Is the transfer of the director’s shares to the buyer enough to extinguish criminal liability for failure to remit the loan amortizations to the SSS?
One of the defenses that an employer may raise in a suit against him for violation of the provisions of RA 1161 is that he has sold his shares before the suit was filed against him? Is the transfer of the shares to another owner before the filing of the case sufficient to extinguish his criminal liability?
This was one of the issues raised by the employer in the case of Victor de Jesus vs. CA (GR No. 101630). In this case, the petitioner and his stepmother who are both directors of the Southern Island Colleges were charged with violation of Section 28 (h) of the Social Security Law for their failure to remit the SSS loan amortizations of the respondent employee.
In its motion to quash, the petitioner argued that the criminal action has been extinguished by the sale of his shares in the school before the complaint for estafa was filed against him.
The Supreme Court ruled against the petitioner. It found that the criminal liability of the employer is not extinguished by the sale of the shares before the filing of the criminal action. It stated that “On the third ground, it must be stressed that criminal liability is personal to the offender and cannot be transferred to another by contract. Criminal culpability attaches to the offender upon the commission of the offense, and from that instant, liability appends to him until extinguished as provided by law. The time of filing of the criminal complaint is material only for determining prescription. Consequently, petitioner’s reported transfer of his shares in the Southern Island Colleges to Ramon Magsaysay Memorial Colleges did not extinguish his criminal liability nor transfer the same to his vendee or assignee.”
