The Supreme court recently denied the petition of a former employee of the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) to junk a Sandiganbayan ruling which affirmed the decision of the Regional Trial Court (RTC) Branch 47 of Tagbilaran City finding him guilty of direct bribery and violation of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act. Juanito Merencillo, a former group supervising examiner of the BIR-Tagbilaran, tried to invoke double jeopardy as the two charges stemmed from the same transaction where he was proven to have demanded and accepted monetary consideration from a scion of the Ramasola family in exchange for the release of a document related to purchase of property.
However, in an eleven-page decision promulgated April 13, this year, Associate Justice Renato C. Corona, wrote that the Sandiganbayan June 18, 1999 decision was correct in affirming the omnibus decision of the Regional Trial Court (RTC) Branch 47 of Tagbilaran City finding Merencillo guilty of both direct bribery and violation of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act. Corona explained that “although the two charges against petitioner stemmed from the same transaction, the same act gave rise to two separate and distinct offenses. No double jeopardy attached since there was a variance between the elements of the offenses charged. The constitutional protection against double jeopardy proceeds from a second prosecution for the same offense, not for a different one.”
Merencillo was charged in Criminal Case 9482 for violation of Section 3(b) of RA 3019, and in Criminal Case 9483 for direct bribery punishable under Article 210 of the Revised Penal Code. As the Sandiganbayan later affirmed, RTC Branch 47 charged that Merencillo violated Republic Act 3019 or the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act for having used his position as public official in demanding P20,000 from Maria Angeles Ramasola Cesar in exchange for the release of the certification of her payment of the capital gains tax for the land that her family's company, Ramasola Superstudio, Inc., purchased from one Catherine Corpuz Enerio.
The RTC Branch 47 also charged, and the Sandiganbayan also affirmed, that Merencillo was guilty of direct bribery having been caught accepting the marked money that Cesar handed to him during an entrapment designed by the 702nd Criminal Investigation Command. The Sandiganbayan only junked the portion of the RTC decision which cited the aggravating circumstances of abuse of authority and in consideration of a price, promise or reward, “because these circumstances are integral elements of the crime.” From the sentence that the RTC recommended to be indeterminate penalty of imprisonment for eight years and one month as minimum to 15 years as maximum for violating RA 3019, the Sandiganbayan reduced the penalty to “an indeterminate sentence of six years and one month of prision mayor as minimum to 10 years of prision mayor as maximum.
For direct bribery or violation of Article 210 of the Revised Penal Code, the RTC ruled, and the Sandiganbayan affirmed which the Supreme Court now affirms, that Merencillo be sentenced to suffer the indeterminate penalty of four years and one day as minimum to eight years of prision mayor as maximum and a fine of P60,000.00. Merencillo, was likewise ordered to indemnify Cesar to pay moral damages in the amount of P50,000.00 and attorney's fees in the amount of P5,000.00 and the costs shall also be taxed against Merencillo.
The Supreme Court gave merit to the facts presented by the prosecution which stated that on September 13, 1995 , Lucit Estillore went to the office of BIR-Tagbilaran to ask for the computation of taxes due on the sale of real property to Ramasola Superstudio, Inc. and to apply for a certificate authorizing registration (CAR). There, Revenue Examiner Lourdes Fuentes computed the documentary stamp tax equivalent to P37,500 and capital gains tax of P125,000 due on the transaction. Merencillo approved the computation in his capacity as group supervisor. Estillore paid the taxes in the bank and returned to apply for a CAR, according to the data presented by the prosecution. Then, she submitted the application together with relevant documents to Fuentes for processing. Fuentes prepared the revenue audit reports and submitted them to Merencillo together with the application for the CAR for preliminary approval.
Fuentes informed Estillore that the CAR would be released after seven days, since the application was yet to be forwarded later to the Revenue District Officer (RDO) for final approval.] At around 10:00 a.m. of the same day, Estillore called up Cesar to tell her that Merencillo wanted to see her “for some negotiation.” Indeed, Cesar went to Merencillo's office where the he demanded P20,000 in exchange for the approval of the CAR. Hesitant on the deal, Cesar told Merencillo that she had to consult her two brothers, who are her business associates, first.
The following day, Merencillo called up Cesar to follow up his demand. Later that day, Merencillo again called up Cesar to tell her that the CAR will be released in four to five days. Cesar returned to the BIR office on September 20, 1995 only to hear from Merencillo reiterating his demand for P20,000 although the CAR had, in fact, been signed by RDO Galahad Balagon the day before, and was therefore ready for release. Upon her inquiry, the releasing clerk, Susan Cabangon told Cesar that she was still waiting for Merencillo's go signal to release the document. Two days later, Cesar reported the matter to RDO Balagon who then assured her that he would look into her complaint. When Merencillo again called up Cesar informing her that the CAR was then ready for release but only after giving his demand. He even tried to settle for a lesser amount.
On this, Cesar decided to seek the assistance of then Senior Superintendent Dionaid Baraguer, the provincial director of the Philippine National Police (PNP) in Bohol . The following day, Baraguer referred Cesar's complaint to the chief of police of Tagbilaran City who coordinated with Cesar for an entrapment procedure. The Police instructed Cesar to prepare two bundles of bogus money by putting a one-hundred-peso bill on each side of every bundle to make it appear that the two bundles amounted to P10,000 each or a total of P20,000. After the serial numbers of the four one-hundred peso bills were recorded, the entrapment was set for September 28, 1995 .
On the set date, Cesar called up Merencillo to appeal for the release of the CAR and possibly convince the BIR official to reduce his demand. Merencillo, then cautiously told Cesar not to talk about the matter on the phone and asked her to see him instead.
So, Cesar went to Merencillo's office with the two bundles of bogus money inside a white envelope. Merencillo was then entertaining a lady visitor when Cesar arrived, as the PNP entrapment team was already inside the BIR office, posing as civilians. Upon seeing Cesar, Merencillo handed the CAR to her and, as she was signing the acknowledgment for the release of the CAR, he signaled at her to follow him down to the second floor. Upon reaching the lobby at the third floor, Merencillo gave a cue that they make the transaction there. Cesar handed the envelope containing the two bundles of marked money to him who, upon receiving it, asked “Why is this thick?” Before Cesar could answer, a member of the PNP entrapment team took a picture of Merencillo holding the envelope.
Merencillo panicked, hid the envelope behind his back and turned towards the window at the back of the BIR building, but it was closed. He turned around towards the open window facing the street. He threw the envelope towards the window but it hit the ceiling instead, bounced and fell to the first floor of the BIR building.
The entrapment team then introduced themselves and invited him to go with them to their headquarters. Merencillo tried to convince the court that he never asked for money and that Cesar was only presuming he demanded for bribe after telling her that there was a misclassification of the asset and additional taxes had to be paid. He said he was surprised when cops suddenly arrested him when Cesar handed him a white envelope. Associate Justice Corona explained that based on Section 3(b) of RA 3019 corrupt practices of any public officer which is unlawful is “directly or indirectly requesting or receiving any gift, present, share percentage or benefit, for himself or for any other person, in connection with any contract or transaction between the Government and any other party, wherein the public officer in his official capacity has to intervene under the law.”
In direct bribery, the offender is a public officer who accepts an offer or promise or receives a gift or present by himself or through another with a view to committing some crime, or in consideration of the execution of an act which does not constitute a crime but the act must be unjust, or to refrain from doing something which it is his official duty to do and that the act which the offender agrees to perform or which he executes is connected with the performance of his official duties.
Corona further cited that “clearly, the violation of Section 3(b) of RA 3019 is neither identical nor necessarily inclusive of direct bribery. While they have common elements, not all the essential elements of one offense are included among or form part of those enumerated in the other.” “The mere request or demand of a gift, present, share, percentage or benefit is enough to constitute a violation of Section 3(b) of RA 3019, acceptance of a promise or offer or receipt of a gift or present is required in direct bribery,” Corona explained.
“Moreover, the ambit of Section 3(b) of RA 3019 is specific. It is limited only to contracts or transactions involving monetary consideration where the public officer has the authority to intervene under the law. Direct bribery, on the other hand, has a wider and more general scope: (a) performance of an act constituting a crime; (b) execution of an unjust act which does not constitute a crime and (c) agreeing to refrain or refraining from doing an act which is his official duty to do,” the Corona added.
