People v. Bernardino
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: Petitioners Nestor A. Bernardino, Eugelio G. Barawid, and Celedonia N. Tomas were members of the Pre-Qualification Bid and Awards Committee (PBAC) for the construction of the extension of the public market of Guimba, Nueva Ecija. Bernardino was the Municipal Mayor and Chairman, Barawid was the Municipal Treasurer, and Tomas was the Acting Secretary. They were charged with falsification of public documents for allegedly making it appear that a public bidding was conducted on December 8, 1997, with four firms participating and a COA representative present, when in fact, no such bidding occurred. This alleged falsification was to justify the award of the contract to Mascom Design and Engineering International (MASCOM). Procedural History: The case originated from a complaint filed by MASCOM against Mayor Dizon and petitioner Barawid for violation of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act. In defense, Mayor Dizon presented affidavits from several PBAC members stating that no public bidding was held. Consequently, the Office of the Ombudsman dismissed the case against Dizon and Barawid and instead filed a falsification case against all PBAC members, including the petitioners. The Sandiganbayan found petitioners Bernardino, Barawid, and Tomas guilty of falsification of public documents. Petitioners Bernardino and Tomas, along with petitioner Barawid and other PBAC members, filed separate motions for a new trial, which were denied by the Sandiganbayan. This led to the filing of the present consolidated petitions for review before the Supreme Court. The Petition: Petitioners Nestor A. Bernardino and Eugelio G. Barawid seek their acquittal, arguing that the prosecution failed to prove their guilt beyond reasonable doubt. They contend that the affidavits presented by the prosecution, which claimed no bidding took place, were merely opinions and not based on personal knowledge, and that the prosecution failed to establish conspiracy. Petitioner Celedonia N. Tomas, while also seeking acquittal, is primarily challenging the penalty imposed. The Supreme Court is asked to review the Sandiganbayan's decision, considering the evidence presented, the testimonies of witnesses, and the legal arguments regarding the elements of falsification, conspiracy, and the admissibility of evidence, particularly the affidavits and testimonies concerning the alleged non-conduct of the public bidding.
Issue(s)
Whether the guilt of petitioners Nestor A. Bernardino and Eugelio G. Barawid was proven beyond reasonable doubt. Whether petitioner Celedonia N. Tomas is guilty of falsification of public document.
Ruling
The Court acquitted petitioners Nestor A. Bernardino and Eugelio G. Barawid on the ground of reasonable doubt. The conviction of petitioner Celedonia N. Tomas was affirmed with modification as to the indeterminate penalty.
Ratio Decidendi
On the guilt of petitioners Nestor A. Bernardino and Eugelio G. Barawid: The Court held that the prosecution failed to prove the guilt of petitioners Bernardino and Barawid beyond reasonable doubt. The primary evidence presented by the prosecution consisted of the affidavits of seven PBAC members stating that no public bidding was conducted on December 8, 1997. However, the Court found that these declarations were merely expressions of opinion and not based on personal knowledge, as the affiants admitted they were not present at the alleged bidding. Their statements that they signed documents without knowledge of their participation bound only themselves and not the petitioners. Furthermore, the prosecution failed to present evidence establishing conspiracy between the petitioners and the other PBAC members. The absence of seven PBAC members did not necessarily mean that the remaining members, including the petitioners, did not convene. Applying the equipoise rule, where evidence is in equipoise or there is doubt, the burden of proof falls on the prosecution, leading to acquittal. On the guilt of petitioner Celedonia N. Tomas: The Court found petitioner Tomas guilty of falsification of public document. Even assuming all PBAC members attended the bidding, Tomas, as the Acting Secretary, signed the "Minutes of the opening of bids" which falsely stated that COA representative Ronquillo attended the public bidding on December 8, 1997. Ronquillo categorically testified that he never attended the bidding. By making it appear that Ronquillo participated when he did not, Tomas took advantage of her official position. The Court found Ronquillo's testimony convincing and gave it credence, sustaining the conviction against Tomas. Her motion for new trial was denied as the alleged newly discovered evidence did not negate her culpability, which was based on the false statement regarding the COA representative's attendance, irrespective of the PBAC members' presence.
Main Doctrine
The prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that petitioners Nestor A. Bernardino and Eugelio G. Barawid committed falsification of public document. However, petitioner Celedonia N. Tomas is guilty of falsification for making it appear in the Minutes of the opening of bids that the COA representative attended the public bidding when he did not, as she took advantage of her official position as Acting Secretary of the PBAC.