Republic of the Philippines

OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN

Quezon City


HON. TERRY L. RIDON, representing
himself and the Kabataan Party-list,
VICTOR VILLANUEVA, representing
himself and the YOUTH ACT NOW,
DYAN FRANCISCO, representing
herself and MATANGLAWIN, JEROME
FLORES, representing himself and
YOUTH ACT NOW-ATENEO DE
MANILA UNIVERSITY, MARY JOY
CAPISTRANO, representing herself and
the Philippine Collegian, NEILL JOHN
MACUHA, representing himself and in
his capacity as the University of the
Philippines Student Regent, EDUARDO
GABRAL, representing himself and the
KATIPUNAN KONTRA KORUPSYON,
ELIZABETH DANIELLE FODULLA,
representing herself and the Manila
Collegian, APRIL JOY CAMACHO,
representing herself and the PUP
CATALYST, MICHELLE LADO,
representing herself and the YOUTH
ACT NOW- UP OPEN UNIVERSITY,
VENCER MARI CRISOSTOMO,
representing himself and Anakbayan,
EINSTEIN RECEDES, representing
himself and the Student Christian
Movement of the Philippines,
CHARLOTTE VELASCO, representing
herself and the League of Filipino
Students, MARC LINO ABILA,
representing himself and the College
Editors Guild of the Philippines, SARAH
JANE ELAGO, representing herself and
National Union of Students of the
Philippines,

Complainants,
- versus

HONORABLE FLORENCIO B. ABAD,
in his official capacity as Secretary of the
Department of Budget and Management,

Respondent.
x--------------------------------------x




















FOR: Plunder under Republic
Act 7080
2





COMPLAINT-AFFIDAVIT


COMPLAINANTS TERRY RIDON, VICTOR VILLANUEVA, DYAN
FRANCISCO, JEROME FLORES, MARY JOY CAPISTRANO, NEILL
JOHN MACUHA, EDUARDO GABRAL, ELIZABETH DANIELLE
FODULLA, APRIL JOY CAMACHO, MICHELLE LADO, VENCER MARI
CRISOSTOMO, EINSTEIN RECEDES, CHARLOTTE VELASCO, MARC
LINO ABILA, SARAH JANE ELAGO, all of legal age, Filipino, hereby
depose and state that:



NATURE OF THE CASE

1. The instant case is a complaint against the Honorable Florencio
B. Abad, for the systematic plunder of government resources during his time
as Secretary of the Department of Budget and Management.

COMPLAINANTS

2. The following are the Complainants in this case:
a. HON. TERRY L. RIDON, representing himself and in his
capacity as National President of Kabataan Party-list, a duly-elected party-
list representing the youth sector in the House of Representatives;
b. VICTOR VILLANUEVA, representing himself and in his
capacity as National Convenor of YOUTH ACT NOW, a nationwide alliance
of youth and student groups against the pork barrel;
c. DYAN FRANCISCO, representing herself and
MATANGLAWIN, a student publication of the Ateneo de Manila University;
3



d. JEROME FLORES, representing himself and in his capacity
as convenor of YOUTH ACT NOW- ATENEO DE MANILA UNIVERSITY
chapter;
e. MARY JOY CAPISTRANO, representing herself and the
Philippine Collegian, the official student publication of the University of the
Philippines-Diliman;
f. NEIL JOHN MACUHA, representing himself and in his capacity
as the University of the Philippines Student Regent;
g. EDUARDO GABRAL, representing himself and in his capacity
as convenor of KATIPUNAN KONTRA KORUPSYON, an anti-pork barrel
alliance composed of students of the University of the Philippines, Miriam
College, and the Ateneo de Manila University;
h. ELIZABETH DANIELLE FODULLA, representing herself and
the Manila Collegian, the official student publication of the University of the
Philippines-Manila;
i. APRIL JOY CAMACHO, representing herself and the PUP
CATALYST, the official student publication of the Polytechnic University of
the Philippines;
j. MICHELLE LADO, representing herself and the YOUTH ACT
NOW- UP OPEN UNIVERSITY chapter;
k. VENCER MARI CRISOSTOMO, representing himself and as
National Chairperson of Anakbayan;
l. EINSTEIN RECEDES, representing himself and as
Spokesperson of Student Christian Movement of the Philippines,
m. CHARLOTTE VELASCO, representing herself and as
spokesperson of the League of Filipino Students;
4



n. MARC LINO ABILA, representing himself and as National
President of the College Editors Guild of the Philippines,
o. SARAH JANE ELAGO, representing herself and as National
President of the National Union of Students of the Philippines;

3. The aforementioned complainants may be reached and
served with processes by this Honorable Office through the Office of Cong.
Terry L. Ridon, at Room 616, North Wing, House of Representatives,
Batasan Hills, Quezon City.


RESPONDENT

4. RESPONDENT FLORENCIO B. ABAD is a public official
currently serving as the Secretary of the Department of
Budget and Management.

FACTUAL BASIS FOR PLUNDER

A. RESPONDENT, IN CONNIVANCE WITH OTHER
GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS, SYSTEMATICALLY
MISAPPROPRIATED, CONVERTED, MISUSED, AND
MALVERSED PUBLIC FUNDS THROUGH THE
DISBURSEMENT ACCELERATION PROGRAM (DAP).

5



5. On July 1, 2014, the Supreme Court of the Philippines
promulgated a decision in the consolidated petitions of
Araullo, et al. vs. Aquino, et al., G.R. No. 209287, Syjuco
vs. Abad, G.R. No. 209135, Luna vs. Abad, et al., G.R. No.
209136, Villegas vs. Ochoa, et al., G.R. No. 209155,
PHILCONSA, et al. vs. Department of Budget and
Management, et al., G.R. No. 209164, IBP vs. Abad, G.R.
No. 209260, Belgica, et al. vs. Aquino, et al., G.R. No.
209442, COURAGE, et al. vs. Aquino, et al., G.R. No.
209517, and VACC vs. Ochoa, et al., G.R. No. 209569.

6. The said petitions assailed the constitutionality of the
Disbursement Acceleration Program (DAP), National
Budget Circular (NBC) No. 541, and related issuances of
the Department of Budget and Management implementing
the DAP.

7. In its resolution of the consolidated petitions, the Supreme
Court, through Associate Justice Lucas P. Bersamin,
declared as illegal and unconstitutional, for being in
violation of Section 25(5), Article VI of the 1987 Constitution
and the doctrine of separation of powers, the following acts
and practices under the DAP, NBC No. 541, and related
executive issuances:

a. The withdrawal of unobligated allotments from the
implementing agencies, and the declaration of the
6



withdrawn unobligated allotments and unreleased
appropriations as savings prior to the end of the fiscal
year and without complying with the statutory definition
of savings contained in the General Appropriations Acts;

b. The cross-border transfers of the savings of the
Executive to augment the appropriations of other offices
outside the Executive; and

c. The funding of projects, activities and programs that were
not covered by any appropriation in the General
Appropriations Act.

8. Further, the Court declared void the use of unprogrammed
funds despite the absence of a certification by the National
Treasurer that the revenue collections exceeded the
revenue targets for non-compliance with the conditions
provided in the relevant General Appropriations Acts.

9. It should be noted that the DAP, which was ostensibly a
program designed to promote economic growth by way of
accelerated government spending, is the brainchild of
herein respondent, having been conceptualized,
developed, and implemented by him during his term as
Secretary of the Department of Budget and Management
7



under the current administration of President Benigno S.
Aquino III.

10. As observed by the Supreme Court in the aforementioned
decision dated 1 July 2014 (attached integrally to this
complaint as Annex A), the earliest available document
relating to the genesis of the DAP was the memorandum of
October 12, 2011 from Sec. Abad seeking the approval of
the president to implement the proposed DAP.
1


11. In addition to various subsequent memoranda to the
President seeking authority to pool savings and fund
proposed projects under the DAP, respondent issued NBC
No. 541 on July 18, 2012, which was likewise declared
illegal and unconstitutional by the Supreme Court.
2


12. At this juncture, it is important to note that in ruling on the
unconstitutionality of DAP, the Supreme Court extensively
discussed the doctrine of operative fact, which recognizes
the existence of the law or executive act prior to the
determination of its unconstitutionality as an operative fact
that produced consequences that cannot always be
erased, ignored or disregarded. However, the Supreme
Court also noted that the doctrine of operative fact only
covers programs, activities, and projects (PAPs) that can

1
Araullo, et al. vs. Aquino, et al., G.R. No. 209287.
2
Supra.
8



no longer be undone, and whose beneficiaries relied in
good faith on the validity of the DAP, but cannot apply to
the authors, proponents and implementors of the DAP,
unless there are concrete findings of good faith in their favor
by the proper tribunals determining their criminal, civil,
administrative and other liabilities.
3
(Emphasis added.)


13. In his Separate Opinion on the DAP ruling (attached to this
petition as Annex B), Associate Justice Arturo Brion
further elucidated that respondent Abad may in fact
established the DAP knowingly aware that it is tainted with
unconstitutionality. Justice Brion stated his observations,
to wit

As a lawyer and with at least 12 years of experience behind him as a
congressman who was even the Chairman of the House
Appropriations Committee, it is inconceivable that he did not know the
illegality or unconstitutionality that tainted his brainchild. Consider,
too, in this regard that all appropriation, revenue and tariff bills
emanate from the Lower House so that the Chair of the Appropriations
Committee cannot but be very knowledgeable about the budget, its
processes and technicalities. In fact, the Secretary likewise knows
budgeting from the other end, i.e., from the user end as the DBM
Secretary. Armed with all these knowledge, it is not hard to
believe that he can run circles around the budget and its

3
ANNEX A. Araullo, et al. vs. Aquino, et al., G.R. No. 209287.
9



processes, and did, in fact, purposely use this knowledge for the
administrations objective of gathering the very sizeable funds
collected under the DAP.
4
(Emphasis added)


14. It should also be noted that Janet Lim-Napoles, in an
affidavit dated May 12, 2014 submitted to the Department
of Justice (DOJ) (integrally attached to this petition as
Annex C), has claimed that respondent was her mentor,
having taught her how to use non-government
organizations (NGOs) in maximizing her earnings in
transactions involving the Priority Development Assistance
Funds (PDAF) of lawmakers.

15. In the said sworn affidavit, Napoles stated, to wit

Around 2000, I was introduced to then Congressman Florencio Abad
by Mr. Manuel Jarmin. We met at the Japanese Restaurant in Edsa
Shangri-la Plaza Hotel. In that meeting, he told me about a project
worth 10 million pesos. He showed me the Special Allotment Release
Order (SARO) then explained to me what it was for. Before the
meeting ended, I handed him Php 2 Million Pesos. When the Notice
of Cash Allocation (NCA) was released, I gave him another Php 2
Million Pesos. Afterwards, when we talked about the implementation,
he asked me if I had an NGO. When I told him I did not have an NGO,
he told me he would take care of it. From what I recall, he used

4
Araullo, et al. vs. Aquino, et al., G.R. No. 209287 (Brion, J., concurring and dissenting).
10



Batanes Electric Cooperative to implement the project. After some
time, he returned the Php 4 Million Pesos I gave him with an added
Php 2 Million Pesos more. That is when I started to transact using
the PDAF.
5


16. There have also been reports that Napoles was likewise a
recipient of DAP funds, through projects undertaken by her
NGOs which were funded by realigned and augmented
disbursements under the DAP.

17. The scope of respondents transgressions against the
public treasury is staggering. As noted by the Supreme
Court:

As of 2013, a total of P144.4 billion worth of PAPs
(projects, activities, or programs) were implemented
through the DAP. Of this amount, P82.5 billion were
released in 2011 and P54.8 billion in 2012.
x x x
The records show, indeed, that funds amounting to
P143,700,000.00 and P250,000,000.00 were transferred
under the DAP respectively to the COA and the House of
Representatives.
6



5
Lim-Napoles, Janet. May 12
th
2014 Affidavit, Annex C, p. 5.
6
Araullo, et al. vs. Aquino, et al., G.R. No. 209287.
11



18. Under the direction and leadership of respondent,
hundreds of billions of pesos in public funds were
systematically misappropriated, converted, misused, and
malversed through the DAP.

THE CHARGE

19. Under Republic Act 7080, Plunder is committed as follows:

d. By any public officer who, by himself or in connivance with
members of his family, relatives by affinity or consanguinity,
business associates, subordinates or other persons;

e. The offender amasses, accumulates or acquires ill-gotten
wealth, defined as any asset, property, business enterprise or
material possession, directly or indirectly through dummies,
nominees, agents, subordinates and/or business associates;

f. The offense is committed through a combination or series of
overt criminal acts, to wit:

i. Through misappropriation, conversion, misuse, or
malversation of public funds or raids on the public
treasury;
ii. By receiving, directly or indirectly, any commission, gift,
share, percentage, kickbacks or any other form of
12



pecuniary benefit from any person and/or entity in
connection with any government contract or project or by
reason of the office or position of the public officer
concerned;
iii. By the illegal or fraudulent conveyance or disposition of
assets belonging to the National Government or any of
its subdivisions, agencies or instrumentalities or
government-owned or -controlled corporations and their
subsidiaries;
iv. By obtaining, receiving or accepting directly or indirectly
any shares of stock, equity or any other form of interest
or participation including promise of future employment
in any business enterprise or undertaking;
v. By establishing agricultural, industrial or commercial
monopolies or other combinations and/or implementation
of decrees and orders intended to benefit particular
persons or special interests; or
vi. By taking undue advantage of official position, authority,
relationship, connection or influence to unjustly enrich
himself or themselves at the expense and to the damage
and prejudice of the Filipino people and the Republic of
the Philippines.

g. The aggregate amount or total value of at least Fifty Million
Pesos (P50,000,000.00).

13



20. All the elements of Plunder exist in the instant case.

21. First, the Respondent is a public official currently serving
as the Secretary of the Department of Budget and
Management.

22. Second, the Respondent systematically misappropriated,
converted, misused, and malversed public funds through
his executive issuances and the programs implemented by
him as Secretary of the Department of Budget and
Management.

23. Third, the aggregate amount of plundered funds exceed
Fifty Million Pesos, amounting to no less than One Hundred
Forty Four Point Four Billion Pesos (P144,400,000,000.00)
as of 2013.

24. Fourth, the offense is committed through a combination or
series of overt acts as follows:

a. The misappropriation, conversion, misuse or malversation of
public funds, together with other government officials, through
the DAP, by illegally realigning and augmenting the budgets for
various projects implemented by different departments of the
Executive Branch, in violation of the relevant General
Appropriations Acts.; and
14



b. The misappropriation, conversion, misuse or malversation of
public funds, together with other government officials, by
illegally transferring funds under the DAP to the COA and the
House of Representatives, in violation of Section 25(5), Article
VI of the 1987 Constitution.

INDIVIDUAL ACTS RE-PLEADED AS CAUSE FOR INDICTMENT FOR
VIOLATION OF THE ANTI-GRAFT AND CORRUPT PRACTICES ACT
AND RELEVANT PROVISIONS OF THE REVISED PENAL CODE

25. In the alternative, the above-described individual acts
indicative of the overall scheme or conspiracy to commit
plunder are likewise re-pleaded for the purpose of charging
the Respondent for violation of the relevant provisions of
the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act, the Code of
Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials and
Employees, and the Revised Penal Code.

26. We are executing the instant Complaint Affidavit in order to
charge the Respondent for Violation of R.A. No. 7080 or, in
the alternative, the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act, the
Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials
and Employees, and the Revised Penal Code.




15



IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we have signed this complaint-affidavit this day
of 8 July 2014 in Quezon City, Philippines.


HON. TERRY RIDON VICTOR VILLANUEVA
Affiant Affiant

NEILL JOHN MACUHA DYAN FRANCISCO
Affiant Affiant

JEROME FLORES MARY JOY CAPISTRANO
Affiant Affiant

ELIZABETH FODULA APRIL JOY CAMACHO
Affiant Affiant

EDUARDO GABRAL VENCER MARI CRISOSTOMO
Affiant Affiant

CHARLOTTE VELASCO EINSTEIN RECEDES
Affiant Affiant


MARC LINO ABILA SARAH JANE ELAGO
Affiant Affiant


MICHELLE LADO
Affiant
16




VERIFICATION and Certificate of Non-Forum Shopping

WE, TERRY RIDON, VICTOR VILLANUEVA, DYAN FRANCISCO, JEROME
FLORES, NEILL JOHN MACUHA, EDUARDO GABRAL, MARY JOY
CAPISTRANO, ELIZABETH FODULA, APRIL JOY CAMACHO, MICHELLE
LADO, VENCER MARI CRISOSTOMO, EINSTEIN RECEDES, CHARLOTTE
VELASCO, MARC LINO ABILA, SARAH JANE ELAGO, having been duly sworn
to, in accordance with law, hereby depose that:

1. We are the complainants in the above-entitled case;
2. We have caused its preparation;
3. We have read the contents of this complaint and declare the same
to be true to the best of our knowledge and belief;
4. We have not filed any similar case with any other Court, Tribunal,
Quasi-Judicial body or government agency;
5. If we should learn that a similar action or claim has been filed or is
pending we shall report such fact within five (5) days from the
discovery to this Honorable Office.

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME this 8 July 2014 at Quezon City
by the following persons who exhibited to me the following ID cards:

AFFIANTS ID TYPE ID NO.
1. Terry Ridon Drivers License N0403000452
2. Victor Villanueva Passport EB3545662
3. Dyan Francisco School ID 114495
4. Jerome Flores School ID 131622
5. Neil John Macuha School ID 2008-03685
6. Eduardo Gabral School ID 2010-78015
7. Mary Joy Capistrano School ID 201078735
8. Elizabeth Fodula School ID 2012-41646
9. April Joy Camacho School ID 2010-00555-MN-O
10. Michelle Lado School ID 2012-81050
11. Vencer Crisostomo Drivers License N0206003943
12. Einstein Recedes TIN ID 286-133-667
13. Charlotte Velasco School ID 2011-05260
14. Marc Lino Abila LPU Alumni Assoc ID 2009-12683
15. Sarah Jane Elago Passport EB3190854


Doc. No.
Page No.
Book No.
Series of 2014.