SUBJECT: TOPIC: Date Made: Digest Maker:

Criminal Law 2 RPC 171 Feb 19, 2016 I.O.

CASE NAME: Galeos vs. People (Ong vs. People)
PONENTE: Villarama Case Date: 2011
Case Summary:
Ong, as mayor, appointed two of his relatives to work in the government. The two said in
their SALNs that they werent relatives of his. This was administered by Ong. Ong also
certified a document stating that they have complied with the rule against non-nepotism.

Ong is liable for RPC 171(4) as the SALN and the certification he made had an untruthful
statement that they werent relatives. The 3 requirements of 171(4) were met
A narration of untruthful facts in a public document The SALN is a public
document
A legal obligation to be truthful the SALN law as well as other laws governing the
eligibility for a position in the government require it.
The fact be absolutely untruthful They were absolutely relatives
Rule of Law:
Provision/s most relevant to this case.

Detailed Facts:
1. Ong moved up the ranks of the local government in Naga City, Cebu.
a. He first started out as an OIC for the mayor, but eventually moved up to the
positions of V-M and M.
2. Sometime in 1991, Ong appointed Galeos and Rivera
a. Galeos, whose mom was the sister of the mother of Ong, (so theyre cousins) was
appointed as Construction and Maintenance Man
b. Rivera, whose wifes moms sister is the mom of Ong (Rivera is the husband of
Ongs cousin), was appointed as Plumber I.
3. They gave the following information for their SALN when asked if they had relatives within
the 4th civil degree of consanguinity or affinity
Galeon Rivera
1993 NO N/A
1994 Blank Case is silent
1995 Blank NO
1996 Blank NO
4. Ong certified their oaths regarding the same. Also, he certified the document which states
that they have complied with the law against nepotism.
5. The Sangguinan of Naga City went after them for violations of the code of conduct of
public officers as well as for RPC 171 (4)
6. The Ombudsman approved prosecution under RPC 171 (4)
7. 9 Informations were filed
a. Guilty of all except Ong re: 1994 for lack of proof beyond reasonable doubt
8. Rivera died so the charges against him were dropped
9. Defenses
a. Galeos
i. Blank doesnt mean No so I didnt make an untruthful statement!
ii. We gave them the information but we werent the ones who filled the
document itself up!
iii. We didnt narrate facts, we talked about law!
b. Rivera
i. Good Faith
BLOCK D 2019 1
 ii. We gave them the information but we werent the ones who filled the
document itself up!
iii.
c. Ong
i. Adopts the others arguments
ii. I merely certified the document re: non-violation of the anti-nepotism law!

Issue:
(1)W/N there is a violation of RPC 171? YES
(2)W/N Ong is guilty for certifying the document re: nepotism? - YES
(3)W/N there was merely a narration of law and not of facts - NO
(4)W/N Good faith is a defense against 171(4) NO
Holding:
(1) The requirements of 171 (4) were met There was a legal obligation to narrate truthfully
because of the SALN law, it was made in a public document as the SALN is public, and the facts
were absolutely untruthful.
(2) Ong is guilty for the certification made by an authorized officer is tantamount to an express
affirmation of the truthfulness of the statement. Thus, the untruthfullness of the statements
certified is untruthfullness on the part of the officer
(3) Discussions of law are those made by authorities regarding the applicability of laws in certain
cases. In this case, there was merely a yes/no question regarding the fact of
consanguinity/affinity.
(4) There is a Filipino Tradition of Strong Kinship and valuing extended family ties. It would not be
likely for Galeon to not know that such a bigtime politician was a relative of his!

Things to remember
- Rivera is dead so the judgment doesnt apply to him
Ruling:
Imprisonment for 2 years, 4 months, and 1 day UP TO 8 years, 1 day, and a fine of 5,000
pesos.

BLOCK D 2019 2