ffida*it, the accused brou'ht to Manila these papers, as (ell as the sum of #,/44.44 on the paid0up capital and #/44.44 for filin' fees, for the re'istration of the ne( corporation (ith the ecurities and >5chan'e Commission 6>C7. o

@urin' the process of its re'istration, the accused accomplished and si'ned an information sheet and an underta%in' to chan'e the corporate name in the e*ent that another person, firm or entit& has ac!uired a prior ri'ht to use the same or one similar to it.

o

+e also (rote a promise to submit the "$2 6"a5 $ccount

 2umber7 of his brother, Mel!uiades 6should be Clemente7 Cauban'.

?riental and to put out of business the compan&. 

o

"he corporation (as re'istered (ith the >C (hich issued a Certificate of ;e'istration recei*ed b& the accused (ho  brou'ht and hand0carried the same to @a*ao ?riental.

(ith pendin' char'es (ill be remo*ed from office  RTC  •

•

•

For failure to recei*e #/44.44 as initial pa&ment of subscription from each of the incorporators e5cept olomon aa and himself, #a'aduan claimed to ha*e announced to Mel!uiades Cauban', Clemente Cauban' and Federico "e*es, that the mer'er (ill not  push throu'h. o

#a'aduan said that he left the si'ned "reasurerDs $ffida*it (ith the accused and (as surprised to learn later that the proposed mer'er (as alread& re'istered (ith the >C.

CA •

Ru%in:  C$ affirmed Ratio:

+e also supposedl& e5ecuted and si'ned a tatement of $ssets

$ccused0appellant denies ha*in' been the one (ho personall&

•

(ent to and handed o*er the documents before the >C, but instead claims it (as his associate. •