FIRST DIVISION
[G.R. No. 239013. March 6, 2019.]
CELSO G. REGENCIA, petitioner,vs. HONORABLE SANDIGANBAYAN, SEVENTH DIVISION, REPRESENTED BY JUSTICE MARIA THERESA DOLORES C. GOMEZ-ESTOESTA, JUSTICE ZALDY V. TRESPESES, AND JUSTICE BAYANI H. JACINTO, AND PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, respondents.
NOTICE
Sirs/Mesdames :
Please take notice that the Court, First Division, issued a Resolution dated March 6, 2019which reads as follows:
"G.R. No. 239013 — Celso G. Regencia, petitioner, vs. Honorable Sandiganbayan, Seventh Division, represented by Justice Maria Theresa Dolores C. Gomez-Estoesta, Justice Zaldy V. Trespeses, and Justice Bayani H. Jacinto, and People of the Philippines, respondents
Considering the allegations, arguments, and issues raised in this Petition for Certiorari, the Court resolves to DISMISS the same for: (a) non-compliance with the required verification pursuant to Section 4, Rule 7 of the Rules of Court; 1 and (b) failure to show that the Sandiganbayan committed grave abuse of discretion in issuing its February 14, 2018 2 and May 9, 2018 3 Resolutions in Criminal Case No. SB-17-CRM-0923.
Petitioner argues that the Sandiganbayan gravely abused its discretion when it preventively suspended him from his position as Mayor of Iligan City after having been charged with the crime of usurpation of authority under Article 177 of the Revised Penal Code, given that the charge against him neither involved fraud against the government nor a violation of Republic Act (RA) No. 3019, also known as the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act. 4
Section 13 of RA No. 3019 mandates that:
Section 13. Suspension and loss of benefits. — Any incumbent public officer against whom any criminal prosecution under a valid information under this Act or under Title 7, Book II of the Revised Penal Code or for any offense involving fraud upon government or public funds or property whether as a simple or as a complex offense and in whatever stage of execution and mode of participation, is pending in court, shall be suspended from office. x x x (Emphasis supplied)
In Miranda v. Sandiganbayan, 5 the Court held that the crime of usurpation of authority under Article 177 is covered by Section 13 of RA No. 3019 as it involves fraud upon government, viz.:
Second. We further hold that the Sandiganbayan did not gravely abuse its discretion when it ruled that petitioner's act fell within the catch-all provision "x x x for any offense involving fraud upon government." x x x
xxx xxx xxx
It is obvious to the eyes that the phrase "fraud upon government" means "any instance or act of trickery or deceit against the government." x x x It ought to follow that "fraud upon government" was committed when the petitioner allegedly assumed the duties and performed acts pertaining to the Office of the Mayor under pretense of official position. 6 (Emphasis supplied)
In this light, it is clear that the Sandiganbayan did not gravely abuse its discretion when it preventively suspended petitioner from his position as Mayor of Iligan City after having been formally charged with the crime of usurpation of authority in an Information dated December 6, 2016.
ACCORDINGLY, the Court resolves to AFFIRM the February 14, 2018 and the May 9, 2018 Resolutions of the Sandiganbayan in Criminal Case No. SB-17-CRM-0923.
SO ORDERED."
Very truly yours,
(SGD.) LIBRADA C. BUENADivision Clerk of Court
Footnotes
1. The verification of the petition is based on "personal knowledge, belief and based on the records in [petitioner's] possession."
2.Rollo, pp. 48-57; approved by Justice Ma. Theresa Dolores C. Gomez-Estoesta, Chairperson, Justice Zaldy V. Trespeses and Justice Bayani H. Jacinto.
3.Id. at 34-47.
4.Id. at 12-14.
5. 502 Phil. 423, 474 (2005).
6.Id. at 438.