Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 398 views

    Victoriano v. Alvior

    Uploaded by

    Cars Carandang
    This case involved Victoriano Alvior, a clerk of court, who was accused of indirect bribery. Garbanzos, representing Ernado Commercial, gave Alvior 200 pesos as a token of gratitude for allowing Garbanzos to manipulate the bidding process to ensure Ernado Commercial won the bid. The court found Alvior guilty of indirect bribery as a public officer for accepting money related to his official duties, even if there was no direct agreement between Alvior and Garbanzos. Indirect bribery does not require a promise for a particular act; it is enough that a public officer accepts gifts offered due to their position. Alvior was found to have violated the anti

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Victoriano v. Alvior

    Uploaded by

    Cars Carandang
    398 views2 pages
    This case involved Victoriano Alvior, a clerk of court, who was accused of indirect bribery. Garbanzos, representing Ernado Commercial, gave Alvior 200 pesos as a token of gratitude for allowing Garbanzos to manipulate the bidding process to ensure Ernado Commercial won the bid. The court found Alvior guilty of indirect bribery as a public officer for accepting money related to his official duties, even if there was no direct agreement between Alvior and Garbanzos. Indirect bribery does not require a promise for a particular act; it is enough that a public officer accepts gifts offered due to their position. Alvior was found to have violated the anti

    Original Description:

    digest

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This case involved Victoriano Alvior, a clerk of court, who was accused of indirect bribery. Garbanzos, representing Ernado Commercial, gave Alvior 200 pesos as a token of gratitude for allowing Garbanzos to manipulate the bidding process to ensure Ernado Commercial won the bid. The court found Alvior guilty of indirect bribery as a public officer for accepting money related to his official duties, even if there was no direct agreement between Alvior and Garbanzos. Indirect bribery does not require a promise for a particular act; it is enough that a public officer accepts gifts offered due to their position. Alvior was found to have violated the anti

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    398 views2 pages

    Victoriano v. Alvior

    Uploaded by

    Cars Carandang
    This case involved Victoriano Alvior, a clerk of court, who was accused of indirect bribery. Garbanzos, representing Ernado Commercial, gave Alvior 200 pesos as a token of gratitude for allowing Garbanzos to manipulate the bidding process to ensure Ernado Commercial won the bid. The court found Alvior guilty of indirect bribery as a public officer for accepting money related to his official duties, even if there was no direct agreement between Alvior and Garbanzos. Indirect bribery does not require a promise for a particular act; it is enough that a public officer accepts gifts offered due to their position. Alvior was found to have violated the anti

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    Victoriano v.

    Alvior
    AM No. P-1597
    1 March 1978
    Crimes Committed by Public Officers (Art. 203 to 245)
    Art. 211 – Indirect Bribery
    Facts: (medyo mahirap i-explain yung facts. If this is hard to understand, you can check out the
    case itself, maiksi lang, pero Malabo)
    Alvior, a clerk of court, solicited the assistance of Garbanzos, a private individual representing
    Ernado Commercial, to facilitate a requisition. Being a representative of Ernado Commercial,
    Garbanzos used the opportunity to manipulate the canvass to insure that Ernado Commercial
    would be declared the lowest bidder.
    After confirming the fact of delivery of the items covered by subject requisition voucher by
    Ernado Commerce and the signing of the Abstract Quotation of Price, an inspection was made,
    and it was discovered that the 100 bundles of braided abaca twine were overpriced at P12.00
    per unit.
    Then Garbanzos gave Alvior 200 pesos as a token of gratitude for allowing the former to do
    what he did.
    Issue:
    YES. Whether or not the 200 pesos given to Alvior constitutes indirect bribery.
    Ruling:
    The charge against respondent Alvior for misconduct in office for having received money, in
    connection with the performance of his official duty, from Garbanzos, as token of the latter's
    gratitude, is clearly meritorious. Respondent's acceptance of money under the circumstances is
    a dishonest act. In his report. after conducting the investigation (pp. 21-22), Judge Victoriano
    stated:
    ... That he was chargeable with knowledge that Garbanzos would realize no little profit
    from the transaction must also be assumed. For Garbanzos declared under oath that he
    gave respondent P200.00 in token of his gratitude. He was grateful because respondent
    gave him the opportunity to make such a big profit when requested to help facilitate or
    expedite the requisition. Or, probably because respondent did not make any fuss
    regarding the price of the abaca twine. At any rate, it was improper for respondent to
    have received any gift or any amount from Garbanzos in connection with the
    performance of official duties. Respondent vehemently insists that no credit should be
    accorded Garbanzos' testimony on this score. But the record shows no plausible reason
    or motive why Garbanzos would wittingly make such imputation against respondent if it
    were not true, considering that in the course of his testimony he also made damaging
    admissions against himself. The suggestion that Garbanzos tried to implicate
    respondent in an attempt to save himself can hardly merit credence. For, as already
    adverted to, his having admitted giving sums of money as part of his "rapport", not only
    to respondent but also to Villaroza and Mayoga, equally implicate him and places him in
    a bad light. There is no evidence of misunderstanding, previous altercation, or
    differences between respondent and Garbanzos as to constitute sufficient motive for the
    latter to incriminate him. On the contrary, Garbanzos gave the amount to respondent
    impelled by a feeling of gratitude for him.
    Being a public officer, and having accepted a gift in the form of money which was offered to him
    by reason of his office, herein respondent Alvior is chargeable with indirect bribery punishable
    under Article 211 of the Revised Penal Code. The fact that the evidence is wanting as to direct
    connivance between Alvior and Garbanzos is of no moment since in indirect bribery "it is not
    necessary that the officer should do any particular act or even promise to do an act, as it is
    enough that he accepts gifts offered to him by reason of his office"

    You might also like