Case Brief: Tabuena vs.

Sandiganbayan
G.R. Nos. 103501-03 February 17, 1997

Facts:
Then President Marcos instructed Luis Tabuena over the phone to pay directly to the
president’s office and in cash what the Manila International Airport Authority
(MIAA) owes the Philippine National Construction Corporation (PNCC), pursuant to
the 7 January 1985 memorandum of then Minister Trade and Industry Roberto
Ongpin. Tabuena agreed. About a week later, Tabuena received from Mrs. Fe Roa-
Gimenez, then private secretary of Marcos, a Presidential Memorandum dated 8
January 1986 reiterating in black and white such verbal instruction. In obedience to
President Marcos’ verbal instruction and memorandum, Tabuena, with the help of
Gerardo G. Dabao and Adolfo Peralta, caused the release of P55 Million of MIAA
funds by means of three (3) withdrawals. On 10 January 1986, the first withdrawal
was made for P25 Million, following a letter of even date signed by Tabuena and
Dabao requesting the PNB extension office at the MIAA the depository branch of
MIAA funds, to issue a manager’s check for said amount payable to Tabuena. The
check was encashed, however, at the PNB Villamor Branch. Dabao and the cashier of
the PNB Villamor branch counted the money after which, Tabuena took delivery
thereof. The P25 Million in cash was delivered on the same day to the office of Mrs.
Gimenez. Mrs. Gimenez did not issue any receipt for the money received. Similar
circumstances surrounded the second withdrawal/encashment and delivery of another
P25 Million, made on 16 January 1986. The third and last withdrawal was made on 31
January 1986 for P5 Million. Peralta was Tabuena’s co-signatory to the letter- request
for a manager’s check for this amount. Peralta accompanied Tabuena to the PNB
Villamor branch as Tabuena requested him to do the counting of the P5 Million. After
the counting, the money was loaded in the trunk of Tabuena’s car. Peralta did not go
with Tabuena to deliver the money to Mrs. Gimenez’ office. It was only upon delivery
of the P5 Million that Mrs. Gimenez issued a receipt for all the amounts she received
from Tabuena. The receipt was dated January 30,1986. Tabuena and Peralta were
charged for malversation of funds, while Dabao remained at large. One of the justices
of the Sandiganbayan actively took part in the questioning of a defense witness and of
the accused themselves; the volume of the questions asked were more the combined
questions of the counsels. On 12 October 1990, they were found guilty beyond
reasonable doubt. Tabuena and Peralta filed separate petitions for review, appealing
the Sandiganbayan decision dated 12 October 19990 and the Resolution of 20
December 1991.
Issue:
Whether or not petitioners are guilty of the crime of malversation.

Held:
Luis Tabuena and Adolfo Peralta are acquitted of the crime of malversation. Tabuena
acted in strict compliance with the MARCOS Memorandum. The order emanated
from the Office of the President and bears the signature of the President himself, the
highest official of the land. It carries with it the presumption that it was regularly
issued. And on its face, the memorandum is patently lawful for no law makes the
payment of an obligation illegal. This fact, coupled with the urgent tenor for its
execution constrains one to act swiftly without question. Records show that the
Sandiganbayan actively took part in the questioning of a defense witness and of the
accused themselves. The questions of the court were in the nature of cross
examinations characteristic of confrontation, probing and insinuation. Tabuena and
Peralta may not have raised the issue as an error, there is nevertheless no impediment
for the court to consider such matter as additional basis for a reversal since the settled
doctrine is that an appeal throws the whole case open to review, and it becomes the
duty of the appellate court to correct such errors as may be found in the judgment
appealed from whether they are made the subject of assignments of error or not.