SECOND DIVISION
|
ENGR. ROGER F. BORJA, Petitioner, - versus - THE PEOPLE OF THE Respondent. |
G.R.
No. 164298
Present: Quisumbing, J., Chairperson, Carpio Morales,
AZCUNA,* Tinga, and VELASCO, JR., JJ.
Promulgated: April
30, 2008 |
x- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -x
DECISION
QUISUMBING, J.:
For
review on certiorari are the Decision[1]
dated
The facts are
as follows:
In three
Informations[3]
filed with the
On
On
Aggrieved, Borja filed a petition for certiorari before the Court of
Appeals, which, however, dismissed his petition for lack of merit after noting
the previous cases wherein we held that local water districts are GOCCs.[8]
Borja sought reconsideration, but it was
likewise denied. Hence, this petition.
Borja
raises the following issues:
I.
WHETHER OR NOT THE HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS SECOND
DIVISION ERRED IN DISMISSING THE PETITION FOR CERTIORARI IN
II.
WHETHER OR NOT THE HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS SECOND
DIVISION ERRED IN NOT APPLYING ESTABLISHED JURISPRUDENCE IN RESOLVING TO
DISMISS THE PETITION FOR CERTIORARI IN
Simply,
the issue is: Did the Court of Appeals err in ruling that there was no
prejudicial question warranting the suspension of the proceedings of the graft
cases?
Petitioner
reiterates his arguments before the Court of Appeals and insists that the
appellate court should have ordered the suspension of his arraignment while the
Feliciano case is pending before us.
For the
People, the Office of the Solicitor General pointed out that we had already
rendered a decision on the Feliciano case on
The petition
is bereft of merit.
Borja’s
contention that a prejudicial question exists in his case is clearly devoid of
any legal basis, considering that it had been settled, long before the Feliciano
case, that local water districts are GOCCs, and not private corporations.[10] This is because local water districts do not
derive their existence from the Corporation Code,[11]
but from Presidential Decree No. 198,[12]
as amended.
Thus,
being a public officer, Borja can certainly be indicted for violation of Rep.
Act No. 3019.
Moreover,
it did not also escape our notice that at the time Borja filed his petition
before us on
WHEREFORE, the petition
is DENIED for lack of merit. The assailed Decision dated
SO
ORDERED.
|
|
LEONARDO A. QUISUMBING Associate Justice |
WE CONCUR:
|
CONCHITA CARPIO MORALES Associate Justice |
|
|
ADOLFO S. AZCUNA Associate Justice |
DANTE O. TINGA Associate Justice |
|
PRESBITERO J. VELASCO, JR. Associate Justice |
|
A T T E S T A T I O N
I attest that the conclusions in the
above Decision had been reached in consultation before the case was assigned to
the writer of the opinion of the Court’s Division.
|
|
LEONARDO A. QUISUMBING Associate Justice Chairperson |
C E R T I F I C A T I O N
Pursuant to Section 13, Article VIII
of the Constitution, and the Division Chairperson’s Attestation, I certify that
the conclusions in the above Decision had been reached in consultation before
the case was assigned to the writer of the opinion of the Court’s Division.
|
|
REYNATO S. PUNO Chief Justice |
* Additional member in place of Justice Arturo D. Brion, who inhibited due to close relation to a party.
[1] Rollo, pp. 172-178. Penned by Associate Justice Andres B. Reyes,
Jr., with Associate Justices
[2]
[3] Records, Criminal Case No. 13758-SP (02),
p. 1.
x x x x
That sometime on August 12, 1997 or immediately sometime prior or subsequent thereto, in San Pablo City, Laguna, Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused Roger F. Borja, a public officer, being then the General Manager C, with Salary Grade 26, of the San Pablo City Water District, while in the performance of his official functions, with evident bad faith, manifest partiality or gross inexcusable negligence, did, then and there, willfully, unlawfully and feloniously give unwarranted benefit to Teresita B. Rivera by retaining her as Division Manager of Commercial C of the San Pablo City Water District, although her promotional appointment had been revoked by the Civil Service Commission, enabling said Teresita B. Rivera to receive all the benefits due said position without legal basis, to the prejudice of the government and public interest.
CONTRARY TO LAW.
Records, Criminal Case No. 13759-SP (02), p. 1.
x x x x
That on or about July 15, 1995 or
immediately sometime prior or subsequent thereto, in San Pablo City, Laguna,
Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the
above-named accused, Roger F. Borja, a public officer, being then the General
Manager C, with Salary Grade 26, of the San Pablo City Water District, while in
the performance of his official functions, with evident bad faith, manifest
partiality or gross inexcusable negligence, did, then and there, willfully,
unlawfully and criminally use the funds of the San Pablo City Water District,
instead of his own, to pay the back wages of Evelyn Eje in the amount of P969,822.73,
thereby causing undue injury to the San Pablo City Water District and to the
public in the aforestated amount.
CONTRARY TO LAW.
Records, Criminal
Case No. 13760-SP (02), p. 1.
x x x x
That
on [or] about July 17, 1995 or immediately sometime prior or subsequent thereto,
in San Pablo City, Laguna, Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this
Honorable Court, the above-named accused Roger F. Borja, a public officer,
being then the General Manager C, with Salary Grade 26, of the San Pablo City
Water District, while in the performance of his official functions, with
evident bad faith, manifest partiality or gross inexcusable negligence, did,
then and there, willfully, unlawfully and criminally use the funds of the San
Pablo City Water District, instead of his own, to pay the back wages of Raquel
Tolentino in the amount of P972,209.69, thereby causing undue injury to
the San Pablo City Water District and to the public in the aforestated amount.
CONTRARY
TO LAW.
[4] Sec.
3. Corrupt practices of public
officers. – In addition to acts or omissions of public officers already
penalized by existing law, the following shall constitute corrupt practices of
any public officer and are hereby declared to be unlawful:
x
x x x
(e) Causing any undue injury to any party, including the Government, or giving any private party any unwarranted benefits, advantage or preference in the discharge of his official, administrative or judicial functions through manifest partiality, evident bad faith or gross inexcusable negligence. This provision shall apply to officers and employees of offices or government corporations charged with the grant of licenses or permits or other concessions.
x
x x x
[5] Records, Criminal Case No. 13758-SP (02), pp. 48-55.
[6] G.R. No. 147402,
[7]
[8] Rollo, p. 177. See cases of Hagonoy Water District v. NLRC, No. L-81490, August 31, 1988, 165 SCRA 272, 279; Davao City Water District v. Civil Service Commission, G.R. Nos. 95237-38, September 13, 1991, 201 SCRA 593, 606; Tanjay Water District v. Gabaton, G.R. No. 63742, April 17, 1989, 172 SCRA 253, 261.
[9] Rollo, pp. 269-270.
[10] Supra, note 8.
[11] Batas Pambansa Blg. 68.
[12] “The
Provincial Water Utilities Act of 1973.” Done on