Court clears ex-Marcos exec
The Sandiganbayan has cleared a former Marcos government official of a P22-million malversation charge, saying there was no evidence that he had used the money for his own benefit.
Acquitted was Juan Roberto Abling, former executive director of the Economic Support Fund Secretariat (ESFS) under the office of the late dictator Ferdinand Marcos.
The funds that Abling was accused of misusing were part of the P35 million that was withdrawn supposedly to pay miscellaneous expenses as directed by Marcos shortly before the snap elections in 1986.
Following the Edsa People Power Revolution that deposed Marcos, the new Commission on Audit found that only P13 million of the P35 million was delivered to the ESFS. Abling was asked to liquidate the remaining P22 million and submit supporting documents.
Abling sent a letter and disbursement voucher to the COA to support the liquidation, but no receipts or list of projects were submitted. The COA subsequently demanded that he refund the P22 million, and filed the malversation charges against Abling.
In its ruling, the antigraft court’s 2nd Division took note of Abling’s testimony that he had delivered the P22 million to Marcos and that he had then drafted a memorandum showing that the dictator had accepted the payment. He also said Marcos had signed the documents he gave to indicate that he had received the amount.
The prosecution contended that the signatures were inadmissible as evidence, but the court denied this for lack of merit. This meant that the evidence that Marcos had received the amount was unrebutted, the court said.
Given Abling’s explanation, the court said the prosecution should have presented direct evidence to show that he had used the money for his personal use.
“However, the prosecution did not offer in evidence the fact of misappropriation by the accused. There is simply nothing in the records which would show or otherwise suggest that the accused has appropriated for his benefit the amount of [P22 million],” it said.
It noted that based on jurisprudence, when the absence of funds is not due to personal use, the presumption that the public officer’s failure to have the funds is evidence that he had put it to personal use does not stand.
The decision was penned by Justice Samuel Martires. Presiding Justice Edilberto Sandoval and Justice Teresita Diaz-Baldos concurred with the ruling.
