One comment on “Petitioners file Motion for Partial Reconsideration of SC decision on DAP

  1. Rizalde F Laudencia says:

    About good faith as defense . . .

    In Ysidoro v. People (G.R. No. 192330; 14 November 2012), the Supreme Court ruled:

    • Malice or criminal intent is not an element of technical malversation
    • The law punishes the diversion of public property earmarked by law or ordinance for a particular public purpose to another public purpose
    • The offense is malum prohibitum
    • It is the commission of an act as defined by the law – not its character or effect – that determines whether or not Article 220 of the Revised Penal Code has been violated

    So, it would not be that difficult to prosecute all the officials responsible for the diversion of billions of DAP funds.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s