Photo from Pexels | Tima Miroshnichenko
The following post does not create a lawyer-client relationship between Alburo Alburo and Associates Law Offices (or any of its lawyers) and the reader. It is still best for you to engage the services of a lawyer or you may directly contact and consult Alburo Alburo and Associates Law Offices to address your specific legal concerns, if there is any.
Also, the matters contained in the following were written in accordance with the law, rules, and jurisprudence prevailing at the time of writing and posting, and do not include any future developments on the subject matter under discussion.
AT A GLANCE:
In the recent case of People of the Philippines v. Dante Manzano De Guzman (G.R. No. 274863 and 275057-59), July 2, 2025), the Supreme Court upheld the conviction of former Quezon City District III Councilor Dante Manzano De Guzman for graft involving more than Six Million Pesos (PhP6,000,000.00) worth of ghost projects.
Sometime in 2008 and 2009, the Quezon City Government entered into four (4) separate contracts for the procurement of 141 custom-design tents, 1,177 kiddie raincoats, 1,177 rainboots, food supplies, and sports equipment. These procured items were included in the Project Procurement Management Plans (PPMP) of De Guzman’s office. Each transaction involving the procured items was initiated by a purchase request signed by De Guzman, followed by a public bidding, and culminated with the award of the contract to the winning bidder.
Subsequently, the Office of the Ombudsman received an anonymous letter-complaint denouncing the anomalous transactions involving the hiring of ghost employees and implementation of ghost projects by certain councilors of Quezon City, including De Guzman.
Upon investigation, the Ombudsman discovered distribution lists showing that the procured items were received by indicated area coordinators for distribution to the indicated barangays and signed by De Guzman. The Ombudsman therefore concluded that De Guzman, through his staff, received the procured items for distribution to the various barangays of District III, Quezon City. However, the items were never distributed nor received by the indicated area coordinators in the distribution lists. Worse, De Guzman allegedly made it appear that the persons named in the distribution lists received the items, when he knew that the said persons were not the area coordinators of the indicated barangays and the items were not received by them.
The Sandiganbayan found De Guzman guilty of violation of Section 3 (e) of R.A. No. 3019. The Supreme Court upheld the decision of the Sandiganbayan holding that De Guzman committed said violation when he caused the purchase of 141 custom-design tents, 1,177 kiddie raincoats, 1,177 rainboots, food supplies, and sports equipment, received the procured items, then failed to distribute them to the intended beneficiaries of District III, Quezon City. Consequently, accused-appellant defrauded and caused undue injury to the Quezon City Government.
The prosecution must sufficiently establish the following elements to sustain a conviction under Section 3 (e) of R.A. No. 3019: (1) the offender is a public officer; (2) the act was done in the discharge of the public officer’s official, administrative, or judicial functions; (3) the act was done through manifest partiality, evident bad faith, or gross inexcusable negligence; and (4) the public officer caused undue injury to any party, including the government, or gave any unwarranted benefits, advantage or preference.
According to the High Court, a judicious review of the records proves the undisputed existence of all the elements of violation of Section 3 (e) of R.A. No. 3019.
First, De Guzman was a public officer. He was then the City Councilor of District III, Quezon City.
Second, De Guzman discharged official functions when he entered into four separate contracts for the procurement of goods, then failed to distribute the procured items. His official acts eventually led to the purchase of 141 custom-design tents, 1,177 kiddie raincoats, 1,177 rainboots, food supplies, and sports equipment. Thereafter, he failed to distribute the procured items to its intended beneficiaries in District III, Quezon City.
Third, De Guzman acted with gross inexcusable negligence. A public officer is guilty of gross inexcusable negligence when there is a serious breach of duty that is committed flagrantly, palpably, and with willful indifference, regardless of whether such breach of duty was done with malicious intent. De Guzman’s failure to cause the distribution of the procured items to the different barangays of District III, Quezon City, coupled with his seeming lack of concern, prove that he acted with gross inexcusable negligence.
Fourth, De Guzman caused undue injury to the Quezon City Government. As discussed above, the procured items were properly delivered to accused-appellant and his office. However, owing to accused-appellant’s gross inexcusable negligence, these procured items could not be located or could not be accounted for after its proper turnover to accused-appellant’s custody. Consequently, the Quezon City Government suffered undue injury amounting to PHP 6,411,261.01, representing the amounts paid by the Quezon City Government for the procured items.
Click here to subscribe to our newsletter
Alburo Alburo and Associates Law Offices specializes in business law and labor law consulting. For inquiries regarding legal services, you may reach us at info@alburolaw.com, or dial us at (02)7745-4391/ 09175772207/ 09778050020.
All rights reserved.