~uttoigulthttt!tttt -...

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

~UttOigUlthttt!ttttQuezon City

FIRST DIVISION

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,Plaintiff,

- versus - CRIM. CASE NO. SB-16-CRM-0509For: Violation of Sec. 3 (h) RA 3019,

as amended

MEYNARDO ASA SABILI,ET AL., Present:

Accused.DE LA CRUZ, J., Chairperson

ECONG, J.CALDONA, J.

Promulgated on:

SEP 2 9 2017I

X - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ - - -I - - - - - - - -x

RESOLUTION

DE LA CRUZ, J.

This resolves the Demurrer to Evidence, dated September 8,2017, of accused Meynardo Asa Sabili and Bernadette Palomares-Sabili; and the prosecution's CommenVOpposition to Accused'sDemurrer to Evidence, dated September 13,2017.

In their demurrer, the accused move for the dismissal of thecase, arguing that there is no sufficient evidence to prove that theyviolated Section 3(h) of Republic Act No. 3019, otherwise known asthe Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act, as shown by thefollowing:

i1. The alleged common-law relation between the accused is

governed by Art. 148 of the Family Code; hence, actualcontribution is the determinant factor to prove co-ownership. Therewas not a piece of evidence showing that accused Meynardo Sabilihas actually contributed money, property or industry for thepurchase and/or establishment of BPS Broadcasting. In the

RESOLUTIONpp vs. Meynardo A. Sabili, et al.Crim. Case No. SB-16-CRM-0509

of 11

x ------------------------------------------------------x

Information, accused Bernadette Palomares-Sabili was alleged asthe owner/proprietor of BPS Broadcasting, and the prosecutioneven presented a OTI Business Registration to show that it wasregistered under her name. Assuming arguendo that accusedMeynardo Sabili actually contributed, there was no evidencepresented that the purchase and/or establishment of BPSBroadcasting 'was made during the supposed period ofcohabitation. There is also no credible proof that the accused wereliving together as husband and wife.

2. By virtue of its own admission, i the prosecution isestopped from denying the ownership of accused BernadettePalomares-Sabili over BPS Broadcasting. Again, assumingarguendo that the prosecution can still renege on its admission, theentirety of the evidence for the prosecution, both documentary andtestimonial, dismally failed to show that accused Meynardo Sabilihas any direct pecuniary/financial interest over BPS Broadcasting.

3. Conspiracy was not proven to the point of moral certaintybecause no offense was committed, and no evidence supports theallegation. No direct or circumstantial evidence was presented toshow conspiracy, which must be established independently andseparately from the crime itself.

4. The prosecution's witness, Ooroteo Rosales, who was theCity Treasurer and a member of the BAC, absolved accusedMeynardo Sabili of any influence/participation in the negotiationstage of the live streaming services before the contract wasconcluded. Accused Meynardo Sabili's act of signing the contractand the voucher was a ministerial act pursuant to his duty underRA 7160 as chief executive. Following the ruling in Caballero v.Sandiganbayan,1 what is contemplated in Section 3(h) of RA 3019is the actual intervention in the transaction in which one hasfinancial or pecuniary interest in order that liability may attach.What the law aims to prevent is the dominant use of influence,authority and power.

By way of comment/opposition, the prosecution maintainsthat it was able to prove the guilt of the accused beyondreasonable doubt. It contends that at the time of the execution ofthe subject contract, the accused were living together as husband1 .

G.R. No. 137355-58, September 25, 2007

RESOLUTIONpp vs. Meynardo A. Sabi/i, et al.Crim. Case No. SB-16-CRM-0509,

of 11

)( - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - )(

and wife, as affirmed by witnesses and as shown by thedeclarations of the accused in the birth certificates of their commonchildren. Accused Bernadette Palornares-Sabili likewise admittedin an affidavit earlier submitted to the COMELEC that the housethey live in was paid for by accused Meynardo Sabili albeitregistered under her name. Accused Meynardo Sabili made thesame admission in Sabili v. COMELEG. 2 According to theprosecution, such admissions prove that the accused, as common-law spouses, eo-mingle their funds and co-own their properties.They are also estopped from claiming otherwise. Having provedthe accused's common-law relationship prior to the execution ofthe contract, the prosecution argues that it has undoubtedly provedthat accused Meynardo Sabili had a pecuniary interest in thesubject contract.

The prosecution also contends that the property regime ofthe accused should be covered under Article 147 of the FamilyCode considering that the marriage between accused Bernadetteand Jose Bernardo, Jr. was void from the beginning. As such, allproperties acquired while the accused were living together shall bepresumed to have been obtained by their joint efforts, work orindustry, and shall be owned by them in equal shares. Evengranting that Art. 148 applies, the contributions and correspondingshares of the accused are still presumed. Finally, even grantingthat Art. 147 does not apply in January 2012, or the start of thecontract, the provision applies after February 21, 2012 when themarriage of accused Bernadette to Jose was declared void abinitio.

The demurrer to evidence is impressed with merit.

A demurrer to evidence is an objection by one of the partiesin an action, to the effect that the evidence which his adversaryproduced is insufficient in point of law, whether true or not, to makeout a case or sustain the issue." It is filed by the accused after theprosecution rests its case."

The accused stand charged for violation of Section 3(h), RA3019, in an Information the accusatory portion of which reads:

2 G.R. No. 193261, April 24, 20123 Singian, Jr. v. Sandiganbayan (3'd Division), G.R. Nos.195011-19, September 30,20134 Section 23, Rule 119, Rules of Court

RESOLUTIONpp vs. Meynardo A. Sabili, et al.

I

Crim. Case No. SB-16-CRM-0509

of 11Ix -----------1------------------------------------------x

That on or about January 6, 2012, in Lipa City and withinthe jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, accused Meynardo AsaSabili, a high-ranking public officer, being then the Mayor of LipaCity (SG 27), a local and government unit, committing the crimeherein charged in relation to his office and while in theperformance and taking advantage of his official functions,conspiring and confederating with and with full consent of theaccused Bernadette Palomares-Sabili, a private individual andowner/proprietor of BPS Broadcasting and Media Services andthe former's common-law wife at the time, did then and there,wilfully, unlawfully and criminally have a direct financial orpecuniary interest in the broadcast contract entered into by LipaCity and BPS Broadcasting and Media Services to air the radioprogram called May Aasahang Serbisyo from January 7 toDecember 31, 2012, a transaction in connection with whichaccused Sabili takes part in his official capacity, by then and therecausing the payment of a monthly fee of P30,OOO.00 orP360,OOO.OOfor one year to BPS Broadcasting and MediaServices.

CONTRARY TO LAW.

Section 3(h) of RA 3019 provides:

Section 3. Corrupt practices of public officers. - Inaddition to acts or omissions of public officers already penalizedby existing law, the following shall constitute corrupt practices ofany public 'officer and are hereby declared to be unlawful:

xxx

(h) Directly or indirectly having financial or pecuniaryinterest in any business, contract or transaction in connection withwhich he intervenes or takes part in his official capacity, or inwhich he .is prohibited by the Constitution or by any law fromhaving any interest.

To constitute a violation of Section 3(h) of RA 3019, thefollowing essential elements must be proved:

1. The accused is a public officer;

2. : He has a direct or indirect financial or pecuniaryinterest in any business, contract, or transaction; and

RESOLUTIONpp vs. Meynardo A. Sabili, et al.Grim. Gase No. SB-16-GRM-0509

of 11

)( - - - - - - - - - - - r - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - )(!I

3. He either a) intervenes or takes part in his officialcapacity in connection with such interest; or b) is prohibited fromhaving sucr interest by the Constitution or by any law.5

Upon arraignment, the accused separately pleaded "NotGuilty" to the charge against them.

At the pre-trial," the parties stipulated that accused MeynardoAsa Sabili wa:s the City Mayor of Lipa, Batangas at the timematerial to this case, and that BPS Broadcasting and MediaServices is registered under the name of accused BernadettePalomares-Sabili.

The prosecution presented as witnesses Sir Ryan AnthonyDonciela Amad, Dominador B. Honrade and Doroteo P. Rosales,whose testimonies are summarized below.

Sir Ryan Anthony Donciela Arnad.' a Statistical Analystdesignated as Prosecutor Investigator of the Legal Service of thePhilippines Statistics Authority (PSA).

Amad identified the following exhibits to be the samedocuments issued by the PSA: Certificate of Marriage between theaccused, Certificates of Live Birth of Francis Meynard PalomaresSabili and Mey Bernadette Sabili, and Marriage Contract betweenaccused Bernadette and Jose Bernardo, Jr.

Dominador B. Honrade," Barangay Chairman of Brgy.Pinagtung-ulan, Lipa City, Batangas.

Honrade testified that he had known the accused since 2002as the latter bought a house and lot in their barangay. The accusedand their children live in said house, and neither accused lived withanother partner. He also testified that accused Meynardo workedas a broker and a consultant, while accused Bernadette works withthe City of Lipa since accused Meynardo became mayor. Honradedoes not know whether accused Bernadette was employed prior toaccused Meynardo becoming a mayor.

5 Teves v. Sandiganbayan, December 17, 2004, 447 SeRA 309, 323-3246 Records, Vel I., pp. 427 TSN, August 1, 20178 TSN, August 1, 2017 I


of 11I

)( - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - )(I

During cross-examination, Honrade admitted that hesupports the Spouses Senator Ralph Recto and Vilma Santos,allegedly political opponents of accused Meynardo. Honradelikewise admitted that he does not know the personalcircumstances ·of accused Bernadette, such as her marriage toanother man.

Doroteo P. Rosales," the City Treasurer of Lipa City,Batangas at the time material to the case.

Rosales testified that he approved a disbursement voucherfor the payment of BPS Broadcasting and Media Services (BPSBroadcasting) sometime in December 2012, in relation to a RadioBroadcast Contract between the City of Lipa and BPSBroadcasting. BPS Broadcasting was paid for the whole duration ofthe contract from January to December 2012. Rosales testified thataccused Meynardo was a signatory to the contract and thevoucher.

During cross-examination, Rosales admitted that accusedMeynardo has nothing to do with the mode of procurement or thenegotiation process of the subject contract. Rosales explained thatit was the City Treasurer's Office that requested to have BPSBroadcasting for the implementation of the city's programs andactivities. The request was approved by the City Executive andwas thereafter endorsed to the BAC. He also testified that whenaccused Meynardo Sabili married his eo-accused BernadetteSabili, the subject contract was ordered cancelled.

On September 5, 2017, the prosecution formally offered inopen court its documentary exhibits, all of which the Court admittedin evidence: 10

Exhibit Description

D

-Radio Broadcast Contract-Disbursement Voucher No. 13843-12-12 dated December 4,2012-Official Receipt No. 0270 datedDecember 20, 2012

BC

9 TSN, September 4,201710 .

Records, Vol. 11, p. 111

RESOLUTIONpp vs. Meynardc A. Sabili, et al.Crim. Case No. SB-16-CRM-0509

of 11

)( - - - - - - - - - - - ~- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - )(

E -Certificate of Marriage of MeynardoAsa Sabili and BernadettePalomares

F -Certificate of Live Birth of FrancisMeynard Palomares Sabili

G -Certificate of Live Birth of MeyBernadette Palomares Sabili

H -Marriage Contract of Jose Bernardo,Jr. and Bernadette D. Palomares-Petition for Declaration of AbsoluteNullity of Marriage of Bernadette D.Palomares-Bernardo and Jose M.Bernardo, Jr.

T -Decision in Civil Case No. 4972-11,dated February 21,2012

J -Affidavit of Bernadette Palomares,dated December 16, 2009

K -Affidavit of Leonila G. Suarez, datedDecember 16, 2009

M -Affidavit of Rosalinda L. Macasaet,dated December 16, 2009

o -Affidavit of Jacinto Honrade Cornejo,Sr., dated December 16, 2009

R -DTI Certificate of Business NameRegistration for BPS Broadcasting &Media Services dated September30,2010

The core issue for resolution in this case is whether or not atthe time material to the case accused Meynardo had a direct orindirect financial or pecuniary interest in the radio broadcastcontract entered into by the City of Lipa, represented by him as itsmayor, with BPS Broadcasting, owned by accused Bernadette.

To prove that accused Meynardo had financial or pecuniaryinterest over BPS Broadcasting, the prosecution presenteddocuments and witnesses, all alluding to the fact of cohabitationbetween the two accused, prior to and at the time of the executionof the subject contract. The prosecution maintains that BPSBroadcasting should be presumed to have been obtained byaccused's joint efforts, work or industry, and shall be owned bythem in equal shares.


of 11

x ------------------------------------------------------x

Upon an assiduous review of the evidence presented by theprosecution, the Court finds, and so holds, that the prosecutionfailed to establish that accused Meynardo had direct or indirectfinancial or pecuniary interest in the subject broadcast outfit.

It is not disputed that at the time of the execution of thebroadcast contract in January 2012, the accused were not yetmarried to each other. Admittedly, accused Bernadette had, at thattime, a legally subsisting marriage with one Jose Bernardo, Jr.Having been incapacitated to marry each other, the accused'sproperty regime shall be governed by Art. 148 of the Family Code,which provides:

Art 148. In cases of cohabitation [wherein the parties areincapacitated to marry each other], only the properties acquiredby both of the parties through their actual joint contribution ofmoney, property, or industry shall be owned by them in commonin proportion to their respective contributions. In the absence ofproof to the contrary, their contributions and correspondingshares are presumed to be equal. The same rule andpresumption shall apply to joint deposits of money and evidencesof credit.

xxx

Under this regime, only the properties acquired by both of theparties through their actual joint contribution of money, property orindustry shall be owned by them in common in proportion to theirrespective contributions. Proof of actual contribution is required."Without proof of actual contribution from either or both spouses,there can be 'no eo-ownership under Article 148 of the FamilyCode." Hence, properties under this regime can be consideredcommon property only if: (1) these were acquired during thecohabitation; and (2) there is evidence that the properties wereacquired through the parties' actual joint contribution of money,property, or industry."

Instead df presenting evidence to prove accused Meynardo'sactual contribution to BPS Broadcasting, the prosecution focusedsolely on establishing that the accused were cohabiting prior to the

11 Atienza v. De Castra, November 29,2006,508 SeRA 59312 Go-Bangayan v. Bangayan, Ir., July 3, 2013, 700 SeRA 702, 72213 Ventura, Jr. v. Spouses Abuda, October 23, 2013, 708 SeRA 640, 650

RESOLUTIONpp vs. Meynardo A. Sabili, et al.Grim. Gase No. S'8-16-GRM-0509

of 11

)( - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - )(

execution of 'the contract. However, pursuant to law andjurisprudence, even if it can be shown that the accused indeedcohabited and lived together as husband and wife, there must beproof of accused Meynardo's actual contribution to BPSBroadcasting in order to conclude that it is in fact co-owned by theaccused. Failing to demonstrate accused Meynardo's actualcontribution and establish the accused's co-ownership over BPSBroadcasting, the prosecution was unable to hurdle the burden ofproving that accused Meynardo had a direct or indirect pecuniaryinterest over the subject contract.

Moreover, the documents presented by the prosecutionnegate the allegation of co-ownership between the accused. It isnot disputed that BPS Broadcasting was registered solely underthe name of accused Bernadette. While the accused representedthemselves in the birth certificates of their children as havingmarried in 1980 and 1983, respectively, the same cannot beconstrued as proof of their marriage considering that accusedBernadette's marriage with Jose was declared void ab initio only in2012. Moreover, the records show that the accused got marriedonly on September 28, 2012. Such change in relations betweenthe accused required BPS Broadcasting to return to the citygovernment, which it did, the payment received for the months ofOctober to December 2012.

Having failed to overcome the constitutional presumption ofinnocence of the accused, the Court is constrained to GRANT theaccused's demurrer to evidence.

WHEREFORE, in light of all the foregoing, the Court herebyGRANTS the Demurrer to Evidence, dated September 8, 2017, ofaccused Meynardo Asa Sabili and Bernadette Palomares-Sabili,and hereby renders judgment in Criminal Case No. SB-16-CRM-0509, finding said accused NOT GUlL TV, and are herebyACQUITTED, .for failure of the prosecution to prove their guiltbeyond reasonable doubt.

In view of the acquittal of the accused, the Resolution, datedSeptember 8, 2017, ordering the suspension pendente lite ofaccused Meynardo Asa Sabili is hereby LIFTED and SET ASIDEand is considered to be without force and effect.

RESOLUTIONpp vs. Meynardo A. Sabili, et al.Grim. Gase No. S8-16-GRM-0509

of 11

X ------------:-------------------------------------------X

Considering that the act or omission from which the civilliability might arise did not exist, no civil liability may be assessedagainst the accused.

The hold-departure order issued by this Court against thesaid accused-movants is likewise hereby LIFTED and SET ASIDE,and the bonds they posted for their provisional liberty orderedRELEASED, subject to the usual accounting and auditingprocedures.

SO ORDERED.

EFREN ~ ~ LA CRUZchairpers~~fociate Justice

WE CONCUR:

1Lwl~ wAb. ~GERALDINE FAITH A. ECONG

Associate Justice

~~M lilt· 0tc1~,'t1t:JPARDO A. CALo'O~

Associate Justice

RESOLUTIONpp vs. Meynardo- A. Sabili, et al.Crim. Case No. SB-16-CRM-0509

of 11

)( - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - )(

ATTESTATION

I attest that the conclusions in the above resolution werereached in consultation before the case was assigned to the writerof the opinion of the Court's Division.

EFREN ~ f:'d LA CRUZChairper~¥.~rst Division

CERTIFICATION

Pursuant'to Article VIII, Section 13, of the Constitution, andthe Division Chairperson's Attestation, it is hereby certified that theconclusions in the above resolution were reached in consultationbefore the case was assigned to the writer of the opinion of theCourt's Division.

MPARO M. AJE-Presiding Justice

~uttoigulthttt!tttt -...

Documents