Title 7. Chapter 4 Flashcards
What are the crimes called malversation of public funds or property?
- Malversation by appropriating, misappropriating or permitting any other person to take public funds or property. (Art. 217)
- Failure of accountable officer to render accounts. (Art. 218)
- Failure of a responsible public officer to render accounts before leaving the country. (Art. 219)
- Illegal use of public funds or property. (Art. 220)
- Failure to make delivery of public funds or property. (Art. 221
Elements of Art. 220. Illegal use of public funds or property
Elements:
1. That the offender is a public officer.
2. That there is public fund or property under his administration.
3. That such public fund or property has been appropriated by law or ordinance
4. That he applies the same to a public use other than that for which such fund or property has been appropriated by law or ordinance.
Can the accused be held liable for malversation under Art. 217, if the funds applied to a public use are not appropriated by law or ordinance?
Yes. That is appropriating public funds under Art. 217, because he disposed of the same without right.
Example of illegal use of public funds.
When the school teachers and other municipal officers were unable to receive their salaries because the treasurer applied the funds, appropriated from the payment of said salaries, to another public use, there is detriment
and hindrance to the public service. (U.S. vs. Ejercito, 6 Phil. 80)
Illegal use of public funds or property distinguished from malversation under Art. 217.
The offenders are accountable public officers in both crimes.
(2) The offender in illegal use of public funds or property does not derive any personal gain or profit; in malversation, the offender in certain cases profits from the proceeds of the crime.
(3) In illegal use, the public fund or property is applied to another public use; in malversation, the public fund or property is applied to the personal use and benefit of the offender or of another person.
Elements common to all acts of malversation under Art. 217
- . That the offender be a public officer.
- ## That he had the custody or control of funds or property by reason of duties of his office.3.That those funds or property were public funds or property for which he was accountable.
- - . That he appropriated, took, misappropriated or consented or, through abandonment or negligence, permitted another person to take them.
Elements of A r t . 2 1 8 . Failure of accountable officer to render accounts.
- That the offender is a public officer, whether in the service or separated therefrom.
- That he must be an accountable officer for public tunds or property.
- That he is required by law or regulation to render accounts to the Commission on Audit, or to a provincial auditor.
- That he fails to do so for a period of two months after such accounts phould ho rendered.
Acts punishable under Art. 221. Failure to make delivery of public funds or property.
- By failing to make payment by a public officer who is under obligation to make such payment from Government funds in his possession.
- By refusing to make delivery by a public officer who has been ordered by competent authority to deliver any property in his custody or under his administration.
Elements of act. 221 failure to make payment.
That the public officer has Government funds in his possession.
That he is under obligation to make payment from such funds.
That he fails to make the payment maliciously.
Private individuals who may be liable under Arts. 217 to 221
- Private individuals who, in any capacity whatever, have charge of any national, provincial or municipal funds, revenue, or property.
- Administrator or depository of funds or property, attached, seized or deposited by public authority, even if such property belongs to a private individual.
Purpose of Art. 222.
The purpose of Article 222 of the Revised Penal Code is to extend the provisions of the Code on malversation to private individuals. (People vs. Escalante,
What happened in the case of US vs Rastrollo
In civil proceedings to obtain a preventive attachment to secure a debt contracted by accused Rastrollo, then a defendant, 1121 ft. of hose, among other properties belonging to said Rastrollo, was attached. The attached property remained in the possession of Rastrollo who, with the consent of the attorney for the plaintiff, sold the same to the Manila Fire Department. Rastrollo failed to deliver the proceeds of the sale to the attorney for the plaintiff immediately after selling the hose, and deposited the proceeds of the sale in court after four (4) months following the day the complaint was filed against him for embezzlement,
If the acts with which the accused is charged constitute a crime whatever, it would be that of malversation of property attached by judicial order. The act could not be regarded as constituting estafa, because the property alleged to have been misapplied was not the subject of a mere private bailment but of a judicial deposit. This gives the depository a character equivalent to that of a public official, and breach of his obligation is similar to the violation of the obligations imposed by public office.
Sheriffs and receivers fall under the term “administrator.”
The words “administrator” and “depository” include the sheriffs and receivers. Thus, if they misappropriate money or property under their custody, they are liable for malversation.
Are Judicial administrator covered by this article.
The word “administrator” here used does not include judicial administrator appointed to administer the estate of a deceased person, because he is not in charge of any property attached, impounded or placed in deposit by public authority.
Conversion of effects in his trust makes him liable for estafa.
What is embezzlement?
Malversation is otherwise called embezzlement. Note the word “embezzled” in the phrase “or equal to the total value of the property embezzled” in the penultimate paragraph of Art. 217.
