Ombudsman denies MR of incumbent, former Libmanan councilors
|Office of the Ombudsman|
Photo by Judgefloro on Wikimedia Commons
In their Motion for Reconsideration, Tendero and Dilanco, Jr., alleged that the Ombudsman erred in finding the existence of probable cause to indict them for Falsification of Public Documents by Public Officers because the complainants failed to establish the presence of the element of “taking advantage of official function.”
They also claimed that there was sufficient evidence showing that they actually attended the Philippine Councilor’s League Incorporated activity.
Finally, they insisted that they cannot be charged of Malversation of Public Funds because respondent Reynaldo M. Abay admitted that he received the payment.
The Ombudsman said that Tendero and Dilanco, Jr. failed to raise any new matters in their Motion for Reconsideration. The arguments in their motion are mere reiterations of the allegations and defenses in their previous pleadings, which were exhaustively probed and passed upon by the Office in the assailed resolution.
In its resolution, the Ombudsman explained why it found probable cause to indict them for the crimes of Falsification of Public Document and Malversation of Public fund.
First, Tendero and Dilanco, Jr. took advantage of their official position when they submitted falsified PCLI Official Receipts and Certificates of Attendance in their respective Liquidation Reports, which they had the duty to prepare. They made it appear that PCLI issued the assailed ORs for the payment of their registration fees, when in fact, said receipts were issued to Jeff Penalosa and Pablo Kong, respectively.
Second, by submitting the Certificates of Attendance, they made it appear that they participated in the PCLI activity even if they did not attend said activities.
Third, mere allegation that they gave their monies to Abay to pay for their registration fee to PCLI is not sufficient to overcome the presumption that the user of the falsified document is deemed the author of the falsification, the Ombudsman said.
On the basis of the above-mentioned pronouncement, Atty. Gerard A. Mosqueda, Deputy Ombudsman for Luzon denied the Motion for Reconsideration filed by Tendero and
The resolution was issued on June 1.—BICOLSTANDARD.COM