SC reverses guilty verdict vs Sulu college president

The Supreme Court has cleared the woman president of the Sulu State College of technical malversation, reversing an earlier guilty verdict of the Sandiganbayan.

In a 15-page decision penned by Justice Cancio Garcia, the Supreme Court’s third division set aside the Sandiganbayan ruling against Norma Abdulla, president of the Sulu State College, which found her guilty of using P40,000 supposedly for teachers’ salary differentials to pay for the benefits of casuals in November 1980.

Abdulla and Nenita Aguil, cashier of the Sulu State College, were accused of conspiring with Mahmud Darkis, the state college’s administrative officer, in the alleged technical malversation.

The Sandiganbayan, in its ruling dated Aug. 25, 2000 but promulgated on Sept. 27, 2000, acquitted Aguil and Darkis but convicted Abdulla, ordering her to pay a P3,000 fine and imposing a temporary special disqualification on her for six years.

The anti-graft court later deleted the temporary special disqualification against Abdulla after she appealed its ruling.

In her defense, Abdulla presented evidence showing that the Department of Budget and Management (DBM) had approved her request for the conversion of 34 secondary school teachers of the Sulu Stage College to Instructor I items.

Correspondingly, the DBM allotted P40,000 as partial funding for the salary differentials of the 34 teachers.

But only six of the 34 teachers were entitled to and paid salary differentials amounting to P8,370 since the rest, who were occupying Teacher III positions, were no longer entitled to salary differentials as they were already receiving the same salary rate as an Instructor I.

Abdulla said P31,516.16 from the remaining balance of the P40,000 allotment was used to pay the terminal leave benefits of six casuals.

The Supreme Court noted that Abdulla treasured her constitutional rights "that she came all the way to this court" despite the fact that the Sandiganbayan merely fined her P3,000 "with no imprisonment at all."

The tribunal agreed with Abdulla’s contention that the prosecution failed to prove some elements of technical malversation.