Double jeopardy saves Manila barangay official from graft conviction

On account of the constitutional proscription against double jeopardy or the prosecution of a person twice for the same offense, the Sandiganbayan reversed a trial court ruling which convicted of graft a barangay captain who had earlier been acquitted of the same charge.

Reversed was the May 24, 2019 decision of the Manila City regional trial court (RTC) which convicted Barangay Captain Emmanuel De Vela of graft.

In a decision, the anti-graft court ruled: “The appeal of accused-appellant De Vela is granted. The decision dated May 24, 2019 of the Regional Trial Court, Branch 21, in the City of Manila, finding him guilty of violation of Section 3(b) of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act is reversed, and Criminal Case No. 15-312913 is dismissed on the ground of double jeopardy."

De Vela was accused of reportedly demanding and receiving  P70,000 from FRCGE Trading as a pre-condition for the release of payment in connection with the company's delivery of various supplies and materials to Barangay 404, Zone 41, District IV from the City of Manila.

He was sentenced by the RTC to a prison term ranging from six to nine years imprisonment with perpetual disqualification from holding public office. His motion for reconsideration was denied by the RTC.

He elevated his case to the Sandiganbayan.  He argued the RTC erred in its ruling and that there was double jeopardy in his case.

The anti-graft court disagreed with De Vela's first argument, since the court believes the RTC rightly found that the prosecution established his guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

However, the Sandiganbayan found his argument on double jeopardy meritorious. "Considering that accused-appellant De Vela has already been acquitted by Branch 11, Metropolitan Trial Court (MeTC) , City of Manila in its decision dated June 11, 2018 in Criminal Case No. 479992-CR for the charge under Section 7(d) of R.A. 6713, otherwise known as the Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials and Employees, covering the same transactions, he can no longer be convicted by the RTC for [graft], as amended, pursuant to the Constitutional proscription against double jeopardy," the decision said.

It said that since De Vela had been validly acquitted in the MeTC case, he can no longer be tried for the same act, coming from the same intent, this time before the RTC.

Since there is no showing of any exceptions to the rule of double jeopardy, such as the MeTC acting with grave abuse of discretion, or that there was a mistrial, the Sandiganbayan ruled that "such order of acquittal is final and unappealable on the ground of double jeopardy."

The 47-page decision was written by Sixth Division Chairperson Associate Justice Sarah Jane T. Fernandez with the concurrence of Associate Justices Karl B. Miranda and Kevin Narce B. Vivero.