The Sandiganbayan has affirmed its order that granted probation, instead of serving his jail term, to former Butuan City councilor Sergio C. Pascual who was convicted of usurpation of authority or official function.

Pascual, in the March 6, 2020 decision of the anti-graft court, was sentenced to a jail term ranging from six months and one day to four years and two months.

He was also ordered to pay complainant Potenciano Malvar P30,000 as civil indemnity.

On July 19, 2013, Pascual caused the demolition and removal of concrete barriers set up by Malvar at the southwest portion of the open space of Malvar Subdivision in Butuan City.

The prosecution said that Pascual usurped the City Council which has the authority under Republic Act No. 7160, the Local Government Code of 1991, to authorize the removal of encroachments and illegal constructions in public places.

In convicting Pascual, the anti-graft court ruled that he ordered the removal of the concrete barriers under the pretense of his official function.

The court said that public officials cannot break the law that they were duty-bound to enforce. In this case, the court said Pascual "performed a task without color of law."

On June 24, 2025, the court granted Pascual ‘s motion for probation, an alternative to imprisonment under Republic Act No. 10707 for persons sentenced to less than six years imprisonment and first-time offenders.

The grant was opposed by Malvar who alleged that the probation depreciates the seriousness of the offense.

In denying Malvar’s motion, the court said that it granted the Probation Order based on the Post-Sentence Investigation Report of Senior Probation and Parole Officer Paul Patrick S. Blanco, approved by Chief Probation and Parole Officer Girliezette U. Palacio. They evaluated Pascual's personal circumstances, character, antecedents, environment, and capacity for reform, it also said.

"Consistent with the findings and recommendations in the said report, the Court found no showing that the accused requires correctional treatment best served by institutional confinement, nor that there exists an undue risk that he would commit another crime during probation period," it added.

At the same time, the court said that contrary to Malvar’s allegation, Pascual had not violated any of the conditions of his probation. "Rather than diminishing the gravity of the offense, probation in this instance subjects the accused to continuing judicial supervision, strict conditions, and the possibility of revocation upon non-compliance," the court stressed.

The 10-page resolution dated Feb. 18, 2026 was written by Presiding Justice Geraldine Faith A. Econg with the concurrence of Associate Justices Edgardo M. Caldona and Gener M. Gito of the court’s second division.