This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2015-09-02 |
PERLAS-BERNABE, J. |
||||
| As already stated, Apelo was accused of committing the crime of Direct Bribery, which has the following elements: (a) that the accused is a public officer; (b) that he received directly or through another some gift or present, offer or promise; (c) that such gift, present or promise has been given in consideration of his commission of some crime, or any act not constituting a crime, or to refrain from doing something which is his official duty to do; and (d) that the crime or act relates to the exercise of his functions as a public officer.[27] On the other hand, Cu and Zate were accused of committing the crime of Corruption of Public Officials, the elements of which are as follows: (a) that the offender makes offers or promises, or gives gifts or presents to a public officer; and (b) that the offers or promises are made or the gifts or presents are given to a public officer under circumstances that will make the public officer liable for direct bribery or indirect bribery.[28] In addition, all private respondents were charged with violation of Section 3 (e) of RA 3019. The essential elements of such crime are as follows: (a) that the accused must be a public officer discharging administrative, judicial, or official functions (or a private individual acting in conspiracy with such public officers[29]); (b) that he acted with manifest partiality, evident bad faith, or inexcusable negligence; and (c) that his action caused any undue injury to any party, including the government, or giving any private party unwarranted benefits, advantage, or preference in the discharge of his functions.[30] | |||||
|
2014-11-25 |
VELASCO JR., J. |
||||
| This was reiterated in Disini v. Sandiganbayan[22] where We counted the running of the prescriptive period in said case from the date of discovery of the violation after the PCGG's exhaustive investigation despite the highly publicized and well-known nature of the Philippine Nuclear Power Plant Project therein involved, recognizing the fact that the discovery of the crime necessitated the prior exhaustive investigation and completion thereof by the PCGG. | |||||