COSEP v.

PEOPLE of the PHILIPPINES

GR No. 110353
May 21, 1998
Article III

FACTS
The Municipality of Olutanga, Zamboanga del Sur decided to construct an artesian well for one
of its localities. It hired the services of Angelino Alegre (complainant) to undertake the construction
project for Php 5,000. The construction was monitored by Tomas Cocep (petitioner), who was the
Municipal Planning and Development Coordination Officer of Olutanga. Upon completion of the project,
Cosep paid Alegre Php 4,500 and withheld the Php 500 as reimbursement for his expenses in processing
documents.
Thereafter, Alegre filed a complaint before the Sandiganbayan for violation of Section 3(b) of the
Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act (RA 3019) which pertains to the requesting or receiving of any gift,
share, percentage or benefit by a public officer in connection with any contract or transaction with the
government.
Cosep explained that Alegre was never a contractor as he claimed to be, rather he was merely one
of the 14 laborers hired to build the artesian wall. He also presented as evidence the time book and
payroll sheet of the construction project as well as the memorandum issued by the mayor of Olutanga
indicating that Alegre was hired as the head laborer of the well.
Not satisfied, the Sandiganbayan found Cosep guilty of the charge and sentenced him to
imprisonment and ordered him to pay the sough after Php 500 to Alegre. Hence this petition.
ISSUES
Whether or not Cosep was accorded an impartial trial by the Sandiganbayan.
Whether or not his guilt was proven beyond reasonable doubt to justify his conviction.
HELD
On the first issue, yes Cosep was accorded an impartial trial. His contention that the number of
the questions propounded to him was an indication of partiality and prejudgement of guilt is of no merit.
It is natural for judges and justices to ask questions to elicit facts with a view to attain justice for the
parties. The degree of inquisitiveness of judges does not necessarily translate to neutrality or lack thereof.
Judges need not remain silent or passive during proceedings just to show their lack of prejudice and
fairness.
For the second issue, the court finds that his guilt was not adequately proven beyond reasonable
doubt so as to justify his conviction. The fact that Alegre does not know a single name of the workers is
enough proof that he was not a contractor or that the other laborers worked for him. He did not present
any evidence suggesting that he was indeed a contractor which could be in the form of a project study,
delivery receipt, proof of procurement of materials etc. In all criminal cases, when the guilt of the accused
has not been proven with moral certainty, as in this case, the presumption of innocence must prevail. To
affirm the Coseps conviction would be an injustice, therefore, petitioner Cosep is acquitted.

Prepared by: Cristobal, Darlene Ciara G.