7/25/2019 Uy v. Sandiganbayan

1/7

Republic of the Philippines

SUPREME COURT

Manila

EN BANC

G.R. Nos. 105965-70 March 20, 2001

GEORGE UY,petitioner,

vs.

THE HON. SAN!GAN"AYAN, THE HON. OM"USMAN AN THE HON. ROGER C. "ER"ANO, SR., SPEC!A#

PROSECUT!ON O$$!CER !!!, O$$!CE O$ THE SPEC!A# PROSECUTOR,respondents.

R E S O # U T ! O N

PUNO, J.%

Before the Court is the Motion for Further Clarification filed by Obudsan Aniano A. !esierto of the Court"s rulin# in its

decision dated Au#ust $, %$$$ and resolution dated February &&, &''' that the prosecutory po(er of the Obudsan

e)tends only to cases co#ni*able by the +andi#anbayan and that the Obudsan has no authority to prosecute cases

fallin# (ithin the urisdiction of re#ular courts.

-he Court stated in its decision dated Au#ust $, %$$$

/0n this connection, it is the prosecutor, not the Obudsan, (ho has the authority to file the correspondin#

inforation1s a#ainst petitioner in the re#ional trial court. -he Obudsan e)ercises prosecutorial po(ers only in

cases co#ni*able by the +andi#anbayan./

0t e)plained in the resolution of February &&, &''' that

/2t3he clear iport of such pronounceent is to reco#ni*e the authority of the +tate and re#ular provincial and city

prosecutors under the !epartent of 4ustice to have control over prosecution of cases fallin# (ithin the

urisdiction of the re#ular courts. -he investi#ation and prosecutorial po(ers of the Obudsan relate to cases

ri#htfully fallin# (ithin the urisdiction of the +andi#anbayan under +ection %5 2%3 of R.A. 677' 2/An Act Providin#

for the Functional and +tructural Or#ani*ation of the Office of the Obudsan, and for other purposes/3 (hich

vests upon the Obudsan /primaryurisdiction over cases co#ni*able by the +andi#anbayan. . ./ And this is

further buttressed by +ection %% 28a3 of R.A. 677' (hich ephasi*es that the Office of the +pecial Prosecutor

shall have the po(er to /conduct preliinary investi#ation and prosecute criinal cases within the jurisdiction of

the Sandiganbayan./ -hus, repeated references to the +andi#anbayan"s urisdiction clearly serve to liit theObudsan"s and +pecial Prosecutor"s authority to cases co#ni*able by the +andi#anbayan./

+ee9in# clarification of the fore#oin# rulin#, respondent Obudsan raises the follo(in# points

/2%3 -he urisdiction of the :onorable +andi#anbayan is not parallel to or e;uated (ith the broader urisdiction of

the Office of the Obudsan

7/25/2019 Uy v. Sandiganbayan

2/7

2&3 -he phrase /priary urisdiction of the Office of the Obudsan over cases co#ni*able by the

+andi#anbayan/ is not a deliitation of its urisdiction solely to +andi#anbayan cases< and

2=3 -he authority of the Office of the +pecial Prosecutor to prosecute cases before the +andi#anbayan cannot be

confused (ith the broader investi#atory and prosecutorial po(ers of the Office of the Obudsan./

-hus, the atter that needs to be discussed herein is the scope of the po(er of the Obudsan to conduct preliinary

investi#ation and the subse;uent prosecution of criinal offenses in the li#ht of the provisions of the Obudsan Act of

%$>$ 2Republic Act ?RA@ 677'3.

e held that the Obudsan is clothed (ith authority to conduct preliinary investi#ation and to prosecute all criinal

cases involvin# public officers and eployees, not only those (ithin the urisdiction of the +andi#anbayan, but those (ithin

the urisdiction of the re#ular courts as (ell.

-he authority of the Obudsan to investi#ate and prosecute offenses coitted by public officers and eployees is

founded in +ection %5 and +ection %% of RA 677'. +ection %5 vests the Obudsan (ith the po(er to investi#ate and

prosecute any act or oission of any public officer or eployee, office or a#ency, (hen such act or oission appears to beille#al, unust, iproper or inefficient, thus

/+EC-0ON %5. Powers, Functions and Duties. -he Office of the Obudsan shall have the follo(in# po(ers,

functions and duties

2%3 Investigate and prosecute on its own or on complaint by any person, any act or omission of any public officer

or employee, office or agency, when such act or omission appears to be illegal, unjust, improper or inefficient. 0t

has priary urisdiction over cases co#ni*able by the +andi#anbayan and, in the e)ercise of this priary

urisdiction, it ay ta9e over, at any sta#e, fro any investi#atory a#ency of overnent, the investi#ation of

such cases

-hus, in the advent of the %$7= Constitution, the ebers of the Constitutional Convention sa( the need to

constitutionali*e the office of the Obudsan, to #ive it political independence and ade;uate po(ers to enforce its

recoendations.$-he %$7= Constitution andated the le#islature to create an office of the Obudsan to be 9no(n as

-anodbayan. 0ts po(ers shall not be liited to receivin# coplaints and a9in# recoendations, but shall also include

the filin# and prosecution of criinal, civil or adinistrative case before the appropriate body in case of failure of ustice.+ection 6, Article 000 of the %$7= Constitution read

/+EC-0ON 6. -he Batasan# Pabansa shall create an office of the Obudsan, to be 9no(n as -anodbayan,

(hich shall receive and investi#ate coplaints relative to public office, includin# those in #overnentDo(ned or

controlled corporations, a9e appropriate recoendations, and in case of failure of justice as defined by law,

file and prosecute the corresponding criminal, civil or administrative case before the proper court or body./

0pleentin# this constitutional provision, President Marcos, on 4une %%, %$7>, e)ercisin# his po(er under Proclaation

%'>%, enacted Presidential !ecree 2P!3 %8>7 creatin# the Office of the Obudsan to be 9no(n as -anodbayan. 0ts

principal tas9 (as to /investi#ate, on coplaint, any adinistrative act%'of any adinistrative a#ency%%includin# any

#overnentDo(ned or controlled corporation./%&-he -anodbayan also had the duty to file and prosecute the correspondin#

criinal, civil, or adinistrative case before the +andi#anbayan or the proper court or body if he has reason to believe that

any public official, eployee, or other person has acted in a anner resultin# in a failure of ustice.%=0t should be noted,

ho(ever, that the prosecution of cases fallin# (ithin the urisdiction of the +andi#anbayan (as to be done by the

-anodbayan throu#h the +pecial Prosecutor (ho, accordin# to P! %8>6, %8had the e)clusive authority to conduct

preliinary investi#ation, file inforation for and prosecute cases (ithin the urisdiction of said court. -he +pecial

Prosecutor (as then under the control and supervision of the +ecretary of 4ustice.%5

7/25/2019 Uy v. Sandiganbayan

5/7

+hortly after its enactent, P! %8>7 (as aended by P! %6'7 (hich too9 effect on !eceber %', %$7>. -he aendatory

la( broadened the authority of the -anodbayan to investi#ate adinistrative acts of adinistrative a#encies by authori*in#

it to conduct an investi#ation on its o(n otion or initiative, even (ithout a coplaint fro any person.%6-he ne( la( also

e)panded the prosecutory function of the -anodbayan by creatin# the Office of the Chief +pecial Prosecutor in the Office of

the -anodbayan and placin# under his direction and control the +pecial Prosecutor (ho had the /e)clusive authority to

conduct preliinary investi#ation of all cases co#ni*able by the +andi#anbayan< to file inforations therefor and to directand control the prosecution of said cases therein./%7-hus, the la( provided that if the -anodbayan has reason to believe

that any public official, eployee, or other person has acted in a anner (arrantin# criinal or disciplinary action or

proceedin#s, he shall cause hi to be investi#ated by the Office of the Chief +pecial Prosecutor (ho shall file and

prosecute the correspondin# criinal or adinistrative case before the +andi#anbayan or the proper court or before the

proper adinistrative a#ency.%>

On 4uly %>, %$7$, P! %6=' (as enacted further aendin# P! %8>7 and P! %6'7. P! %6=' reor#ani*ed the Office of the

-anodbayan and transferred the po(ers previously vested in the +pecial Prosecutor to the -anodbayan hiself. -hus, the

-anodbayan (as epo(ered to directly conduct preliinary investi#ation, file inforation and prosecute cases (ithin the

urisdiction of the +andi#anbayan and other courts. -he aendent #ave the -anodbayan the e)clusive authority to

conduct preliinary investi#ation of all cases co#ni*able by the +andi#anbayan< to file inforation therefor and to directand control the prosecution of said cases.%$+ection %' of P! %6=' provided

/+ec. %'. Powers. he-anodbayan shall have the follo(in# po(ers

2a3 :e ay investi#ate, on coplaint by any person or on his o(n otion or initiative, any adinistrative act

(hether aountin# to any criinal offense or not of any adinistrative a#ency includin# any #overnentDo(ned

or controlled corporation further stated

/+EC-0ON %>. Prosecution of Public Personnel or OtherPerson. 0f the -anodbayan has reason to believe that

any public official, eployee or other person has acted in a anner (arrantin# criinal or disciplinary action or

proceedin#s, he shall conduct the necessary investi#ation and shall file and prosecute the correspondin# criinal

or adinistrative case before the +andi#anbayan or the proper court or before the proper adinistrative a#ency./

ith the ratification of the %$>7 Constitution, a ne( Office of the Obudsan (as created. -he present Obudsan, as

protector of the people, is andated to act proptly on coplaints filed in any for or anner a#ainst public officials oreployees of the #overnent or any subdivision, a#ency or instruentality thereof, includin# #overnentDo(ned or

controlled corporations, and to notify the coplainants of the action ta9en and the result thereof.&':e possesses the

follo(in# po(ers, functions and duties

/%. 0nvesti#ate on its o(n, or on coplaint by any person, any act or oission of any public official, eployee,

office or a#ency, (hen such act or oission appears to be ille#al, unust, iproper, or inefficient

7/25/2019 Uy v. Sandiganbayan

6/7

&. !irect, upon coplaint or at its o(n instance, any public official or eployee of the overnent, or any

subdivision, a#ency or instruentality thereof, as (ell as of any #overnentDo(ned or controlled corporation (ith

ori#inal charter, to perfor and e)pedite any act or duty re;uired by la(, or to stop, prevent and correct any

abuse or ipropriety in the perforance of duties.

=. !irect the officer concerned to ta9e appropriate action a#ainst a public official or eployee at fault, andrecoend his reoval, suspension, deotion, fine, censure, or prosecution, and ensure copliance there(ith.

8. !irect the officer concerned, in any appropriate case, and subect to such liitations as ay be provided by

la(, to furnish it (ith copies of docuents relatin# to contracts or transactions entered into by his office involvin#

the disburseent or use of public funds or properties, and report any irre#ularity to the Coission on Audit for

appropriate action.

5. Re;uest any #overnent a#ency for assistance and inforation necessary in the dischar#e of its

responsibilities, and to e)aine, if necessary, pertinent records and docuents.

6. Publici*e atters covered by its investi#ation (hen circustances so (arrant and (ith due prudence.

7. !eterine the causes of inefficiency, red tape, isana#eent, fraud, and corruption in the overnent and

a9e recoendations for their eliination and the observance of hi#h standards of ethics and efficiency.

>. Proul#ate its rules of procedure and e)ercise such other po(ers or perfor such functions or duties as ay

be provided by la(./&%

As a ne( Office of the Obudsan (as established, the then e)istin# -anodbayan becae the Office of the +pecial

Prosecutor (hich continued to function and e)ercise its po(ers as provided by la(, e)cept those conferred on the Office of

the Obudsan created under the %$>7 Constitution. &&

-he frae(or9s for the Office of the Obudsan and the Office of the +pecial Prosecutor (ere laid do(n by President

Cora*on A;uino in E)ecutive Order 2EO3 &8= and EO &88, both passed on 4uly &8, %$>7.

0n +epteber %$>$, Con#ress passed RA 677' providin# for the functional and structural or#ani*ation of the Office of the

Obudsan. As in the previous la(s on the Obudsan, RA 677' #ave the present Obudsan not only the duty to

receive and relay the people"s #rievances, but also the duty to investi#ate and prosecute for and in their behalf, civil,

criinal and adinistrative offenses coitted by #overnent officers and eployees as ebodied in +ections %5 and %%

of the la(.

Clearly, the Philippine Obudsan departs fro the classical Obudsan odel (hose function is erely to receive and

process the people"s coplaints a#ainst corrupt and abusive #overnent personnel. -he Philippine Obudsan, asprotector of the people, is ared (ith the po(er to prosecute errin# public officers and eployees, #ivin# hi an active

role in the enforceent of la(s on antiD#raft and corrupt practices and such other offenses that ay be coitted by such

officers and eployees. -he le#islature has vested hi (ith broad po(ers to enable hi to ipleent his o(n actions.

Reco#ni*in# the iportance of this po(er, the Court cannot dero#ate the sae by liitin# it only to cases co#ni*able by

the +andi#anbayan. 0t is apparent fro the history and the lan#ua#e of the present la( that the le#islature intended such

po(er to apply not only to cases (ithin the urisdiction of the +andi#anbayan but also those (ithin the urisdiction of re#ular

courts. -he Court observed in the case of !epublic vs" Sandiganbayan&=

7/25/2019 Uy v. Sandiganbayan

7/7

/A perusal of the la( ori#inally creatin# the Office of the Obudsan then 2to be 9no(n as the -anodbayan3, and

the aendatory la(s issued subse;uent thereto (ill sho( that, at its inception, the Office of the Obudsan (as

already vested (ith the po(er to investi#ate and prosecute civil and criinal cases before the +andi#anbayan

and even the re#ular courts.

))) ))) )))

Presidential !ecree No. %6=' (as the e)istin# la( #overnin# the then -anodbayan (hen Republic Act No. 677'

(as enacted providin# for the functional and structural or#ani*ation of the present Office of the Obudsan.

-his later la( retained in the Obudsan the po(er of the forer -anodbayan to investi#ate and prosecute on

its o(n or on coplaint by any person, any act or oission of any public officer or eployee, office or a#ency,

(hen such act or oission appears to be ille#al, unust, iproper or inefficient. ) ) )./

Finally, it ust be clarified that the authority of the Obudsan to prosecute cases involvin# public officers and eployees

before the re#ular courts does not conflict (ith the po(er of the re#ular prosecutors under the !epartent of 4ustice to

control and direct the prosecution of all criinal actions under Rule %%' of the Revised Rules of Criinal Procedure. -he

Rules of Court ust be read in conunction (ith RA 677' (hich char#ed the Obudsan (ith the duty to investi#ate andprosecute all ille#al acts and oissions of public officers and eployees. -he Court held in the case of Sanchez vs"

Demetriou&8that the po(er of the Obudsan under +ection %5 2%3 of RA 677' is not an e)clusive authority but rather a

shared or concurrent authority in respect of the offense char#ed. -hus, Adinistrative Order No. > issued by the Office of

the Obudsan provides

/-he prosecution of case co#ni*able by the +andi#anbayan shall be under the direct e)clusive control and

supervision of the Office of the Obudsan. 0n cases co#ni*able by re#ular Courts, the control and supervision

by the Office of the Obudsan is only in Obudsan cases in the sense defined 2therein3. &5 -he la(

reco#ni*es a concurrence of urisdiction bet(een the Office of the Obudsan and other investi#ative a#encies

of #overnent in the prosecution of cases co#ni*able by re#ular courts./

0N G0E :EREOF, the Court"s rulin# in its decision dated Au#ust $, %$$$ and its resolution dated February &', &''' that

the Obudsan e)ercises prosecutorial po(ers only in cases co#ni*able by the +andi#anbayan is +E- A+0!E.

+O OR!ERE!.

Davide, #r", $ "# ", %ellosillo, &elo, 'itug, &endoza, Panganiban, %uena, (onzaga)!eyes, *nares)Santiago and Sandoval)

(utierrez, ## ",concur.

+apunan, # ",concurs in the result.

uisumbing, # ",is on leave.

Pardo, #", dissent. +ee attached.

De -eon, #r", #"oin the dissentin# opinion of 4ustice B.P. Pardo.