COMPLAINT & INFORMATION: Form and Constituent Allegations

G.R. No. L-57841

GALLEGO & AGONCILLO v SANDIGANBAYAN
Relova, J.

FACTS
Crime Violation of Sec. 3(e) of RA 3019
(e) Causing any undue injury to any party, including the Government, or giving any private party
any unwarranted benefits, advantage or preference in the discharge of his official administrative
or judicial functions through manifest partiality, evident bad faith or gross inexcusable
negligence. This provision shall apply to officers and employees of offices or government
corporations charged with the grant of licenses or permits or other concessions.

Parties Bernardo Gallego – Member of the Board for Marine Engine Officers (petitioner)
Felix Agoncillo – Member of the Board for Marine Deck Officers (petitioner)
Ramon Deseo – Chairman of the Board of Marine Engine Officers
Herminio Erorita – Member of the Board for Marine Deck Officers

Nature Petition for certiorari, prohibition, and mandamus

Events  An information was filed in the Sandiganbayan by Tanodbayan Special Prosecutor

before Punzalan-Castillo against Ramon Deseo, Bernardo Gallego, Herminio Erorita, and
Trial Felix Agoncillo for violation of Sec. 3(e) or RA No. 3019
(commissi  The information stated that during the May 1979 Examinations, Deseo, Gallego,
on of the Agoncillo, and Erorita gave unwarranted benefits to examinees in the discharge of
crime to their official and/or administrative functions through manifest impartiality, evident
Pre-trial) bad faith or gross inexcusable negligence (see notes for more details)
 Petitioners Gallego and Agoncillo filed a motion to quash the information on the
following grounds
1. The facts alleged do not constitute an offense;
2. Or in the alternative, the information charges more than one offense
 Petitioner’s Arguments
 The information concludes that the ratings given by the accused to
particular examinees constituted the giving of “unwarranted benefits in the
discharge of his official, administrative or judicial functions through manifest
partiality evident bad faith or gross inexcusable negligence”
 Sec. 3(e) of RA 3019 is null and void because it is unconstitutionally vague
 cannot be made the basis of any criminal prosecution
o “Unwarranted”: highly imprecise and elastic term which has no
common law meaning or settled definition in judicial precedents
 Even if Sec. 3(e) were to be sustained as definite, the allegations of the
information are not sufficiently definite to charge an offense wo which the
accused may be required to plead
 The information charges the accused with three distinct offenses:
a. The giving of “unwarranted” benefits through manifest partiality
b. The giving of “unwarranted” benefits through evident bad faith
c. The giving of “unwarranted” benefits through gross inexcusable negligence
while in the discharge of their official and/or administrative functions
o Right of the accused to be informed of the nature and cause of the
accusation against them is violated
o They are left to guess which of the three, if not all, offenses they are
being prosecuted
 The prosecution opposed the motion to quash
 Alleged that the term “unwarranted” in Sec. 3(e) is clear, unambiguous and
unequivocal
o Said term is presumed to have been used in its primary arid general
acceptation
 Averred that what is charged in the information is the giving of unwarranted
benefits to the owners of Test Booklets Nos. 839 and 144
 o While manifest partiality, evident bad faith or gross inexcusable negligence
are only the MEANS OF COMMISSION

Sandigan  Sandiganbayan sustained the prosecution and denied the motion to quash
bayan  Petitioners filed a petition for certiorari, prohibition, and mandamus
 Sought to set aside the Sandiganbayan’s resolution
 Sought to restrain the Sandiganbayan from further proceeding with Criminal
Case No. 2940 (People v Deseo et al.)
 Sought to set aside the information in said case

Supreme RTC decision is REVERSED and accused appellant is ACQUITTED on the ground of
Court reasonable doubt

ISSUES with HOLDING:

1. W/N the Sandiganbayan erred in denying the Motion to Quash the Information – NO
 Sec. 3(e) of RA 3019 does not suffer from the constitutional defect of vagueness
 It is not difficult to comprehend that the section penalizes the act of a public officer, in the
discharge of his official, administrative or judicial functions, in giving any private party
benefits, advantage or preference
o Which are unjustified, unauthorized or without justification or adequate reason
o Through manifest partiality, evident bad faith or gross inexcusable negligence.
 The phrases “manifest partiality”, “evident bad faith”, and “gross inexcusable negligence” merely
describe the different modes by which the offense is penalized in Sec. 3(3) may be committed
 The use of all these phrases in the same information does not mean that the indictment
charges three distinct offenses
 The information definitely states:
 The name of the parties
 The tune, place, manner of commission and designation of the offense
 The argument that failure to state the reasons why the benefits bestowed by the accused are
unwarranted renders it defective is without merit
 Informations need only state the ultimate facts
 The reasons threrefor could be proved during the trial

DISPOSITIVE PORTION
ACCORDINGLY, for lack of merit, instant petition is hereby dismissed.

NOTES:
 In checking Test Paper No. 839 in the subject Steam Boiler Engines, Turbines, Internal
Combustion and Marine Shop, Deseo gave a rating of:
o Test II: 18% out of a total of 20%, the answer of the examinee being a recital of the prayer
“Hail Mary”
o Test III: 18% out of 20%, the answer of the examinee being the prayer “Our Father”
 Acting as Second Corrector, Gallego affirmed the ratings given by Deseo to Test Paper No. 839
 In checking Test Paper No. 144, in the subject Meteorology and Electronics, Agoncillo gave a
rating of 19% out of 20% to Test I A and B thereof
o The answer of the examinee to Test I A being a long love letter
 Acting as Second Corrector, Erorita affirmed the ratings given by Agoncillo to Test Paper No.
144