[Polirev] Article II, Sec.

1 – Philippines
Serana v. Sandiganbayan as a Democratic and Republican State
14
G.R. No. 162059 January 22, 2008 J. Reyes Therese
Petitioners Respondents
HANNAH EUNICE D. SERANA SANDIGANBAYAN and PEOPLE OF THE
PHILIPPINES
Recit Ready Summary

Serana, a student of UP Cebu, was appointed as a student regent of UP by then President Joseph
Estrada. Serana discussed with Estrada the revonation of Vinzons Hall Annex in UP Diliman. Then
President Estrada gave 15M for the renovation and the hall shall then be renamed as President Joseph
Ejercito Estrada Student Hall. When the renovations failed to materialize Serana was charged with
malversation of Public Funds and Property with the Office of the Ombudsman. The Ombudsman, after
due investigation, found probable cause to indict petitioner and her brother Jade Ian D. Serana
for estafa. Petitioner moved to quash the information. She claimed that the Sandiganbayan does not
have any jurisdiction over the offense charged or over her person, in her capacity as UP student
regent.

I: W/N the SB has jurisdiction over the case? YES

The jurisdiction of the SB is laid out in PD 1606 and not RA 3019. T he two statutes differ in that P.D.
No. 1606, as amended, defines the jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan while R.A. No. 3019, as
amended, defines graft and corrupt practices and provides for their penalties. Evidently, the
Sandiganbayan has jurisdiction over other felonies committed by public officials in relation to their
office.

Although the 1987 Constitution does not define who are public officers, varied concepts and definitions
are found in different statures and jurisprudence. It is not only the salary grade that determines the
jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan. The Sandiganbayan also has jurisdiction over other officers
enumerated in P.D. No. 1606. Section 4(A)(1)(g) of P.D. No. 1606 explictly vested the Sandiganbayan
with jurisdiction over Presidents, directors or trustees, or managers of government-owned or controlled
corporations, state universities or educational institutions or foundations. Petitioner falls under this
category. As the Sandiganbayan pointed out, the BOR performs functions similar to those of a board of
trustees of a non-stock corporation. By express mandate of law, petitioner is, indeed, a public officer as
contemplated by P.D. No. 1606. Moreover, it is well established that compensation is not an essential
element of public office. At most, it is merely incidental to the public office. Delegation of sovereign
functions is essential in the public office. An investment in an individual of some portion of the
sovereign functions of the government, to be exercised by him for the benefit of the public
makes one a public officer.

The administration of the UP is a sovereign function in line with Article XIV of the Constitution. UP
performs a legitimate governmental function by providing advanced instruction in literature, philosophy,
the sciences, and arts, and giving professional and technical training. Moreover, UP is maintained by
the Government and it declares no dividends and is not a corporation created for profit.

Facts

1. Petitioner Hannah Eunice D. Serana was a senior student of the University of the Philippines-
Cebu. She was appointed by then President Joseph Estrada on December 21, 1999 as a
student regent of UP, to serve a one-year term.
2. Petitioner discussed with President Estrada the renovation of Vinzons Hall Annex in UP
Diliman. On September 4, 2000, petitioner, with her siblings and relatives, registered with the
Securities and Exchange Commission the Office of the Student Regent Foundation, Inc.
(OSRFI).
3. President Estrada gave Fifteen Million Pesos (P15,000,000.00) to the OSRFI as financial

ALS B2021 1
 assistance for the proposed renovation. The source of the funds, according to the information,
was the Office of the President.
4. The renovation of Vinzons Hall Annex failed to materialize. The succeeding student regent,
Kristine Clare Bugayong, and Christine Jill De Guzman, Secretary General of the KASAMA sa
U.P., a system-wide alliance of student councils within the state university, consequently filed a
complaint for Malversation of Public Funds and Property with the Office of the Ombudsman.
5. The Ombudsman, after due investigation, found probable cause to indict petitioner and her
brother Jade Ian D. Serana for estafa.
6. Petitioner moved to quash the information. She claimed that the Sandiganbayan does not have
any jurisdiction over the offense charged or over her person, in her capacity as UP student
regent. She claimed:
a. R.A. No. 3019, as amended by R.A. No. 8249, enumerates the crimes or offenses
over which the Sandiganbayan has jurisdiction. It has no jurisdiction over the crime
of estafa. It only has jurisdiction over Crimes Committed by Public Officers under the
RPC. Estafa falling Crimes Against Property, Book II of the RPC is not within the
Sandiganbayan’s jurisdiction.
b. It was President Estrada, not the government, that was duped. Even assuming that
she received the P15,000,000.00, that amount came from Estrada, not from the coffers
of the government.
c. As a student regent, she was not a public officer since she merely represented her
peers, in contrast to the other regents who held their positions in an ex officio capacity.
d. She had no power or authority to receive monies or funds. Such power was vested
with the Board of Regents (BOR) as a whole. Since it was not alleged in the
information that it was among her functions or duties to receive funds, or that the crime
was committed in connection with her official functions, the same is beyond the
jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan
7. The Sandiganbayan denied the petitioner’s motion to quash.

Issues Ruling
W/N the Sandiganbayan has jurisdiction over the Petitioner for the crime of estafa as Yes
a member of the UP Board of Regents
Rationale

Sandiganbayan has jurisdiction over the offense of estafa

 The jurisdiction of the SB is laid out in PD 1606 and not RA 3019. T he two statutes differ in
that P.D. No. 1606, as amended, defines the jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan while R.A.
No. 3019, as amended, defines graft and corrupt practices and provides for their penalties.
 Evidently, the Sandiganbayan has jurisdiction over other felonies committed by public officials
in relation to their office. There is no plausible or sensible reason to exclude  estafa as one of
the offenses included in Section 4(bB) of P.D. No. 1606. Plainly, estafa is one of those other
felonies. The jurisdiction is simply subject to the twin requirements that (a) the offense is
committed by public officials and employees mentioned in Section 4(A) of P.D. No. 1606, as
amended, and that (b) the offense is committed in relation to their office.
 Although the 1987 Constitution does not define who are public officers, varied concepts and
definitions are found in different statures and jurisprudence. Petitioner claims that she is not a
public officer with Salary Grade 27; she is, in fact, a regular tuition fee-paying student. This is
likewise bereft of merit. It is not only the salary grade that determines the jurisdiction of the
Sandiganbayan. The Sandiganbayan also has jurisdiction over other officers enumerated in
P.D. No. 1606.
 Section 4(A)(1)(g) of P.D. No. 1606 explictly vested the Sandiganbayan with jurisdiction over
Presidents, directors or trustees, or managers of government-owned or controlled corporations,
state universities or educational institutions or foundations. Petitioner falls under this category.
As the Sandiganbayan pointed out, the BOR performs functions similar to those of a board of
trustees of a non-stock corporation. By express mandate of law, petitioner is, indeed, a public
officer as contemplated by P.D. No. 1606.

ALS B2021 2
  Moreover, it is well established that compensation is not an essential element of public office.
At most, it is merely incidental to the public office.
 Delegation of sovereign functions is essential in the public office. An investment in an
individual of some portion of the sovereign functions of the government, to be exercised
by him for the benefit of the public makes one a public officer.

Application
 The administration of the UP is a sovereign function in line with Article XIV of the Constitution.
UP performs a legitimate governmental function by providing advanced instruction in literature,
philosophy, the sciences, and arts, and giving professional and technical training. Moreover,
UP is maintained by the Government and it declares no dividends and is not a corporation
created for profit.

Disposition

The petition is denied for lack of merit.

Annex
Sec. 4. Jurisdiction. - The Sandiganbayan shall exercise exclusive original jurisdiction in all cases involving:
A. Violations of Republic Act No. 3019, as amended, other known as the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act, Republic Act No. 1379, and Chapter II, Section
2, Title VII, Book II of the Revised Penal Code, where one or more of the accused are officials occupying the following positions in the government, whether in
a permanent, acting or interim capacity, at the time of the commission of the offense:
(1) Officials of the executive branch occupying the positions of regional director and higher, otherwise classified as Grade "27" and higher, of the
Compensation and Position Classification Act of 989 (Republic Act No. 6758), specifically including:
" (a) Provincial governors, vice-governors, members of the sangguniang panlalawigan, and provincial treasurers, assessors, engineers, and other city
department heads;
" (b) City mayor, vice-mayors, members of the sangguniang panlungsod, city treasurers, assessors, engineers, and other city department heads;
"(c ) Officials of the diplomatic service occupying the position of consul and higher;
" (d) Philippine army and air force colonels, naval captains, and all officers of higher rank;
" (e) Officers of the Philippine National Police while occupying the position of provincial director and those holding the rank of senior superintended or higher;
" (f) City and provincial prosecutors and their assistants, and officials and prosecutors in the Office of the Ombudsman and special prosecutor;
" (g) Presidents, directors or trustees, or managers of government-owned or controlled corporations, state universities or educational institutions or
foundations.
" (2) Members of Congress and officials thereof classified as Grade "27'" and up under the Compensation and Position Classification Act of 1989;
" (3) Members of the judiciary without prejudice to the provisions of the Constitution;
" (4) Chairmen and members of Constitutional Commission, without prejudice to the provisions of the Constitution; and
" (5) All other national and local officials classified as Grade "27'" and higher under the Compensation and Position Classification Act of 1989.
B. Other offenses of felonies whether simple or complexed with other crimes committed by the public officials and employees mentioned in subsection a of this
section in relation to their office.
C. Civil and criminal cases filed pursuant to and in connection with Executive Order Nos. 1, 2, 14 and 14-A, issued in 1986.
" In cases where none of the accused are occupying positions corresponding to Salary Grade "27'" or higher, as prescribed in the said Republic Act No. 6758,
or military and PNP officer mentioned above, exclusive original jurisdiction thereof shall be vested in the proper regional court, metropolitan trial court,
municipal trial court, and municipal circuit trial court, as the case may be, pursuant to their respective jurisdictions as provided in Batas Pambansa Blg. 129, as
amended.
" The Sandiganbayan shall exercise exclusive appellate jurisdiction over final judgments, resolutions or order of regional trial courts whether in the exercise of
their own original jurisdiction or of their appellate jurisdiction as herein provided.
" The Sandiganbayan shall have exclusive original jurisdiction over petitions for the issuance of the writs of mandamus, prohibition,  certiorari, habeas corpus,
injunctions, and other ancillary writs and processes in aid of its appellate jurisdiction and over petitions of similar nature, including quo warranto, arising or that
may arise in cases filed or which may be filed under Executive Order Nos. 1, 2, 14 and 14-A, issued in 1986: Provided, That the jurisdiction over these petitions
shall not be exclusive of the Supreme Court.
" The procedure prescribed in Batas Pambansa Blg. 129, as well as the implementing rules that the Supreme Court has promulgated and may thereafter
promulgate, relative to appeals/petitions for review to the Court of Appeals, shall apply to appeals and petitions for review filed with the Sandiganbayan. In all
cases elevated to the Sandiganbayan and from the Sandiganbayan to the Supreme Court, the Office of the Ombudsman, through its special prosecutor, shall
represent the People of the Philippines, except in cases filed pursuant to Executive Order Nos. 1, 2, 14 and 14-A, issued in 1986.
" In case private individuals are charged as co-principals, accomplices or accessories with the public officers or employees, including those employed in
government-owned or controlled corporations, they shall be tried jointly with said public officers and employees in the proper courts which shall exercise
exclusive jurisdiction over them.
" Any provisions of law or Rules of Court to the contrary notwithstanding, the criminal action and the corresponding civil action for the recovery of civil liability
shall, at all times, be simultaneously instituted with, and jointly determined in, the same proceeding by the Sandiganbayan or the appropriate courts, the filing
of the criminal action being deemed to necessarily carry with it the filing of the civil action, and no right to reserve the filing such civil action separately from the
criminal action shall be recognized: Provided, however, That where the civil action had heretofore been filed separately but judgment therein has not yet been
rendered, and the criminal case is hereafter filed with the Sandiganbayan or the appropriate court, said civil action shall be transferred to the Sandiganbayan
or the appropriate court, as the case may be, for consolidation and joint determination with the criminal action, otherwise the separate civil action shall be
deemed abandoned."

ALS B2021 3