By Benjamin Cuaresma
MANILA — The Sandiganbayan has acquitted a former barangay treasurer in Cebu City of graft charges involving more than P4 million in public funds, ruling that prosecutors failed to establish the elements necessary to sustain a conviction under the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act.
In a decision dated July 7, the anti-graft court cleared Christopher Cacanindin, former treasurer of Barangay San Antonio, Cebu City, of violating Republic Act No. 3019. However, it emphasized that the ruling does not affect his separate conviction for malversation of public funds, which remains in force.
The case stemmed from a Commission on Audit (COA) examination that uncovered a P4.62-million cash shortage resulting from undeposited collections and unliquidated cash advances incurred during Cacanindin’s tenure from December 2013 to March 2019.
Earlier, in October 2024, a Cebu Regional Trial Court convicted Cacanindin of both graft and malversation, sentencing him to up to 18 years’ imprisonment for malversation and up to eight years for graft.
Prosecutors alleged that Cacanindin repeatedly issued checks covering the same transactions and supporting documents to pay honoraria for barangay officials and employees. They also claimed he made it appear that the funds had been returned to the barangay treasury by issuing official receipts months after the checks had been encashed, despite the absence of actual reimbursement.
The prosecution further alleged that several checks marked as “refunded” were never backed by the actual return of cash to government coffers.
Despite these findings, the Sandiganbayan ruled that the prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that Cacanindin’s actions resulted in actual undue injury to the government, an essential element required to secure a conviction under the anti-graft law.
“The prosecution established, at most, that there was a substantial cash shortage and irregularities in the barangay’s financial records,” the court said. “However, it failed to present sufficient evidence demonstrating actual undue injury directly caused by the accused’s acts, separate from the audit deficiencies noted by the COA.”
The court stressed that criminal liability for graft cannot rest solely on accounting irregularities without proof of all elements required by law.
It also underscored that while public officials must be held accountable, anti-corruption laws should not be applied beyond what the evidence supports.
“Our penal laws against corruption are intended to strengthen public service, not to punish officials who may have committed administrative or procedural errors without criminal intent,” the Sandiganbayan said.
The anti-graft court clarified that only Cacanindin’s conviction for violating Republic Act No. 3019 was under review in the appeal.
It said his separate conviction for malversation was not part of the proceedings and therefore remains unaffected.
“Any findings or conclusions relating to the malversation case are beyond the scope of this appeal,” the court said. “Accordingly, the Court refrains from examining the merits of that conviction, as it is not the subject of the present review.”
The ruling effectively overturns Cacanindin’s graft conviction while leaving intact the lower court’s judgment finding him guilty of malversation of public funds.
ia/xf
