The mother-in-law of former Commission on Elections (Comelec) commissioner Andres D. Bautista has been charged with qualified theft before the Makati City Regional Trial Court (RTC) for allegedly misappropriating more than P18 million from the company of her late husband reportedly without authority from the firm’s officers.

The Makati City RTC has issued an order last Sept. 21 for the arraignment and pre-trial conference on Oct. 19 on the case against Maria Pacita “Baby” Gaborro Cruz-Vazquez.

Also accused of qualified theft was Cruz-Vazquez’s son, Alfredo Jose Cruz.  Both mother and son have posted bail before the trial court.

The filing of the criminal case against Cruz-Vazquez and her son was ordered by Department of Justice (DOJ) Secretary Jesus Crispin C. Remulla.

The qualified theft charge against them had been dismissed by the Makati City Prosecutor’s Office on a complaint filed by Bellville Development, Inc., through its finance officer Grace Cielo Balquin. The firm appealed the dismissal before the DOJ.

Remulla granted the appeal in a resolution issued last Aug. 8.

“After a careful examination of the records of the case, this Office finds there is probable cause to believe that Respondents-Appellees Maria Pacita Cruz-Vasquez and Alfredo Cruz committed Qualified Theft,” Remulla’s resolution stated.

Remulla pointed out that all six elements of qualified theft were present in the case, as he stressed that the issues “are evidentiary in nature and can be best threshed out in a full-blown trial.”

In its complaint, Bellville alleged that the criminal act of qualified theft was committed when the late husband of Cruz-Vazquez, Dr. Daniel E. Vazquez, served as officer and chairman of the firm.

Remulla noted that the complainant alleged that Cruz-Vasquez and her co-respondents, including Dr. Vasquez, conspired from 2014 to 2015 “in the misappropriation of funds amounting to at least Eighteen Million One Hundred Seventy-Six Thousand Four Hundred Fifty-Four and 17/100 Pesos (P18,176,545.17).”

He said that Dr. Vasquez issued check vouchers and checks that resulted in the release of corporate funds to the respondents (Cruz-Vazquez, Alfredo Jose Cruz, and others).

“The checks were made to appear as payable to ‘Cash’ and purportedly recorded as ‘Advances to Officers,’” he noted.

Remulla ruled that “the unauthorized acts of Dr. Vasquez of issuing checks without the consent of the Complainant-Appellant (Bellville Development), and the receipt of the proceeds thereof by the Respondents-Appellees, is indicative of their common criminal design on the part of the Respondents-Appellees to defraud and unduly gain at the expense of the Complainant-Appellant.”

He pointed out that while the late chairman Dr. Vazquez at that time owned 75 percent of Bellville, “Dr Vasquez’s chairmanship and majority ownership over Complainant-Appellant’s shares of stock does not mean that he owns Complainant-Appellant.”

He said that Dr. Vasquez had “no authority to draw checks without complying with the corporation's standard procedures” and “the Complainant-Appellant’s Board of Directors did not authorize Dr. Vasquez to issue the corporate checks to persons who had no legal right to receive corporate funds.”

In his resolution, Remulla also noted that “Dr. Vasquez was authorized to sign checks for purposes of company-to-company transactions on behalf of Complainant-Appellant.”

But he said that “while they want us to believe that the check was purportedly a loan, the same is clearly belied by the absence of any document in the corporate records to support their claim.”