-fd5djx~ - sandiganbayan home pagesb.judiciary.gov.ph/decisions/2009/b_crim_28109_joson,...

ATTY. LILExecutive CI k of Ci

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILlPPINESThi Division

~anaiBanhat!anQuezon City

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,Plan tiff,

For: Violation of Sec. 3 (i)of R.A. 3019, As Amended

DR. ANTONIO DELA FUENTEJOSON, JR.,

VILLARUZ, J., ChairpersonDE LA CRUZ, J. &GERALDEZ, JJ.

-fd5DJx~ 2G, ~0 ~x -----------------------,----------------------------------------------------------------~-----x

"That on or about February 5, 2000 or subsequent thereto, inManila, Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court,accused DR. ANTONIO DELA FUENTE JOSON JR., a public official,being then a member of the Board of Optometry, ProfessionalRegulatory Commission (sic), with Salary Grade 28, did then andthere, willfully, unlawfully and criminally take advantage of his officialposition by having direct interest for personal gain in the specialexamination in ocular pharmacology for optometrists, given on saidday, wherein the accused participated in by taking the test andsuccessfully passed it, which transaction, the accused fully well k,new ~""~

1//r !

DECISIONPP vs. Dr. Antonio D. Joson, Jr.Crim. Case No. 28109

ON:Executive Cler. 01 Court ill

Thi11d ivision

that he is prohibited by law from having any interest, he being amember of the Board of Optometry, which administered andconducted it, although he did not participate in the approval of theresult of the examination.

Rafael Rubrico, was arraigned, and he entered a plea of "Not GUilty".1

defense. Afterwards, the Court declared the pre-trial closed and terminated,2

President of the Integrated Philippine Association of Optometrists (IPAO) in

2001 and 2002, testified3 that she knows Dr. Antonio dela Fuente Joson Jr.,\

he having been indorsed by IPAO to the Professional R~9U ~ commisslon1n1 Records, Volume 1, p. 43. \' \2 Pre-Trial Orderdafed December 19,2005, Records, Volume 1, page 141. ~ /, TSN dated March 9, 2006 • r

2 ~


ATTY. LILY ONExecutiv~ Clef, of Court DI

'fbir Division

(PRC) as nominee for member of the Board of Optometry. She affirmed that

the accused was a duly appointed member of the Board of Optometry.4 She

Dyhongpo, Dr. Marissa Callarta-Oliveros and Dr. Vic Cinco. By authority of the

IPAO, she filed a complaint5 against Dr. Antonio Joson Jr. and Dr. Oliveros

During the testimony of witness Ramos, the accused admitted that he

applied for,6 took and passed the Special Certification Examination on Ocular

Pharmacology for Optometrists,7 held on February 5, 2000, and that the

and Regulations Governing the Examination and Registration of Optometrists

and the Regulation of the Practice of Optometry,8 and also Resolution No.7,

Series of 1999, on the Administration of the Special Certification Examination

in Pharmacology.' <" n4 Exhibits A, A-1 and B5 Exhibit J6 Exhibit F (Notice of Admission) and Exhibit F-1 (PRC Certification dated September 2, 2005)7 Exhibit G8 Exhibit C9 Exhibit 0


ATTY. LILYExecutive Cler

Third

Dr. Erlinda Reyes, an optometrist since 1952 and IPAO President

from June 1, 2003 to May 31, 2005, affirmed10 her statements in her Reply

Affidavit,11 that it is the Board of Optometry which checks and rates the test

Dr. Ligaya Perez, Chairperson of the Board of Optometry in 1997

until 2002, testified12 that on February 5, 2000, the Board administered the

would "transmutate" or adjust one to two points for all the examinees so that I~ I

10 TSN dated March 15, 2006 . 1111 Exhibit K" TSN dated Maceh 16, 2006 V


A'I'TY. LILYExecutive CJer

Third

results 13 of the 2000 special certification examination in ocular pharmacology

She saw to it, as Chairperson of the Board, that there was no anomaly in the

correction of the test papers, the computer checking the answer sheets bei~~

operated by the confidential personnel at the confidential room at the PRe \~

The Board deliberated on the results without knowing the names of the

!(j


ATTY. LILYExecutive Cler1 of

a'bird ivioioD

Gina Consignado is the Officer-in-Charge of the Rating Division of the

PRC from May 2004 until the time she testified.14 She elucidated that among

examination in ocular pharmacology,15 the Transmutation Table of Scores 16

of the subject examination, the Table of Results 17of the subject examination,

14 TSN dated July 27, 200615 Exhibit M16 Exhibit N17 Exhibit 0


ATrY. LILYExecutive Cler of Court In

Tbil'ld ivision

"PRS",18 dated 02-08-02, Transmutation Table,19 and the Table of Results of

the February 2002 ocular pharmacology examination.2o According to this

On October 5, 2006,21 the prosecution formally offered its documentary

Resolution, dated November 28,2006,22 admitted in evidence, namely:

Certified true copy of the Appointment, datedNovember 3, 1997, of Antonio dela FuenteJoson Jr., as Board Member of the Board ofOptometry

Certified true copy of th Oath of Office, datedNovember 19,1997, of accused Antonio JosonJr.

Original copy of Certification, signed by LeonorTripan Rosero (tenure of Antonio Joson Jr. asmember of the Board)

Certified true copy of Resolution No.3, Seriesof 1997, of the Board of Optometry consistin~of 27 pages .Section 32 thereof

Enclosed powers and functions of the Board ofOptometry

Certified true copy of Resolution No.7, Seriesof 1999 of the Board of Optometry consisting of

18 Exhibit P19 Exhibit Q20 Exhibit R21 Records, Volume I, p. 23022 Ibid., p. 298

DECISIONPP vs. Dr. Antonio D..Joson, Jr.Crim. Case No. 28109

Signature of Antonio Joson, Jr. above histypewritten name

Signature of Ligaya Perez, above hertypewritten name

Enclosed paragraph 6 of Resolution No.7,Series of 1999

Certificate of Completion of Antonio Joson Jr.for the special course General Pharmacologyand Ocular Pharmaco- Therapeutics (November15, 1998 to June 20, 1999)

Notice of Admission, dated January 17, 2000,for the Ocular Pharmacology examination

Certification, dated September 2, 2005, ofEmma Francisco

Certified true copy of Roll of SuccessfulExaminees in the Special CertificationExamination in Ocular Pharmacology held inFebruary 2000

Result/Roll of Successful Examinees in theOcular Pharmacology Examination held onFebruary 4, 2002, consisting of 3 pages

,'~~)'0\. .'.. J

Original Complaint of Victoria E. Ramos, datedMarch 17, 2003 consisting of 7 pages \Signature above the typewritten name Victoria \

Ramos 1/(\ '~ ) 'y./

8


ATTY. LILY ONExceutive Cluk of Court In

Thirid

Original Reply Affidavit, dated July 11, 2003, ofErlinda Reyes, consisting of 5 pages

Signature above the typewritten name ErlindaV. Reyes

Commitment, dated January 15, 1997, ofAntonio Joson, Jr. as Board Member of theBoard of Optometry

Signature above the typewritten name ofaccused Antonio Joson, Jr.

Demurrer to Evidence,23 which was granted by the Court on February 16,

in 2000, testified27 that her duties include overseeing and coordinating the

23 Records, Volume I, p. 301.24 Ibid., p. 344.25 Ibid., p. 346.26 Ibid., p. 411.27 TSN dated August 22, 2007

\\ ,~\)~\\


V. ByrONExecutiv Clerk of Court III

hiJ'ld Division

Hermogenes Pobre, Chairperson of the PRC from 1992 until January

17, 2001, testifiedL~8that he knew the accused as a member of the Board of

Optometry and that he took a special examination in ocular pharmacology i.n

2000. He remembered that there was a letter from the accused requesting 0


ATTY. LILExecutive Cl· k of Court III

Thi~ Division

Dr. Vic H. Cinco, a member of the Board of Optometry in 2000,

testified29 that under R.A. 8050, optometrists who are graduates of a four-year

examination to enhance their profession and apply their learnings on their

patients. According to him, under the new law, the former four-year cours \\


!TONC\·,lrt. HI

Di"·'"i~.;;(n:

writers for that purpose,3D which hiring is strictly confidential. These item

30 Exhibit 4, Board of Optometry Resolution No. 12, series of 1999, "Appointment of Item Writers forBiochemistry, General Pharmacology and Ocular Pharmacology in the February 5, 2000 SpecialCertification Examination in Pharmacology (Ocular)" . /

12 )f'


ATTY. LILY V.Executive Gler;; J Court ID

Thir:d Di 'sion

of the PRC, through Chairperson of the Board Ligaya Perez. The said letter

was received32 by the Commission and approved, as shown by a marginal

31 TSN, dated May 13, 200832 Exhibit 3-A, Commission Logbook entry


l BJTONEx€cnti',,~ ': ~'\)f C'c.urt nI

."" 1rd ni'·~.-.iof'

with a copy kept by the Rating Division of the PRe and the other by the Boar~,


ATTY. LILY . I ONExecuti 'lt~ Clerk of Court In

Tbim

letter of inhibition33 to then PRC Chairperson Antonieta Fortuna Ibe for


ATrY. LIL . ElTONExecuth",~ C'd, ('J i ),1"1; III

Thir Dh'iFlon

2002 ocular pharmacology examination during which Dr. Oliveros was an

examinee, but the latter took it only with the approval of the Commission.34

dated October 7, 2008, admitted, namely:36

Copy of the Appointment of the accused as amember of the Board of Optometry

Copy of Board Resolution No. 3 of the Board ofOptometry, Series of 1997

Letter request, dated October 25, 1999, and PRCLogbook Entry

Resolution No. 12, Series of 1999, of the Boardof Optometry

Record of the preparation of test question sheet, \.in pharmacology special examination .,\

; \\ ~\

Release of the Results of the special examination \on February 5, 2000

34 Exhibit 835 Records, Volume II, p. 8036 Ibid., p. 146


A'l"TY. LILY V.Exe('utive C"rk 0 Court m

ThiI1d Di sion

Letter of inhibition, dated January 28, 2002, of Dr.Marissa Oliveros

and coordination with the Professional Regulation Commission.37 The PRC

exercises general supervision over the Board.38

\\ \

On November 4, 1997, the Board, with the approval of the PRC, ~ ;

passed Board Resolution No.3, Series of 1997, or the Rules and Regulations \"

37 Sections 12 (a), (b), and (d) of R.A. 805038 Section 14, Board Resolution No.3, Series of 1997

n


October 25, 1999, the accused informed PRe '''J ')he was going to take the aforesaid special

ATTY. LIL V. BITON~E:xecutive C10xk of Court III

Till Division

"Optometrists Competency in the Use of DiagnosticPharmaceutical Agents (DPA) -- Persons who have been admittedto the practice of optometry prior to the passage of Republic Act No.8050 must take a course in Pharmacology to be prescribed by theCommission on Higher Education (CHED) and pass a specialcertification examination to be administered by the Board before theyare allowed to use specific diagnostic pharmaceutical agents."

Competence in Pharmacology. -- Persons who have beenadmitted to the practice of the profession prior to the passage of thisAct must take a course in Pharmacology to be prescribed by theCommission on Higher Education and pass a special certificationexamination to be administered by the Board before they are allowedto use specific diagnostic pharmaceutical agents.


examination at the latter. As part of the PRe standard procedure for each

examination, the encoding and extraction of the test questions and '\the

correction of the answer sheets are all done by computer (specifically by ,he "\

optical mark reader) and the Board thereafter deliberates the results with th


ATTY. LILYExecutiv8 Cl.:r

ThiJ'ld

rO:tfof Court In

ivision

"Section 3. Corrupt Practices of Public Officers. -- Inaddition to acts or omissions of public officers already penalized byexisting law, the following shall constitute corrupt practices of anypublic officer and are hereby declared to be unlawful:

"(i) Directly or indirectly becoming interested, for personal gain,or having a material interest in any transaction or act requiring theapproval of a board, panel or group of which he is a member, and

20 ~(1

CERTIFIED TRUE .:"'.,:;'. COPIIi


ATrY. LILY V.Exeeutive Clerk 0 Cow:t m

Thi11d Di mOD

which exercises discretion in such approval, even if he votes againstthe same or does not participate in the action of the board, committee,panel or group.

"Interest for personal gain shall be presumed against thosepublic officers responsible for the approval of manifestly unlawful,inequitable, or irregular transactions or acts by the board, panel orgroup to which they belong."

gain in the special examination in ocular pharmacology for optometrists,

/

VJ

{,"ERTIFIED TRUE .. ~"~' '. CO~I


ATrY. LILY TO~Executive ele of Court In

,Thi Division

includes facts and circumstances out of which a claim may arise,39 which is

Application and Qualification Evaluation Division, which receives, evaluates

and either approves or disapproves applications for examination along With0'

the required documents. Thus, the special certification examination conducted \

on February 5, 2000 was not exactly a transaction between the Board and \\

~/


effect in the sensible world,4o and may be unilateral. In the present case, the

discretionary act is in order. In Lamb v. Phipps,41 the Honorable Supreme

"A purely ministerial act or duty, in contradistinction to adiscretionary act, is one which an officer or tribunal performs in agiven state of facts, in a prescribed manner, in obedience to themandate of legal authority without regard to the exercise of his ownjudgment, upon the propriety or impropriety of the act done.

"If the law imposes a duty upon a public officer, and giveshim the right to decide how and when the duty shall beperformed, such act is discretionary and not ministerial.

"The duty is ministerial only when the discharge of the samerequires the exercise of neither official discretion nor judgment."(Emphasis supplied)

upon the Board of Optometry the authority to administer a special certificatior., \

examination in pharmacology which must be taken and passed by perso s\\\\who have been admitted to the practice of the profession prior to the passage

40 People v Adriano, 78 Phil 56941 22 Phil 450-456

CERTIFIED TRUE ~'-~":¥'. CO:e1:1


ATrY. LILY V;. ON'Executive Clerk of Court iu

Third ivisioD

the Regulation of the Practice of Optometry,42 and on September 15, 1999,

42 Section 33 of the said board resolution enumerates the requirements for taking the special certificationexamination. Thus:

Sec. 33. Requirements for Taking Special Certification Examination. - To qualify forthe special certification examination, an applicant must file an application with the ApplicationDivision of the PRC dUly accomplished, together with the following documents:

a. Authentic or authenticated copy of Certificate of Registration as Optometristb. Authentic or authenticated xerox copy of valid Professional License (I.D.)c. Certificate of completion of the special course in Pharmacology prescribed by the CHEDissued by the appropriate official of a school, college or university, public or private, offeringthe prescribed course.


ArTY. LILY V;llixecutive Cler of Court m

Third ivisioD

applications for examination to be submitted to the Application Division43 of

the PRe for evaluation, along with the required documents.44

Vi43 Complete designation is Application and Qualification Evaluation Division on page 2 of Exhibit 744 "WHEREAS, the Board has decided to conduct and administer the special certification examination inpharmacology starting this year.

"WHEREFORE, the Board hereby resolved to conduct the special certification examination inpharmacology to registered optometrists on February 5, 2000.

"Applicants for ex amination shall submit applications with the Application Division of the ProfessionalRegulation Commission duly accomplished with the following documents attached thereto:

a. authentic or authenticated copy of certificate of registration as optometristb. authentic or authenticated copy of current professional license andc. certificate or diploma of completion of the special course on pharmacology issued

by the official of the school, college or university authorized to issue suchcertificate or diploma bearing the official seal of the school, college or university."

CERTIFIED TRUE - -< •..' ~',,''f' CODV'r • _ ;&...J...I!oI1


3(h) of the same law. In People v. Sapaden,45 it was held that:

"Where the law (Section 3, Anti-Graft and Corrupt PracticesLaw, Rep. Act 3019) speaks of .pecuniary interest' and .personalgain', it could not have intended to cover isolated transactions orcontracts that involve only a few pesos as profit or gain, xxx rather, itwas intended to cover cases where substantial profit or material gainis involved and one that would sap at the economy of the governmentand prejudice its interest at the instance of, if not by, a public servantwho is supposed to serve and protect it, and to which he shouldrender loyalty."

four to six years under R.A. 8050, and presently includes Pharmacology, a

study involving the use of diagnostic pharmaceutical agents (DPAs)46 used to

45 CA-G.R. No. 16653-CR, June 15, 1976.46 Sec 3(d). "Diagnostic pharmaceutical agents"- Specific topical drugs used to aid optometrists in theirexamination of the human eye. Until otherwise specified by the Board of Optometry, upon approval bythe Secretary of the Department of Health (DOH) upon the recommendation of the Bureau of Fodd andDrugs (BFAD), these agents shall be limited to the following: '. . }.y

(1) Phenyleprine 2.5% ophthalmic drops; '.(2) Tropicamide 0.5% ophthalmic drops; ~(3) Proparacaine 0.5% ophthalmic drops; "'. .'(4) Oxybuprocaine HCL 0.4% ophthalmic drops; and '. '. ,"- j(5) Fluorecein strips. "\ .",')

26 \1

CERTIFIED TRUE ." """~' c.o~1


ATTY. LIL . BIT<»{'Executive C rk of Court m

Thi Division

developments in optometry, optometric services being promoted as a regular

component of the primary health care system.47

the spirit of public service, no less a public spirit because it may incidentally

be a means of livelihood.48 Far from being material or for personal gain, any

the State as essential in safeguarding and enhancing the heath and general

physical well-being of the citizenry.49 Any resulting additional income to the

certification examination in pharmacology on February 5, 20~,\o..~. part from his

47 Ibid. ".

" In "" Authority to Conanue Use of F;nn N,me, 92 SCRA 10, July 30, 1979. , I,· Itv'/·" Section 2, R.A 8050 V.,

27 j

CjjRTIFLED TRUE . -..,•.,~'. CO.PXlJ


or transaction approved by a board, panel or group is "manifestly unlawful,

inequitable, or irregular".5o "Manifest" means capable of being readily and

concealed, or capable of being easily understood or recognized at once by

the mind, not obscure but obvious and evident,51 Such manifestly unlawful,

V50 Second paragraph, Section 3(i), R.A. 3019. \51 Webster's Third New International Dictionary, G. & C. Merriam Co., Massachusettes, USAjCopyright 1976, p. 1375.

CERTIFIEU TRUE


ATTY. LILY~xeeutive Cler of Court m

Thi11d ivisioD


ATTY. LILY ONExecutive Cler of Court m

:l'hird ivisiou

overcome the presumption of innocence.52 Proof beyond reasonable doubt

exclusion of all possibility of error. 53 Guilt beyond reasonable doubt of the

accused must be proven on the strength of the evidence of the prosecution,

and not on the weakness of the evidence of the defense. 54 When there is

doubt on the guilt of the accused, the doubt should be resolved in his favor.55

Indeed, "[a]cquitting the guilty and condemning the innocent--the LORD

detests them both".56

As the act from which civil liability may arise did not exist, no awar

civil liability is adjudged. (,:\

52 Buenaventura v People, 493 SC 223. .53 Calimutan v People, 482 SCRA 4 .54 Biong v People, 500 SeRA 32.55 Abarquez v People, 479 SCRA 22 .56 Proverbs 17:15

CERTIFIED- TRUE ". « .•. ~....•.. CQ~fI


ATTY. LILY V. BE~€ClItive Clerk of urt III

Third Divisi D

~(1J?/1

FRANCI . 0 H. VILLARUZ, JR.Chairprson/Associate Justice


~

/":\, r-, (

I/.'! /'1..' f; I . J

FRANC .,.CO H. VIL~RUZ, JR.Ch irperson, Third Division

~t:i~Acting Presiding Justice

-fd5djx~ - sandiganbayan home pagesb.judiciary.gov.ph/decisions/2009/b_crim_28109_joson,...

Documents