G.R. No. 124471 - RODOLFO E. AGUINALDO, VS. SANDIGANBAYAN AND PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES.

Ruling

accordingly filed against petitioner on August 16, 1994. In Crim. Case No. 20948, the information states: That in or about the year 1988 in the Municipality of Tuguegarao, Province of Cagayan, Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above named accused, Rodolfo E. Aguinaldo, then holding the position of Provincial Governor of Cagayan Province, hence a public officer who, by reason of the duties of his office, is accountable for public funds or property, taking advantage of his official position, did then and there wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously take or misappropriate for his personal use public funds in his custody in the total amount of Four Hundred Thousand Pesos (P400,000.00), Philippine Currency, which amount he had earlier withdrawn from the provincial treasury of Cagayan to be used in the provinces intelligence activities, to the damage and prejudice of the provincial government of Cagayan. In Crim. Case No. 20949, the information alleges: That in or about the year 1989 in the Municipality of Tuguegarao, Province of Cagayan, Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above named accused, Rodolfo E Aguinaldo, then holding the position of Provincial Governor of Cagayan province, hence a public officer who, by reason of the duties of his office, is accountable for public funds or property, taking advantage of his official position, did then and there wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously take or misappropriate for his personal use public funds in his custody in the total amount of Three Hundred Fifty Thousand Pesos (P350,000.00), Philippine Currency, to the damage and prejudice of the provincial government of Cagayan. Upon motion of petitioner, the Sandiganbayan ordered the Office of the Ombudsman to reinvestigate the cases. Petitioner was allowed to submit the affidavits executed by twelve military officers who acknowledged receipt from petitioner of unspecified amounts which they claimed had been used for counter-insurgency operations. In addition petitioner presented his counter-affidavit. In a letter dated January 19, 1995, Prosecutor Espinosa requested information from the Special and Technical Audit Division of the COA whether there had been compliance with the recommendations in the latters SAO Report No. 90-25 which, as already stated, required the submission of documents covering claims for intelligence activities and the complete documentation of payments made, and the provincial officials to stop using the 20% Development Fund for purposes other than for development projects. He also inquired whether on the basis of the affidavits executed by the twelve military officers, the disbursements could be considered fully liquidated. In reply, COA Special and Technical Audit Division, through Provincial Auditor Teresita Rios, stated: [E]xcept for the list of recipients and the machine copies of the duly subscribed affidavits of some of the recipients, records do not show that