Elizabeth is the municipal treasurer of Masinloc, Zambales. On Jan. 10, 1994, she received, as municipal treasurer, from the Department of Public Works and Highways, the amount of P100,000.00 known as the fund for construction, rehabilitation, betterment, and improvement (CRBI) for the concreting of Barangay Phanix Road. Informed that the fund was already exhausted while the concreting remained unfinished, a representative of the Commission on Audit conducted a spot audit of Elizabeth who failed to account for the P100,000 CRBI fund.

Elizabeth, who was charged with malversation of public funds, was acquitted by the Sandiganbayan of that charge but was nevertheless convicted, in the same criminal case, for illegal use of public funds. On appeal, Elizabeth argued that her conviction was erroneous as she applied the amount of P50,000.00 for a public purpose without violating any law or ordinance appropriating the said amount for any specific purpose. The absence of such law or ordinance was, in fact, established.

Is the contention of Elizabeth legally tenable? Explain. (1996 BAR)