Treasurer’s conviction upheld

The Sandiganbayan has affirmed the decision of the Regional Trial Court convicting a former barangay treasurer of Malubog in Cebu City for falsification of time book and payroll by making it appear that the people listed there had been paid for their services when they had not.

Associate Justice Bayani Jacinto found no strong reason to reverse the joint judgment of the Regional Trial Court Branch 6 finding accusedappellant Edwin Villarta guilty of falsification of public documents under Article 171 of the Revised Penal Code.

“The Time Book and Payroll subject of this case are public documents, being official records of the barangay. Appellant’s acts which he claims to have resorted to only to expedite the release of funds, only betray his cavalier treatment of such documents. These are exactly the very acts that are punished in Article 171 of the Revised Penal Code,” the decision read.

Villarta appealed his case before the Sandiganbayan after he was found guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime charged and sentenced to two years, four months and one day to eight years and one day in prison, and to pay a fine of P3,000 for each count.

In his appeal, he alleged the trial court erred in convicting him, citing he had no deliberate intent to defraud the government or to falsify the time books and payrolls.

He said those documents were merely prepared ahead of the Road and Draining Cleaning Maintenance project to facilitate the release of funds.

Villarta, however, said the barangay did not push through with the said project, thus he did not release the funds. He added he returned the funds corresponding to the unimplemented project.

However, the Sandiganbayan did not buy Villarta’s contention.

“The court cannot give credence to his claim that it was the practice of the barangay to process the payroll first to expedite the release of funds from the city. There are ways to expedite the release of funds without appellant having to certify in the Time Book and Payroll that certain workers were paid for services rendered for a project that had yet to be undertaken,” the decision read.

BRP