Manila barangay chief, treasurer get 17 years for malversation

MANILA, Philippines - A barangay chairman and treasurer in  Tondo, Manila were sentenced to serve 17 years in prison for misappropriating public funds in 2001, the Office of the Ombudsman announced yesterday.

In a 10-page decision, Manila Regional Trial Court Branch 42 Judge Dinnah Aguila-Topacio found Leo de Guzman and Violeta Arendela – then chairman and treasurer of Barangay 95, Zone 8, respectively – guilty beyond reasonable doubt of malversation of public funds and falsification by a public officer.

They were each sentenced to suffer the penalty of a maximum of eight years in jail for falsification and a maximum of 17 years in jail for malversation.

The court found that in September 2001, De Guzman and Arendela malversed barangay funds worth P157,850.93.

In order to secure the release of monetary privileges in the form of additional honoraria, wages and reimbursements, De Guzman and Arendela falsified a barangay resolution by cutting the signatory portion of a 2000 Sangguniang Barangay resolution and attaching it to a new resolution which was photocopied and filed after using correction fluid to erase certain entries such as the date and traveling expenses.

Prosecutors said they made it appear that the resolution was unanimously passed, approved and signed by all members of the barangay council on April 15, 2001 when in truth they never participated, approved or signed the same.

The disbursement vouchers showed that De Guzman approved the amount, which was received by Arendela and himself, respectively, to advance the payment for barangay tanods as well as street sweeper allowances, additional and traveling expense.

The general payroll, on the other hand, showed how the claims were allegedly spent and who received which amount.

Two of the defense witnesses, Federico Dionisio and Romeo Simbol, a street sweeper and barangay tanod, respectively, admitted to having received their compensation in 2001.

“The accused thus clearly permitted the said witnesses to take public funds even when the resolution, which was the basis thereof was without any color of authority,” the ruling stated.