THREE contractual workers of the Balamban Water District will face trial in court for allegedly conspiring to amass a total of P1.92 million in water collections from 2008 to 2009.
Graft Investigator Carmelle Baybay-Suson found evidence to charge Christine Marie Narvasa, the water district’s acting cashier; and collectors Nelia Undray and Ellen Seblos with violation of Article 217 of the Revised Penal Code (malversation of public funds).
A separate complaint of 13 counts of falsification of a public document was filed against Narvasa.
Narvasa allegedly altered the duplicate and triplicate copies of the official receipts and made these appear the water consumers paid lesser amounts.
Undray and Seblos committed the “second form” of malversation when they gave the collections to Narvasa without any proof of receipt.
Due to their negligence, Undray and Seblos allowed Narvasa to take the public funds, the ombudsman ruled.
The case stemmed from the complaint filed by the Commission on Audit and the Ombudsman’s Field Investigation Office, which accused the respondents of malversation of public funds and falsification of public documents.
The fraud audit conducted by state auditors showed that Narvasa issued 13 officials receipts to water consumers on various dates between 2008 and 2009. But Narvasa allegedly failed to account for a total of P1,920,711.
“Accounts settled”
Replying to the charges, Seblos admitted she remitted her collections to Narvasa without any written transmittal.
She said the water firm’s Board of Directors required her to settle her unaccounted funds, which she fully paid in June 2014.
For her part, Undray said she also regularly endorsed their remittance to Narvasa. She said Narvasa even admitted during the Board’s inquiry having personally used her collections.
Undray said she even paid in full the supposed unaccounted collections.
In the resolution, the graft investigator said Narvasa’s failure to remit her water fee collections proved she used the public funds for her personal use.
Likewise, the ombudsman said that Narvasa’s flight abroad after the firm’s Board of Directors’ inquiry is “a strong indication of her guilt.”
The act of Undray and Seblos in remitting their collections to Narvasa without getting any proof of receipt also constituted negligence on their part and is considered a “mitigating circumstance being analogous to voluntary surrender.”