People v. Alas
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: Two separate informations for violation of Section 3(e) of Republic Act No. 3019 (Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act) were filed against Efren L. Alas, in his capacity as President and Chief Operating Officer of the Philippine Postal Savings Bank (PPSB). The charges stemmed from alleged anomalous advertising contracts entered into by Alas, which purportedly caused damage and prejudice to the government. Procedural History: Respondent Efren L. Alas filed a motion to quash the informations, arguing that the Sandiganbayan lacked jurisdiction because the PPSB was a private corporation and its officers were not public officers. The Sandiganbayan granted the motion, ruling that PPSB was organized under the Corporation Code and not by special law, thus its officers were not covered by the Sandiganbayan's jurisdiction. The Petition: The People of the Philippines, through the Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP), filed a petition for certiorari, arguing that the Sandiganbayan has jurisdiction over officers of government-owned or controlled corporations (GOCCs) organized under the Corporation Code, as defined under Section 2(13) of the Administrative Code of 1987 and RA 8249.
Issue(s)
Whether the Sandiganbayan has jurisdiction over presidents, directors or trustees, or managers of government-owned or controlled corporations organized and incorporated under the Corporation Code for purposes of the provisions of RA 3019. Whether the Philippine Postal Savings Bank (PPSB) is a government-owned or controlled corporation whose officers fall under the jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan.
Ruling
The petition is GRANTED. The assailed resolution dated February 15, 2001, of the respondent Sandiganbayan is REVERSED and SET ASIDE.
Ratio Decidendi
On the jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan over officers of GOCCs organized under the Corporation Code: The Supreme Court held that the Sandiganbayan has jurisdiction over presidents, directors or trustees, or managers of government-owned or controlled corporations (GOCCs) regardless of the manner of their creation. The Court emphasized that RA 8249, which further defined the jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan, did not make any distinction as to the manner of creation of GOCCs. The legislature's deliberate omission to distinguish between GOCCs created by special charter and those organized under the Corporation Code clearly indicates the intention to include officers of both types of corporations within the Sandiganbayan's jurisdiction when involved in graft and corruption. The principle of ubi lex non distinguit nec nos distinguere debemos (when the law does not distinguish, we should not distinguish) applies. The Court reiterated its ruling in Quimpo v. Tanodbayan, which held that officers of GOCCs, whether created by special law or formed under the Corporation Code, come under the jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan for purposes of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act. This interpretation is necessary to avoid undermining the government's policy to eradicate graft and corruption. On whether PPSB is a GOCC: The Court found that the Philippine Postal Savings Bank (PPSB) fits the definition of a government-owned or controlled corporation (GOCC) under Section 2(13) of the Administrative Code of 1987. PPSB was organized and incorporated under the Corporation Code as a subsidiary of the Philippine Postal Corporation (PHILPOST), a government-owned corporation. More than 99% of PPSB's authorized capital stock belongs to the government. Furthermore, the creation of PPSB was expressly sanctioned by Section 32 of RA 7354 (Postal Service Act of 1992) for purposes related to public needs, such as promoting thrift and facilitating postal services. Therefore, as an officer of a GOCC, respondent Alas falls under the jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan.
Main Doctrine
Officers of government-owned or controlled corporations (GOCCs) organized under the Corporation Code, even if not created by special charter, fall under the jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan when charged with violations of Republic Act No. 3019 (Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act).