Sandiganbayan acquits former Dumanjug mayor of graft

The Sandiganbayan has acquitted former Dumanjug, Cebu mayor Efren Gica of graft, malversation, and falsification charges over the alleged tampering of a restaurant receipt.

In a 36-page decision promulgated on December 9, the Sandiganbayan Fourth Division cleared Gica of the charges for the violation of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act, falsification, and malversation under the Revised Penal Code due to the failure of the prosecution to prove his guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

“No civil liability is hereby adjudged, there being no basis therefor,” the Court said.

“Let the Hold Departure Order issued against the accused by reason of these cases be lifted and set aside, and their bonds released, subject to the usual accounting and auditing procedures,” it added.

The case stemmed from the complaint accusing Gica of falsifying a restaurant receipt to make it appear that the dinner for the Association of Local Budget Officers seminar in Cebu cost P21,435 when it only cost P11,435.

However, the Court said the prosecution was unable to establish that Gica made an untruthful statement and made alterations or intercalation to the purchase order and liquidation report.

According to the Court, the prosecution provided the falsified receipt as evidence.

“While the rule is that public documents are admissible in evidence even without further proof of their due execution and genuineness, the documents subject of the instant information were offered not as authentic but falsified public documents,” it said.

“Thus, the basis for dispensing with the authentication of public documents does not hold true for public documents assailed as falsified,” it added.

Further, it said that the allegation of falsification was anchored in the statement of the restaurant branch manager. However, the Court said the branch manager was never presented as a witness in the cases.

The Court also said that the receipt offered does not clearly show the alleged intercalation made.

“[T]he Court finds that the element of evident bad faith is absent. It was not proven based on the evidence presented that the pertinent documents were indeed falsified,” it said.—AOL, GMA Integrated News