SYLLABI/SYNOPSIS EN BANC

[G.R. No. 128096. January 20, 1999]

PANFILO M. LACSON, petitioner v . !"# #$#C%!I&# S#CR#!AR', !"# SAN(IGAN)A'AN, OFFIC# OF !"# SP#CIAL PROS#C%!OR, !"# (#PAR!M#N! OF J%S!IC#, M'RNA A)ALORA, N#NI!A ALAP*AP, IM#L(A PANC"O MON!#RO, an+ !"# P#OPL# OF !"# P"ILIPPIN#S, respondents. ROM#O M. ACOP an+ FRANCISCO G. ,%)IA, JR., petitioners-intervenors. (#CISION MAR!IN#,, J.The constitutionality of Sections 4 and 7 of Republic Act No. 8249 an act !hich fu"the" defines the #u"isdiction of the Sandiganbayan is bein$ challen$ed in this petition fo" p"ohibition and mandamus. %etitione" %anfilo &acson' #oined by petitione"s(inte")eno"s Ro*eo Acop and +"ancisco ,ubia' -".' also see.s to p"e)ent the Sandiganbayan f"o* p"oceedin$ !ith the t"ial of C"i*inal Cases Nos. 2/047(2/017 2fo" *ultiple *u"de"3 a$ainst the* on the $"ound of lac. of #u"isdiction. The antecedents of this case' as $athe"ed f"o* the pa"ties4 pleadin$s and docu*enta"y p"oofs' a"e as follo!s5 6n the ea"ly *o"nin$ of 7ay 88' 8991' ele)en 2883 pe"sons belie)ed to be *e*be"s of the Kuratong Baleleng $an$' "epo"tedly an o"$ani9ed c"i*e syndicate !hich had been in)ol)e in a spate of ban. "obbe"ies in 7et"o 7anila' !e"e slain alon$ Co**on!ealth A)enue in :ue9on City by ele*ents of the Anti(Ban. Robbe"y and 6ntelli$ence Tas. ;"oup 2ABR6T;3 headed by Chief Supe"intendent -e!el Canson of the %hilippine National %olice 2%N%3. The ABR6T; !as co*posed of police office"s f"o* the T"affic 7ana$e*ent Co**and 2T7C3 led by petitione"(inte")eno" Senio" Supe"intendent +"ancisco ,ubia' -".< %"esidential Anti(C"i*e Co**ission Tas. +o"ce =aba$at 2%ACC(T+=3 headed by petitione" Chief Supe"intendent %anfilo 7. &acson< Cent"al %olice >ist"ict Co**and 2C%>C3 led by Chief Supe"intendent Rica"do de &eon< and the C"i*inal 6n)esti$ation Co**and 2C6C3 headed by petitione"(inte")eno" Chief Supe"intendent Ro*eo Acop. Actin$ on a *edia e?pose of S%@2 Edua"do delos Reyes' a *e*be" of the C6C' that !hat actually t"anspi"ed at da!n of 7ay 88' 8991 !as a su**a"y e?ecution 2o" a "ub out3 and not a shoot(out bet!een the Kuratong Baleleng $an$ *e*be"s and the ABR6T;' @*buds*an Aniano >esie"to fo"*ed a panel of in)esti$ato"s headed by the >eputy @*buds*an fo" 7ilita"y Affai"s' Bien)enido Blancaflo"' to in)esti$ate the incident. This panel late" absol)e f"o* any c"i*inal liability all the %N% office"s and pe"sonnel alle$edly in)ol)ed in the 7ay 88' 8991 incident' !ith a findin$ that the said incident !as a le$iti*ate police ope"ation.iA8B =o!e)e"' a "e)ie! boa"d led by @)e"all >eputy @*buds*an +"ancisco Cilla *odified the Blancaflo" panel4s findin$ and "eco**ended the indict*ent fo" *ultiple *u"de" a$ainst t!enty(si? 22D3 "espondents' includin$ he"ein petitione" and inte")eno"s. This "eco**endation !as app"o)ed by the @*buds*an' e?cept fo" the !ithd"a!al of the cha"$es a$ainst Chief Supt. Rica"do de &eon. Thus' on No)e*be" 2' 8991' petitione" %anfilo &acson !as a*on$ those cha"$ed as p"incipal in ele)en 2883 info"*ations fo" *u"de"iiA2B befo"e the Sandiganbayans Second >i)ision' !hile inte")eno"s

Ro*eo Acop and +"ancisco ,ubia' -". !e"e a*on$ those cha"$ed in the sa*e info"*ations as accesso"ies afte"(the(fact. Epon *otion by all the accused in the 88 info"*ations' iiiA/B the Sandiganbayan allo!ed the* to file a *otion fo" "econside"ation of the @*buds*an4s action.i)A4B Afte" conductin$ a "ein)esti$ation' the @*buds*an filed on 7a"ch 8' 899D ele)en 2883 a./n+/+ info"*ations)A1B befo"e the Sandiganbayan' !he"ein petitione" !as cha"$ed only as an accesso"y' to$ethe" !ith Ro*eo Acop and +"ancisco ,ubia' -". and othe"s. @ne of the accused )iADB !as d"opped f"o* the case. @n 7a"ch 1(D' 899D' all the accused filed sepa"ate *otions Fuestionin$ the #u"isdiction of the Sandi$anbayan' asse"tin$ that unde" the a*ended info"*ations' the cases fall !ithin the #u"isdiction of the Re$ional T"ial Cou"t pu"suant to Section 2 2pa"a$"aphs a and c3 of Republic Act No. 7971. )iiA7B They contend that the said la! li*ited the #u"isdiction of the Sandiganbayan to cases !he"e one o" *o"e of the G0r1n210a3 accusedH a"e $o)e"n*ent officials !ith Sala"y ;"ade 2S;3 27 o" hi$he"' o" %N% officials !ith the "an. of Chief Supe"intendent 2B"i$adie" ;ene"al3 o" hi$he". The hi$hest "an.in$ 0r1n210a3 accused in the a*ended info"*ations has the "an. of only a Chief 6nspecto"' and none has the eFui)alent of at least S; 27. The"eafte"' in a Resolution)iiiA8B dated 7ay 8' 899D 2p"o*ul$ated on 7ay 9' 899D3' penned by -ustice >e*et"iou' !ith -ustices &a$*an and de &eon concu""in$' and -ustices Bala#adia and ;a"chito"ena dissentin$'i?A9B the Sandiganbayan ad*itted the a*ended info"*ation and o"de"ed the cases t"ansfe""ed to the :ue9on City Re$ional T"ial Cou"t !hich has o"i$inal and e?clusi)e #u"isdiction unde" R.A. 7971' as none of the p"incipal accused has the "an. of Chief Supe"intendent o" hi$he". @n 7ay 87' 899D' the @ffice of the Special %"osecuto" *o)ed fo" a "econside"ation' insistin$ that the cases should "e*ain !ith the Sandiganbayan. This !as opposed by petitione" and so*e of the accused. Ihile these *otions fo" "econside"ation !e"e pendin$ "esolution' and e)en befo"e the issue of #u"isdiction c"opped up !ith the filin$ of the a*ended info"*ations on 7a"ch 8' 899D' =ouse Bill No. 2299?A80B and No. 8094?iA88B 2sponso"ed by Rep"esentati)es Edcel C. &a$*an and Neptali 7. ;on9ales 66' "especti)ely3' as !ell as Senate Bill No. 844 ?iiA82B 2sponso"ed by Senato" Neptali ;on9ales3' !e"e int"oduced in Con$"ess' definin$Je?pandin$ the #u"isdiction of the Sandiganbayan. Specifically' the said bills sou$ht' a*on$ othe"s' to a*end the #u"isdiction of the Sandiganbayan by deletin$ the !o"d Kp"incipalH f"o* the ph"ase Kp"incipal accusedH in Section 2 2pa"a$"aphs a and c3 of R.A. No. 7971. These bills !e"e consolidated and late" app"o)ed into la! as R.A. No. 8249 ?iiiA8/B. The la! is entitled' KAN ACT +ERT=ER >E+6N6N; T=E -ER6S>6CT6@N @+ T=E SANDIGANBAYAN' A7EN>6N; +@R T=E %ER%@SE %RES6>ENT6A& >ECREE N@. 8D0D' AS A7EN>E>' %R@C6>6N; +EN>S T=ERE+@R' AN> +@R @T=ER %ER%@SES.H 6t too. effect on +eb"ua"y 21' 8997.8/ by the %"esident of the %hilippines on +eb"ua"y 1' 8997. SubseFuently' on 7a"ch 1' 8997' the Sandiganbayan p"o*ul$ated a Resolution?i)A84B denyin$ the *otion fo" "econside"ation of the Special %"osecuto"' "ulin$ that it Kstands pat in its "esolution dated 7ay 8' 899D.H @n the sa*e day'?)A81B the Sandiganbayan issued an A>>EN>E7 to its 7a"ch 1' 8997 Resolution' the pe"tinent po"tion of !hich "eads5 KA45/r -ustice &a$*an !"ote the Resolution and -ustice >e*et"iou concu""ed in it' but 6/4or/ -ustice de &eon' -". "ende"ed his concu""in$ and dissentin$ opinion' the le$islatu"e enacted Republic Act 8249 and the %"esident of the %hilippines app"o)ed it on +eb"ua"y 1' 8997. Con 1+/r1n7 58/ 0/r51n/n5 0rov1 1on o4 58/ n/9 3a9, Ju 512/ La7.an an+ (/./5r1ou ar/ no9 1n 4avor o4 7ran51n7, a 58/y ar/ no9 7ran51n7, 58/ S0/21a3 Pro /2u5or: .o51on 4or r/2on 1+/ra51on. Ju 512/ +/ L/on 8a a3r/a+y +on/ o 1n 81 2on2urr1n7 an+ +1 /n51n7 o01n1on. ??? ??? ???

;Con 1+/r1n7 58a5 58r// o4 58/ a22u /+ 1n /a28 o4 58/ / 2a / ar/ PNP C81/4 Su0/r1n5/n+/n5 na*ely' -e!el T. Canson' Ro*eo 7. Acop and %anfilo 7. &acson' an+ 58a5 5r1a3 8a no5 y/5 6/7un 1n a33 58/ / 2a / in fact' no o"de" of a""est has been issued 581 2our5 8a 2o.0/5/n2/ 5o 5a</ 2o7n1=an2/ o4 58/ / 2a / . KTo "ecapitulate' the net "esult of all the fo"e$oin$ is that by the )ote of / to 2' 58/ 2our5 a+.155/+ 58/ A./n+/+ In4or.a51on 1n 58/ / 2a / an+ 6y 58/ unan1.ou vo5/ o4 > 9158 1 n/158/r 2on2urr1n7 nor +1 /n51n7, r/5a1n/+ ?ur1 +1251on 5o 5ry an+ +/21+/ 58/ 2a / .@?)iA8DB AE*phasis suppliedB %etitione" no! Fuestions the constitutionality of Section 4 R.A. No. 8249' includin$ Section 7 the"eof !hich p"o)ides that the said la! Kshall apply to all cases pendin$ in any cou"t o)e" !hich t"ial has not be$un as of the app"o)al he"eof.H %etitione" a"$ues that5 Ka3 The Fuestioned p"o)ision of the statute !e"e int"oduced by the autho"s the"eof in bad faith as it !as *ade to p"ecisely suit the situation in !hich petitione"4s cases !e"e in at the Sandiganbayan by "esto"in$ #u"isdiction the"eo)e" to it' the"eby )iolatin$ his "i$ht to p"ocedu"al due p"ocess and the eFual p"otection clause of the Constitution. +u"the"' f"o* the !ay the Sandiganbayan has foot(d"a$$ed fo" nine 293 *onths the "esolution of a pendin$ incident in)ol)in$ the t"ansfe" of the cases to the Re$ional T"ial Cou"t' the passa$e of the la! *ay ha)e been ti*ed to o)e"ta.e such "esolution to "ende" the issue the"ein *oot' and f"ust"ate the e?e"cise of petitione"4s )ested "i$hts unde" the old Sandiganbayan la! 2RA 79713 Kb3 Ret"oacti)e application of the la! is plain f"o* the fact that it !as a$ain *ade to suit the peculia" ci"cu*stances in !hich petitione"4s cases !e"e unde"' na*ely' that t"ial had not yet co**enced' as p"o)ided in Section 7' to *a.e ce"tain that those cases !ill no lon$e" be "e*anded to the :ue9on City Re$ional T"ial Cou"t' as the Sandiganbayan alone should t"y the*' thus *a.in$ it an ex post facto le$islation and a denial of the "i$ht of petitione" as an accused in C"i*inal Case Nos. 2/047 2/017 to p"ocedu"al due p"ocess Kc3 The title of the la! is *isleadin$ in that it contains the afo"esaid KinnocuousH p"o)isions in Sections 4 and 7 !hich actually e?pands "athe" than defines the old Sandiganbayan la! 2RA 79713' the"eby )iolatin$ the one(title(one(sub#ect "eFui"e*ent fo" the passa$e of statutes unde" Section 2D283' A"ticle C6 of the Constitution.H?)iiA87B +o" thei" pa"t' the inte")eno"s' in thei" petition(in(inte")ention' add that K!hile Republic Act No. 8249 innocuously appea"s to ha)e *e"ely e?panded the #u"isdiction of the Sandiganbayan' the int"oduction of Sections 4 and 7 in said statute i*p"essed upon it the cha"acte" of a class le$islation and an ex post facto statute intended to apply specifically to the accused in the Kuratong Baleleng case pendin$ befo"e the Sandiganbayan.H?)iiiA88B They fu"the" a"$ued that if thei" case is t"ied befo"e the Sandiganbayan thei" "i$ht to p"ocedu"al due p"ocess !ould be )iolated as they could no lon$e" a)ail of the t!o(tie"ed appeal to the Sandiganbayan' !hich they acFui"ed unde" R.A. 7971' befo"e "ecou"se to the Sup"e*e Cou"t. Both the @ffice of the @*buds*an and the Solicito" ;ene"al filed sepa"ate pleadin$s in suppo"t of the constitutionality of the challen$ed p"o)isions of the la! in Fuestion and p"ayin$ that both the petition and the petition(in(inte")ention be dis*issed. This Cou"t then issued a Resolution ?i?A89B "eFui"in$ the pa"ties to file si*ultaneously !ithin a non/A5/n+163/ pe"iod of ten 2803 days f"o* notice the"eof additional *e*o"anda on the Fuestion of !hethe" the sub#ect a*ended info"*ations filed in C"i*inal Cases Nos. 2/047(2/017 sufficiently alle$ed the co**ission by the accused the"ein of the c"i*e cha"$ed !ithin the *eanin$ Section 4 b of Republic Act No. 8249' so as to b"in$ the said cases !ithin the e?clusi)e o"i$inal #u"isdiction of the Sandi$anbayan. The pa"ties' e?cept fo" the Solicito" ;ene"al !ho is "ep"esentin$ the %eople of the %hilippines' filed the "eFui"ed supple*ental *e*o"andu* 91581n the none?tendible "e$le*enta"y pe"iod. The established "ule is that e)e"y la! has in its fa)o" the p"esu*ption of constitutionality' and to #ustify its nullification the"e *ust be a clea" and uneFui)ocal b"each of the Constitution' not a doubtful and a"$u*entati)e one.??A20B The bu"den of p"o)in$ the in)alidity of the la! lies !ith those !ho challen$e it. That bu"den' !e "e$"et to say' !as not con)incin$ly discha"$ed in the p"esent case.

The c"eation of the Sandiganbayan !as *andated in Section 1' A"ticle L666 of the 897/ Constitution' !hich p"o)ides5 ;S#C. B. The Batasan$ %a*bansa shall c"eate a special cou"t' to be .no!n as Sandiganbayan' !hich shall ha)e #u"isdiction o)e" c"i*inal and ci)il cases in)ol)in$ $"aft and co""upt p"actices and such othe" offenses co**itted by public office"s and e*ployees includin$ those in $o)e"n*ent(o!ned o" cont"olled co"po"ations' in "elation to thei" office as *ay be dete"*ined by la!.G The said special cou"t is "etained in the ne! 289873 Constitution unde" the follo!in$ p"o)ision in A"ticle L6' Section 45 ;S/251on >. The p"esent anti($"aft cou"t .no!n as the Sandiganbayan shall continue to function and e?e"cise its #u"isdiction as no! o" he"eafte" *ay be p"o)ided by la!.H %u"suant to the constitutional *andate' %"esidential >ec"ee No. 848D ??iA28B c"eated the Sandiganbayan. The"eafte"' the follo!in$ la!s on the Sandiganbayan' in ch"onolo$ical o"de"' !e"e enacted5 %.>. No. 8D0D'??iiA22B Section 20 of Batas %a*bansa Bl$. 829' ??iiiA2/B %.>. No. 88D0'??i)A24B %.>. No. 88D8'??)A21B R.A. No. 7971'??)iA2DB and R.A. No. 8249.??)iiA27B Ende" the latest a*end*ents int"oduced by S/251on > o4 R.A. No. 82>9' the Sandiganbayan has #u"isdiction o)e" the follo!in$ cases5 KSEC. 4. Section 4 of the sa*e dec"ee A%.>. No. 8D0D' as a*endedB is he"eby fu"the" a*ended to "ead as follo!s5 KSEC. 4. -u"isdiction in)ol)in$5 The Sandi$anbayan shall e?e"cise /A23u 1v/ or171na3 #u"isdiction in all cases

Ka. Ciolations of Republic Act No. /089' as a*ended' othe"!ise .no!n as the Anti(;"aft and Co""upt %"actices Act' Republic Act No. 8/79' and Chapte" 66' Section 2' Title C66' Boo. 66 of the Re)ised %enal Code' !he"e on/ or .or/ o4 58/ a22u /+ ar/ o44121a3 o22u0y1n7 58/ 4o33o91n7 0o 151on 1n 58/ 7ov/rn./n5, !hethe" in a pe"*anent' actin$ o" inte"i* capacity' a5 58/ 51./ o4 58/ 2o..1 1on o4 58/ o44/n /283 @fficials of the e?ecuti)e b"anch occupyin$ the positions of "e$ional di"ecto" and hi$he"' othe"!ise classified as ;"ade M274 and hi$he"' of the Co*pensation and %osition Classification Act of 8989 2Republic Act No. D7183' specifically includin$5 2a3 %"o)incial $o)e"no"s' )ice($o)e"no"s' *e*be"s of the sangguniang panlala!igan' and p"o)incial t"easu"e"s' assesso"s' en$inee"s' and othe" p"o)incial depa"t*ent heads< 2b3 City *ayo"s' )ice(*ayo"s' *e*be"s of the sangguniang panlungsod' city t"easu"e"s' assesso"s' en$inee"s' and othe" city depa"t*ent heads< 2c3 and hi$he"< @fficials of the diplo*atic se")ice occupyin$ the position of consul

2d3 %hilippine A"*y and ai" fo"ce colonels' na)al captains' and all office"s of hi$he" "an.< 2e3 @ffice"s of the %hilippine National %olice !hile occupyin$ the position of p"o)incial di"ecto" and those holdin$ the "an. of senio" supe"intendent o" hi$he"< 2f3 City and p"o)incial p"osecuto"s and thei" assistants' and officials and p"osecuto"s in the @ffice of the @*buds*an and special p"osecuto"< 2$3 %"esidents' di"ecto"s o" t"ustees' o" *ana$e"s of $o)e"n*ent(o!ned o" cont"olled co"po"ations' state uni)e"sities o" educational institutions o" foundations<

223 7e*be"s of Con$"ess o" officials the"eof classified as ;"ade M274 and up unde" the Co*pensation and %osition Classification Act of 8989< 2/3 7e*be"s of the -udicia"y !ithout p"e#udice to the p"o)isions of the Constitution<

243 Chai"*an and *e*be"s of the Constitutional Co**issions' !ithout p"e#udice to the p"o)isions of the Constitution< 213 All othe" national and local officials classified as ;"ade M274 o" hi$he" unde" the Co*pensation and %osition Classification Act of 8989. ;6. O58/r o44/n / or 4/3on1/ 98/58/r 1.03/ or 2o.03/A/+ 9158 o58/r 2r1./ 2o..155/+ 6y 58/ 0u6312 o44121a3 an+ /.03oy// ./n51on/+ 1n Su6 /251on a o4 581 /251on 1n r/3a51on 5o 58/1r o4412/. ;2. Ci)il and c"i*inal cases filed pu"suant to and in connection !ith E?ecuti)e @"de" Nos. 8' 2' 84 and 84(A' issued in 898D. 6n cases !he"e none of the accused a"e occupyin$ positions co""espondin$ to sala"y ;"ade M274 o" hi$he"' as p"esc"ibed in the said Republic Act D718' o" *ilita"y and %N% office"s *entioned abo)e' e?clusi)e o"i$inal #u"isdiction the"eof shall be )ested in the p"ope" "e$ional t"ial cou"t' *et"opolitan t"ial cou"t' *unicipal t"ial cou"t' and *unicipal ci"cuit t"ial cou"t' as the case *ay be' pu"suant to thei" "especti)e #u"isdictions as p"o)ided in Batas "ambansa Blg# 829' as a*ended. KThe Sandiganbayan shall e?e"cise e?clusi)e appellate #u"isdiction o)e" final #ud$*ent' "esolution o" o"de"s of the "e$ional t"ial cou"ts !hethe" in the e?e"cise of thei" o!n o"i$inal #u"isdiction of thei" appellate #u"isdiction as he"ein p"o)ided. GThe Sandiganbayan shall ha)e e?clusi)e o"i$inal #u"isdiction o)e" petitions of the issuance of the !rits of mandamus' p"ohibition' certiorari$ %abeas corpus' in#unctions' and othe" ancilla"y !"its and p"ocesses in aid of its appellate #u"isdiction and o)e" petitions of si*ila" natu"e' includin$ &uo !arranto' a"isin$ o" that *ay a"ise in cases filed o" !hich *ay be filed unde" E?ecuti)e @"de" Nos. 8' 2' 84 and 84(A' issued in 898D5 "ro'ided' That the #u"isdiction o)e" these petitions shall not be e?clusi)e of the Sup"e*e Cou"t. KThe p"ocedu"e p"esc"ibed in Batas "ambansa Blg# 829' as !ell as the i*ple*entin$ "ules that the Sup"e*e Cou"t has p"o*ul$ated and *ay he"eafte" p"o*ul$ate' "elati)e to appealsJpetitions fo" "e)ie! to the Cou"t of Appeals' shall apply to appeals and petitions fo" "e)ie! filed !ith the Sandiganbayan. 6n all cases ele)ated to the Sandiganbayan and f"o* the Sandiganbayan to the Sup"e*e Cou"t' the @ffice of the @*buds*an' th"ou$h its special p"osecuto"' shall "ep"esent the %eople of the %hilippines' e?cept in cases filed pu"suant to E?ecuti)e @"de" Nos. 8' 2' 84 and 84(A' issued in 898D. K6n case p"i)ate indi)iduals a"e cha"$ed as co(p"incipals' acco*plices o" accesso"ies !ith the public office"s o" e*ployees' includin$ those e*ployed in $o)e"n*ent(o!ned o" cont"olled co"po"ations' they shall be t"ied #ointly !ith said public office"s and e*ployees in the p"ope" cou"ts !hich shall e?e"cise e?clusi)e #u"isdiction o)e" the*. ??? ??? ? ? ?.H 2E*phasis supplied3

Section 7 of R.A. No. 8249 states5 KSEC. 7. (ransitory pro'ision# !81 a25 8a33 a003y 5o a33 2a / 0/n+1n7 1n any 2our5 ov/r 98128 5r1a3 8a no5 6/7un a o4 58/ a00rova3 8/r/o4.@ 2E*phasis supplied3 The Sandiganbayan la! p"io" to R.A. 8249 !as R.A. 7971. S/251on 2 o4 R.A. C9CB p"o)ides5 KSEC. 2. Section 4 of the sa*e dec"ee A%"esidential >ec"ee No. 8D0D' as a*endedB is he"eby fu"the" a*ended to "ead as follo!s5 KSEC. 4. )urisdiction in)ol)in$5 The Sandi$anbayan shall e?e"cise /A23u 1v/ or171na3 #u"isdiction in all 2a /

Ka. Ciolations of Republic Act No. /089' as a*ended' othe"!ise .no!n as the Anti(;"aft and Co""upt %"actices Act' Republic Act No. 8/79' and Chapte" 66' Section 2' Title C66' Boo. 66 of the Re)ised %enal Code' !he"e one o" *o"e of the p"incipal accused a"e officials occupyin$ the follo!in$ positions in the $o)e"n*ent' !hethe" in a pe"*anent' actin$ o" inte"i* capacity' at the ti*e of the co**ission of the offense5 283 @fficials of the e?ecuti)e b"anch occupyin$ the positions of "e$ional di"ecto" and hi$he"' othe"!ise classified as ;"ade M274 and hi$he"' of the Co*pensation and %osition Classification Act of 8989 2Republic Act No. D7183' specifically includin$5 2a3 %"o)incial $o)e"no"s' )ice($o)e"no"s' *e*be"s of the sangguniang panlala!igan' and p"o)incial t"easu"e"s' assesso"s' en$inee"s' and othe" p"o)incial depa"t*ent heads< 2b3 City *ayo"s' )ice(*ayo"s' *e*be"s of the sangguniang panlungsod' city t"easu"e"s' assesso"s' en$inee"s' and othe" city depa"t*ent heads< 2c3 and hi$he"< @fficials of the diplo*atic se")ice occupyin$ the position of consul

2d3 %hilippine A"*y and ai" fo"ce colonels' na)al captains' and all office"s of hi$h "an.< 2e3 PNP 281/4 u0/r1n5/n+/n5 an+ PNP o4412/r o4 8178/r ran<D

2f3 City and %"o)incial p"osecuto"s and thei" assistants' and officials and p"osecuto"s in the @ffice of the @*buds*an and special p"osecuto"< 2$3 %"esidents' di"ecto"s o" t"ustees' o" *ana$e"s of $o)e"n*ent(o!ned o" cont"olled co"po"ations' state uni)e"sities o" educational institutions o" foundations< 223 7e*be"s of Con$"ess o" officials the"eof classified as ;"ade M274 and up unde" the Co*pensation and %osition Classification Act of 8989< 2/3 7e*be"s of the #udicia"y !ithout p"e#udice to the p"o)isions of the Constitution<

243 Chai"*an and *e*be"s of the Constitutional Co**issions' !ithout p"e#udice to the p"o)isions of the Constitution< 213 All othe" national and local officials classified as ;"ade M274 o" hi$he" unde" the Co*pensation and %osition Classification Act of 8989. K6. O58/r o44/n / or 4/3on1/ co**itted by the public officials and e*ployees ./n51on/+ 1n Su6 /251on a o4 581 /251on 1n r/3a51on 5o 58/1r o4412/. K2. Ci)il and c"i*inal cases filed pu"suant to and in connection !ith E?ecuti)e @"de" Nos. 8' 2' 84 and 84(A. K6n cases !he"e none of the p"incipal accused a"e occupyin$ positions co""espondin$ to sala"y ;"ade M274 o" hi$he"' as p"esc"ibed in the said Republic Act D718' or PNP o4412/r o22u0y1n7 58/ ran< o4 u0/r1n5/n+/n5 or 8178/r, or 58/1r /Eu1va3/n5, /A23u 1v/ ?ur1 +1251on 58/r/o4 8a33 6/ v/ 5/+ 1n 58/ 0ro0/r r/71ona3 5r1a3 2our5' *et"opolitan t"ial cou"t' *unicipal t"ial cou"t' and *unicipal ci"cuit t"ial cou"t' as the case *ay be' pu"suant to thei" "especti)e #u"isdictions as p"o)ided in Batas "ambansa Blg# 829. KThe Sandi$anbayan shall e?e"cise e?clusi)e appellate #u"isdiction on appeals f"o* the final #ud$*ents' "esolutions o" o"de"s of "e$ula" cou"ts !he"e all the accused a"e occupyin$ positions lo!e" than $"ade 427'4 o" not othe"!ise co)e"ed by the p"ecedin$ enu*e"ation. ??? ??? ???

K6n case p"i)ate indi)iduals a"e cha"$ed as co(p"incipals' acco*plices o" accesso"ies !ith the public office"s o" e*ployees' includin$ those e*ployed in $o)e"n*ent(o!ned o" cont"olled co"po"ations'

they shall be t"ied #ointly !ith said public office"s and e*ployees in the p"ope" cou"ts !hich shall ha)e e?clusi)e #u"isdiction o)e" the*. ??? ? ? ?.H 2E*phasis supplied3

Section 7 of R.A. No. 7971 "eads5 KSEC. 7. Epon the effecti)ity of this Act' all c"i*inal cases !hich t"ial has not be$un in the Sandi$anbayan shall be "efe""ed to the p"ope" cou"ts.H Ende" pa"a$"aphs a and c' Section 4 of R.A. 8249' the !o"d K 0r1n210a3H befo"e the !o"d KaccusedH appea"in$ in the abo)e(Fuoted Section 2 2pa"a$"aphs a and c3 of R.A. 7971' !as +/3/5/+. 6t is due to this deletion of the !o"d Kp"incipalH that the pa"ties he"ein a"e at lo$$e"heads o)e" the #u"isdiction of the Sandiganbayan. %etitione" and inte")eno"s' "elyin$ on R.A. 7971' a"$ue that the Re$ional T"ial Cou"t' not the Sandiganbayan' has #u"isdiction o)e" the Sub#ect c"i*inal cases since none of the 0r1n210a3 accused unde" the a./n+/+ info"*ation has the "an. of Supe"intendent??)iiiA28B o" hi$he". @n the othe" hand' the @ffice of the @*buds*an' th"ou$h the Special %"osecuto" !ho is tas.ed to "ep"esent the %eople befo"e the Sup"e*e Cou"t e?cept in ce"tain cases' ??i?A29B contends that the Sandiganbayan has #u"isdiction pu"suant to R.A. 8249. A pe"usal of the afo"eFuoted Section 4 of R.A. 8249 "e)eals that to fall unde" the e?clusi)e o"i$inal #u"isdiction of the Sandiganbayan' the follo!in$ "eFuisites *ust concu"5 F1G the offense co**itted is a )iolation of 2a3 R.A. /089' as a*ended 2the Anti(;"aft and Co""upt %"actices Act3' 2 b3 R.A. 8/79 2the la! on ill($otten !ealth3' 2c3 Chapte" 66' Section 2' Title C66' Boo. 66 of the Re)ised %enal Code 2the la! on b"ibe"y3'???A/0B 2d3 E?ecuti)e @"de" Nos. 8' 2' 84' and 84(A' issued in 898D 2seFuest"ation cases3' ???iA/8B o" 2e3 othe" offenses o" felonies !hethe" si*ple o" co*ple?ed !ith othe" c"i*es< F2G the offende" co**ittin$ the offenses in ite*s 2a3' 2b3' 2c3 and 2e3 is a public official o" e*ployee ???iiA/2B holdin$ any of the positions enu*e"ated in pa"a$"aph a of Section 4< and FHG the offense co**itted is in "elation to the office. Conside"in$ that he"ein petitione" and inte")eno"s a"e bein$ cha"$ed !ith *u"de" !hich is a felony punishable unde" Title C666 of the Re)ised %enal Code' the $o)e"nin$ p"o)ision on the #u"isdictional offense is no5 pa"a$"aph but 0ara7ra08 6' Section 4 of R.A. 8249. This pa"a$"aph b pe"tains to K o58/r o44/n / o" 4/3on1/ !hethe" si*ple o" co*ple?ed !ith othe" c"i*es co**itted by the public officials and e*ployees *entioned in subsection a of ASection 4' R.A. 8249B in "elation to thei" office.H The ph"ase Kothe" offenses o" feloniesH is too b"oad as to include the c"i*e of *u"de"' p"o)ided it !as co**itted in "elation to the accused4s official functions. Thus' unde" said pa"a$"aph b' !hat dete"*ines the Sandiganbayans #u"isdiction is the o44121a3 0o 151on o" ran< of the offende" that is' !hethe" he is one of those public office"s o" e*ployees enu*e"ated in pa"a$"aph a of Section 4. The offenses *entioned in pa"a$"aphs a' b and c of the sa*e Section 4 do not *a.e any "efe"ence to the c"i*inal pa"ticipation of the accused public office" as to !hethe" he is cha"$ed as a p"incipal' acco*plice o" accesso"y. 6n enactin$ R.A. 8249' the Con$"ess si*ply "esto"ed the o"i$inal p"o)isions of %.>. 8D0D !hich does not *ention the c"i*inal pa"ticipation of the public office" as a "eFuisite to dete"*ine the #u"isdiction of the Sandiganbayan. %etitione" and inte")eno"s4 postu"e that Section 4 and 7 of R.A. 8249 )iolate thei" "i$ht to eFual p"otection of the la!???iiiA//B because its enact*ent !as pa"ticula"ly di"ected only to the Kuratong Baleleng cases in the Sandiganbayan' is a contention too shallo! to dese")e *e"it. No conc"ete e)idence and con)incin$ a"$u*ent !e"e p"esented to !a""ant a decla"ation of an act of the enti"e Con$"ess and si$ned into la! by the hi$hest office" of the co(eFual e?ecuti)e depa"t*ent as unconstitutional. E)e"y classification *ade by la! is p"esu*ed "easonable. Thus' the pa"ty !ho challen$es the la! *ust p"esent p"oof of a"bit"a"iness.???i)A/4B 6t is an established p"ecept in constitutional la! that the $ua"anty of the eFual p"otection of the la!s is not )iolated by a le$islation based on "easonable classification. The classification is "easonable and not a"bit"a"y !hen the"e is concu""ence of fou" ele*ents' na*ely5 283 223 2/3 243 it *ust "est on substantial distinction< it *ust be $e"*ane to the pu"pose of the la!< *ust not be li*ited to e?istin$ conditions only' and *ust apply eFually to all *e*be"s of the sa*e class'???)A/1B

all of !hich a"e p"esent in this case. The challen$e"s of Sections 4 and 7 of R.A. 8249 failed to "ebut the p"esu*ption of constitutionality and "easonableness of the Fuestioned p"o)isions. The classification bet!een those pendin$ cases in)ol)in$ the conce"ned public officials !hose t"ial has not yet co**enced and !hose cases could ha)e been affected by the a*end*ents of the Sandiganbayan #u"isdiction unde" R.A. 8249' as a$ainst those cases !he"e t"ial had al"eady sta"ted as of the app"o)al of the la!' "ests on substantial distinction that *a.es "eal diffe"ences.???)iA/DB 6n the fi"st instance' e)idence a$ainst the* !e"e not yet p"esented' !he"eas in the latte" the pa"ties had al"eady sub*itted thei" "especti)e p"oofs' e?a*ined !itness and p"esented docu*ents. Since it is !ithin the po!e" of Con$"ess to define the #u"isdiction of cou"ts sub#ect to the constitutional li*itations'???)iiA/7B it can be "easonably anticipated that an alte"ation of that #u"isdiction !ould necessa"ily affect pendin$ cases' !hich is !hy it has to p"o)ide fo" a "e*edy in the fo"* of a t"ansito"y p"o)ision. Thus' petitione" and inte")eno"s cannot no! clai* that Sections 4 and 7 placed the* unde" a diffe"ent cate$o"y f"o* those si*ila"ly situated as the*. %"ecisely' pa"a$"aph a of Section 4 p"o)ides that it shall apply to Kall cases in)ol)in$G ce"tain public officials and' unde" the t"ansito"y p"o)ision in Section 7' to Kall cases pendin$ in any cou"t.H Cont"a"y to petitione" and inte")eno"s4 a"$u*ents' the la! is not pa"ticula"ly di"ected only to the Kuratong Baleleng cases. The t"ansito"y p"o)ision does not only co)e" cases !hich a"e in the Sandiganbayan but also in Kany 2our5.H 6t #ust happened that the Kuratong Baleleng cases a"e one of those affected by the la!. 7o"eo)e"' those cases !he"e t"ial had al"eady be$un a"e not affected by the t"ansito"y p"o)ision unde" Section 7 of the ne! la! 2R.A. 82493. 6n thei" futile atte*pt to ha)e said sections nullified' hea)y "eliance is p"e*ised on !hat is pe"cei)ed as bad faith on the pa"t of a Senato" and t!o -ustices of the Sandiganbayan???)iiiA/8B fo" thei" pa"ticipation in the passa$e of the said p"o)isions. 6n pa"ticula"' it is st"essed that the Senato" had e?p"essed st"on$ senti*ents a$ainst those officials in)ol)ed in the Kuratong Baleleng cases du"in$ the hea"in$s conducted on the *atte" by the co**ittee headed by the Senato". %etitione" fu"the" contends that the le$islatu"e is biased a$ainst hi* as he clai*s to ha)e been selected f"o* a*on$ the D7 *illion othe" +ilipinos as the ob#ect of the deletion of the !o"d Kp"incipalH in pa"a$"aph a' Section 4 of %.>. 8D0D' as a*ended' and of the t"ansito"y p"o)ision of R.A. 8249.???i?A/9B R.A. 82>9' !hile still a bill' !as acted' delibe"ated' conside"ed by 2/ othe" Senato"s and by about 210 Rep"esentati)es' and !as sepa"ately app"o)ed by the Senate and =ouse of Rep"esentati)es and' finally' by the %"esident of the %hilippines. @n the pe"cei)ed bias that the Sandiganbayan -ustices alle$edly had a$ainst petitione" du"in$ the co**ittee hea"in$s' the sa*e !ould not constitute sufficient #ustification to nullify an othe"!ise )alid la!. Thei" p"esence and pa"ticipation in the le$islati)e hea"in$s !as dee*ed necessa"y by Con$"ess since the *atte" befo"e the co**ittee in)ol)es the $"aft cou"t of !hich one is the head of the Sandiganbayan and the othe" a *e*be" the"eof. The Con$"ess' in its plena"y le$islati)e po!e"s' is pa"ticula"ly e*po!e"ed by the Constitution to in)ite pe"sons to appea" befo"e it !hene)e" it decides to conduct inFui"ies in aid of le$islation.?lA40B %etitione" and inte")eno"s fu"the" a"$ued that the "et"oacti)e application of R.A. 8249 to the Kuratong Baleleng cases constitutes an ex post facto la!?liA48B fo" they a"e dep"i)ed of thei" "i$ht to p"ocedu"al due p"ocess as they can no lon$e" a)ail of the t!o tie"ed appeal !hich they had alle$edly acFui"ed unde" R.A. 7971.
A42B

A$ain' this contention is e""oneous. The"e is nothin$ ex post facto in R.A. 8249. 6n Calder v. Bull'?lii an ex post facto la! is one 2a3!hich *a.es an act done c"i*inal befo"e the passin$ of the la! and !hich !as innocent !hen co**itted' and punishes such action< o" 2b3 !hich a$$"a)ates a c"i*e o" *a.es it $"eate" that !hen it !as co**itted< o" 2c3 !hich chan$es the punish*ent and inflicts a $"eate" punish*ent than the la! anne?ed to the c"i*e !hen it !as co**itted' 2d3 !hich alte"s the le$al "ules of e)idence and "ecei)es less o" diffe"ent testi*ony than the la! "eFui"ed at the ti*e of the co**ission of the offense in o"de" to con)ict the defendant. ?liiiA4/B

2e3 E)e"y la! !hich' in "elation to the offense o" its conseFuences' alte"s the situation of a pe"son to his disad)anta$e.?li)A44B This Cou"t added t!o *o"e to the list' na*ely5 2f3 that !hich assu*es to "e$ulate ci)il "i$hts and "e*edies only but in effect i*poses a penalty o" dep"i)ation of a "i$ht !hich !hen done !as la!ful< 2$3 dep"i)es a pe"son accused of c"i*e of so*e la!ful p"otection to !hich he has beco*e entitled' such as the p"otection of a fo"*e" con)iction o" acFuittal' o" a p"ocla*ation of a*nesty.?l)A41B *x post facto la!' $ene"ally' p"ohibits "et"ospecti)ity of penal la!s. ?l)iA4DB R.A. 8249 is no5 a 0/na3 la!. 6t is a substanti)e la! on #u"isdiction !hich is not penal in cha"acte". %enal la!s a"e those acts of the &e$islatu"e !hich p"ohibit ce"tain acts and establish penalties fo" thei" )iolations< ?l)iiA47B o" those that define c"i*es' t"eat of thei" natu"e' and p"o)ide fo" thei" punish*ent. ?l)iiiA48B R.A. 7971' !hich a*ended %.>. 8D0D as "e$a"ds the Sandiganbayans #u"isdiction' its *ode of appeal and othe" p"ocedu"al *atte"s' has been decla"ed by the Cou"t as not a penal la!' but clea"ly a p"ocedu"al statute' i#e. one !hich p"esc"ibes "ules of p"ocedu"e by !hich cou"ts applyin$ la!s of all .inds can p"ope"ly ad*iniste" #ustice. ?li?A49B Not bein$ a penal la!' the "et"oacti)e application of R.A. 8249 cannot be challen$ed as unconstitutional. %etitione"4s and inte")eno"4s contention that thei" "i$ht to a t!o(tie"ed appeal !hich they acFui"ed unde" R.A. 7971 has been diluted by the enact*ent of R.A. 8249' is inco""ect. The sa*e contention has al"eady been "e#ected by the cou"t se)e"al ti*es lA10B conside"in$ that the "i$ht to appeal is no5 a na5ura3 r1785 but statuto"y in natu"e that can be "e$ulated by la!. The *ode of p"ocedu"e p"o)ided fo" in the statuto"y "i$ht of appeal is not included in the p"ohibition a$ainst ex post facto la!s.liA18B R.A. 8249 pe"tains only to *atte"s of p"ocedu"e' and bein$ *e"ely an a*endato"y statute it does not pa"ta.e the natu"e of an ex post facto la!. 6t does not *ete out a penalty and' the"efo"e' does not co*e !ithin the p"ohibition. liiA12B 7o"eo)e"' the la! did not alte" the "ules of e)idence o" the *ode of t"ial. liiiA1/B 6t has been "uled that ad#ecti)e statutes *ay be *ade applicable to actions pendin$ and un"esol)ed at the ti*e of thei" passa$e. li)
A14B

6n any case' R.A. 8249 has p"ese")ed the accused4s "i$ht to appeal to the Sup"e*e Cou"t to "e)ie! Fuestions of la!.l)A11B @n the "e*o)al of the inte"*ediate "e)ie! facts' the Sup"e*e Cou"t still has the po!e" of "e)ie! to dete"*ine if the p"esu*ption of innocence has been con)incin$ly o)e"co*e. l)iA1DB Anothe" point. The challen$ed la! does not )iolate the one(title(one(sub#ect p"o)isions of the Constitution. 7uch e*phasis is placed on the !o"din$ in the title of the la! that it KdefinesH the Sandiganbayan #u"isdiction !hen !hat it alle$edly does is to Ke?pandH its #u"isdiction. The e?pansion in the #u"isdiction of the Sandiganbayan' if it can be conside"ed as such' does not ha)e to be e?p"essly stated in the title of the la! because such is the necessa"y conseFuence of the a*end*ents. The "eFui"e*ent that e)e"y bill *ust only ha)e one sub#ect e?p"essed in the title l)iiA17B is satisfied if the title is co*p"ehensi)e enou$h' as in this case' to include sub#ects "elated to the $ene"al pu"pose !hich the statute see.s to achie)e.l)iiiA18B Such "ule is se)e"ally inte"p"eted and should be $i)en a p"actical "athe" than a technical const"uction. The"e is he"e sufficient co*pliance !ith such "eFui"e*ent' since the title of R.A. 8249 e?p"esses the $ene"al sub#ect 2in)ol)in$ the #u"isdiction of the Sandiganbayan and the a*end*ent of %.>. 8D0D' as a*ended3 and all the p"o)isions of the la! a"e $e"*ane to that $ene"al sub#ect. li?A19B The Con$"ess' in e*ployin$ the !o"d KdefineH in the title of the la!' acted !ithin its po!e"s since Section 2' A"ticle C666 of the Constitution itself e*po!e"s the le$islati)e body to K +/41n/, 0r/ 2r16/' and a00or51on the #u"isdiction of )a"ious cou"tsH.l?AD0B The"e bein$ no unconstitutional infi"*ity in both the sub#ect a*endato"y p"o)ision of Section 4 and the "et"oacti)e p"ocedu"al application of the la! as p"o)ided in Section 7 R.A. No. 8249' !e shall no! dete"*ine !hethe" un+/r 58/ a33/7a51on 1n 58/ In4or.a51on ' it is the Sandiganbayan o" Re$ional T"ial Cou"t !hich has #u"isdiction o)e" the *ultiple *u"de" case a$ainst he"ein petitione" and inte")eno"s. The #u"isdiction of a cou"t is defined by the Constitution o" statute. The ele*ents of that definition *ust appea" in the co*plaint o" info"*ation so as to asce"tain !hich cou"t has #u"isdiction o)e" a case. =ence the ele*enta"y "ule that the #u"isdiction of a cou"t is dete"*ined by the alle$ations in the co*plaint

o" info"*ation'l?iAD8B and not by the e)idence p"esented by the pa"ties at the t"ial.l?iiAD2B As stated ea"lie"' the *ultiple *u"de" cha"$e a$ainst petitione" and inte")eno"s falls unde" Section 4 Apa"a$"aph bB of R.A. 8249. Section 4 "eFui"es that the offense cha"$ed *ust be co**itted by the offende" in "elation to his office in o"de" fo" the Sandiganbayan to ha)e #u"isdiction o)e" it.l?iiiAD/B This #u"isdictional "eFui"e*ent is in acco"dance !ith Section 1' A"ticle L666 of the 897/ Constitution !hich *andated that the Sandiganbayan shall ha)e #u"isdiction o)e" c"i*inal cases co**itted by public office"s and e*ployees' includin$ those in $o)e"n*ent(o!ned o" cont"olled co"po"ations' K 1n r/3a51on 5o 58/1r o4412/ as *ay be dete"*ined by la!.H This constitutional *andate !as "eite"ated in the ne! 289873 Constitution !hen it decla"ed in Section 4 the"eof that the Sandiganbayan 8a33 2on51nu/ 5o 4un251on an+ /A/r21 / 15 ?ur1 +1251on as no! o" he"eafte" *ay be p"o)ided by la!.H The "e*ainin$ Fuestion to be "esol)ed then is !hethe" the offense of *ultiple *u"de" !as co**itted 1n r/3a51on 5o 58/ o4412/ of the accused %N% office"s. 6n People vs. Montejo'l?i)AD4B !e held that an offense is said to ha)e been co**itted 1n r/3a51on 5o 58/ o4412/ if it 2the offense3 is Kinti*ately connectedH !ith the office of the offende" and pe"pet"ated !hile he !as in the pe"fo"*ance of his official functions. l?)AD1B This inti*ate "elation bet!een the offense cha"$ed and the discha"$e of official duties K.u 5 6/ a33/7/+ 1n 58/ In4or.a51on.@l?)iADDB As to ho! the offense cha"$ed be stated in the info"*ation' Section 9' Rule 880 of the Re)ised Rules of Cou"t *andates5 KSEC. 9. +ause of Accusation# The acts o" o*issions co*plained of as constitutin$ the offense *ust be stated in o"dina"y and concise lan$ua$e !ithout "epetition not necessa"ily in the te"*s of the statute definin$ the offense' but in such fo"* as is sufficient to enable a pe"son of co**on unde"standin$ to .no! !hat offense is intended to be cha"$ed' and enable the cou"t to p"onounce p"ope" #ud$*ent .H 2E*phasis supplied3 As ea"ly as 8914' !e p"onounced that Kthe facto" that cha"acte"i9es the cha"$e is the a25ua3 r/215a3 o4 58/ 4a25 .Hl?)iiAD7B The "eal natu"e of the c"i*inal cha"$es is dete"*ined not f"o* the caption o" p"ea*ble of the info"*ation no" f"o* the specification of the p"o)ision of la! alle$ed to ha)e been )iolated' 58/y 6/1n7 2on23u 1on o4 3a9' but by the a25ua3 r/215a3 o4 4a25 in the co*plaint o" info"*ation.Hl?)iiiAD8B The noble ob#ect of !"itten accusations cannot be o)e"e*phasi9ed. This !as e?plained in U.S. v. Karelsen5l?i?AD9B KThe ob#ect of this !"itten accusations !as +i"st' To fu"nish the accused !ith such a desc"iption of the cha"$e a$ainst hi* as !ill enable hi* to *a.e his defense' and second' to a)ail hi*self of his con)iction o" acFuittal fo" p"otection a$ainst a fu"the" p"osecution fo" the sa*e cause' and thi"d' to info"* the cou"t of the 4a25 a33/7/+ so that it *ay decide !hethe" they a"e sufficient in la! to suppo"t a con)iction if one should be had. In or+/r 58a5 581 r/Eu1r/./n5 .ay 6/ a51 41/+, 4a25 .u 5 6/ 5a5/+, no5 2on23u 1on o4 3a9 E)e"y c"i*e is *ade up of 2/r5a1n a25 and 1n5/n5 58/ / .u 5 6/ /5 4or58 1n 58/ 2o.03a1n5 9158 r/a ona63/ 0ar512u3ar15y o4 51./, 03a2/, na./ 2plaintiff and defendant3 an+ 21r2u. 5an2/ . 6n sho"t' 58/ 2o.03a1n5 .u 5 2on5a1n a 0/21412 a33/7a51on of /v/ry 4a25 and 21r2u. 5an2/ n/2/ ary 5o 2on 515u5/ 58/ 2r1./ 28ar7/+.H 2E*phasis supplied3 6t is essential' the"efo"e' that the accused be info"*ed of the facts that a"e i*puted to hi* as ;8/ 1 0r/ u./+ 5o 8av/ no 1n+/0/n+/n5 <no93/+7/ o4 58/ 4a25 58a5 2on 515u5/ 58/ o44/n /.@ l??A70B Applyin$ these le$al p"inciples and doct"ines to the p"esent case' !e find the a*ended info"*ations fo" *u"de" a$ainst he"ein petitione" and inte")eno"s !antin$ of 0/21412 4a25ua3 a)e"*ents to sho! the 1n51.a5/ r/3a51onI2onn/251on bet!een the o44/n / 28ar7/+ and the +1 28ar7/ o4 o44121a3 4un251on of the offende"s. 6n the p"esent case' one of the ele)en 2883 a*ended info"*ationsl??iA78B fo" *u"de" "eads5 KA7EN>E> 6N+@R7AT6@N KThe unde"si$ned Special %"osecution @ffice" 666' @ffice of the @*buds*an he"eby accuses C=6E+ 6NS% 76C=AE& RAN A:E6N@' C=6E+ 6NS% ERI6N T. C6&&AC@RTE SEN6@R 6NS% -@SE&6T@ T.

ES:E6CE&. 6NS% R6CAR>@ ;. >AN>AN S%@4 C6CENTE %. ARNA>@' S%@4 R@BERT@ +. &AN;CAE@N' S%@2 C6R;6&6@ C. %ARA;AS' S%@2 R@&AN>@ R. -67ENE,' S%@8 I6&+RE>@ C. CEARTER@' S%@8 R@BERT@ @. A;BA&@;' S%@8 @S7EN>@ B. CAR6N@' C=6E+ SE%T. -EIE& +. CANS@N' C=6E+ SE%T. R@7E@ 7. AC@%' C=6E+ SE%T. %AN+6&@ 7. &ACS@N' SEN6@R SE%T. +RANC6SC@ ;. ,EB6A' -R.' SE%T. A&7AR6@ A. =6&AR6@' C=6E+ 6NS%. CESAR @. 7ANCA@ 666' C=6E+ 6NS%. ;6& &. 7ENESES' SEN6@R 6N6S%. ;&ENN >E7&A@' SEN6@R 6NS%. R@&AN>@ AN>ENAN' 6NS%. CEASAR TANNA;AN' S%@/ I6&&N NEAS' S%@/ C6CER@ S. BAC@&@>' %@2 N@RBERT@ &ASA;A' %@2 &E@NAR>@ ;&@R6A and %@2 A&E-AN>R@ ;. &6IANA; of the c"i*e of Mur+/r as defined and penali9ed unde" Ar5123/ 2>8 o4 58/ R/v1 /+ P/na3 Co+/ co**itted as follo!s5 KThat on o" about 7ay 88' 8991 in Mar1ano Mar2o Av/nu/, Ju/=on C15y, %hilippines and !ithin the #u"isdiction of this =ono"able Cou"t' the accused C=6E+ 6N6S%. 76C=AE& RAN A:E6N@' C=6E+ 6NS%. ERI6N T. C6&&AC@RTE' SEN6@R 6NS%. -@SE&6T@ T. ES:E6CE&' 6NS%. R6CAR>@ ;. >AN>AN' S%@4 C6CENTE %. ARNA>@ S%@4 R@BERT@ +. &AN;CAE@N' S%@2 C6R;6&6@ C. %ARA;AS' S%@2 R@&AN>@ R. -67ENE,' S%@8 I6&+RE>@ C. CEARTER@' S%@8 R@BERT@ @. A;BA&@;' and S%@8 @S7EN>@ B. CAR6N@ all 5a<1n7 a+van5a7/ o4 58/1r 0u6312 an+ o44121a3 0o 151on as office"s and *e*be"s of the %hilippine National %olice and 2o..1551n7 58/ a25 8/r/1n a33/7/+ 1n r/3a51on 5o 58/1r 0u6312 o4412/' conspi"in$ !ith intent to .ill and usin$ fi"ea"*s !ith t"eache"y' e)ident p"e*editation and ta.in$ ad)anta$e of thei" supe"io" st"en$ths did then and the"e !illfully' unla!fully and feloniously 8oo5 -@E& A7@RA' the"eby inflictin$ upon the latte" *o"tal !ounds !hich caused his instantaneous death to the da*a$e and p"e#udice of the hei"s of the said )icti*. KThat accused C=6E+ SE%T. -EIE& +. CANS@N C=6E+ SE%T. R@7E@ 7. AC@% C=6E+ SE%T. %AN+6&@ 7. &ACS@N' SEN6@R SE%T. +RANC6SC@ ;. ,EB6A' -R. SE%T. A&7AR6@ A. =6&AR6@' C=6E+ 6NS%. CESAR @. 7ANCA@ 66 C=6E+ 6NS%. ;6& &. 7ENESES' SEN6@R 6NS%. ;&ENN >E7&A@' SEN6@R 6NS%. R@&AN>@ AN>ENAN' 6NS%. CEASAR TANNA;AN S%@/ I6&&N NEAS S%@/ C6CER@ S. BAC@&@>' %@2 A&E-AN>R@ ;. &6IANA; 2o..1551n7 58/ a25 1n r/3a51on 5o o4412/ as office"s and *e*be"s of the %hilippine National %olice a"e cha"$ed he"ein as a22/ or1/ a45/r*58/*4a25 fo" 2on2/a31n7 58/ 2r1./ 8/r/1n a6ov/ a33/7/+ by a*on$ othe"s 4a3 /3y r/0r/ /n51n7 58a5 58/r/ 9/r/ no arr/ 5 .a+/ +ur1n7 58/ ra1+ 2on+u25/+ 6y 58/ a22u /+ 8/r/1n a5 Su0/rv133/ Su6+1v1 1on, ParaKaEu/, M/5ro Man13a on o" about the ea"ly da!n of 7ay 88' 8991. KC@NTRARN T@ &AIH Ihile the abo)e(Fuoted info"*ation states that the abo)e(na*ed p"incipal accused co**itted the c"i*e of *u"de" Kin "elation to thei" public office' the"e is' ho!e)e"' no 0/21412 a33/7a51on o4 4a25 that the shootin$ of the )icti* by the said p"incipal accused !as 1n51.a5/3y r/3a5/+ to the discha"$e of thei" official duties as police office"s. &i.e!ise' the a*ended info"*ation does not indicate that the said accused a""ested and in)esti$ated the )icti* and then .illed the latte" !hile in thei" custody. E)en the alle$ations conce"nin$ the c"i*inal pa"ticipation of he"ein petitione" and inte")eno"s as a*on$ the accesso"ies afte"(the(fact' the a*ended info"*ation is )a$ue on this. 6t is alle$ed the"ein that the said accesso"ies concealed the c"i*e he"ein(abo)e alle$ed by' a*on$ othe"s' falsely "ep"esentin$ that the"e !e"e no a""ests *ade du"in$ the "aid conducted by the accused he"ein at Supe")ille Subdi)ision' %a"aOaFue' 7et"o 7anila' on o" about the ea"ly da!n of 7ay 88' 8991.H The sudden *ention of the arr/ 5 *ade du"in$ the ra1+ conducted by the accusedH su"p"ises the "eade". !8/r/ 1 no 1n+12a51on 1n 58/ a./n+/+ 1n4or.a51on 58a5 58/ v1251. 9a on/ o4 58o / arr/ 5/+ 6y 58/ a22u /+ +ur1n7 58/ ;ra1+.@ Io"se' the "aid and a""ests !e"e alle$edly conducted Kat Supe")ille Subdi)ision' ParaKaEu/' 7et"o 7anilaH but' as alle$ed in the i**ediately p"ecedin$ pa"a$"aph of the a*ended info"*ation' the shootin$ of the )icti* by the p"incipal accused occu""ed in 7a"iano 7a"cos A)enue' Ju/=on C15y.H =o! the "aid' a""ests and shootin$ happened in t!o places fa" a!ay f"o* each othe" is pu99lin$. A$ain' !hile the"e is the alle$ation in the a*ended info"*ation that the said accesso"ies co**itted the offense Kin "elation to office as office"s and *e*be"s of the 2%N%3'H !e' ho!e)e"' do not see the inti*ate connection bet!een the offense cha"$ed and the accused4s official functions' !hich' as ea"lie" discussed' is an essential ele*ent in dete"*inin$ the #u"isdiction of the Sandiganbayan# The st"in$ent "eFui"e*ent that the cha"$e be set fo"th !ith such pa"ticula"ity as !ill "easonably indicate the e?act offense !hich the accused is alle$ed to ha)e co**itted in "elation to his office !as' sad

to say' not satisfied. Ie belie)e that the *e"e alle$ation in the a*ended info"*ation that the offense !as co**itted by the accused public office" in "elation to his officeH is not sufficient. That ph"ase is *e"ely a 2on23u 1on o4 3a9' not a 4a25ua3 a)e"*ent that !ould sho! the close inti*acy bet!een the offense cha"$ed and the discha"$e of the accused4s official duties. 6n %eople )s. 7a$allanes'l??iiA72B !he"e the #u"isdiction bet!een the Re$ional T"ial Cou"t and the Sandiganbayan !as at issue' !e "uled5 K6t is an ele*enta"y "ule that #u"isdiction is dete"*ined by the alle$ations in the co*plaint o" info"*ation and not by the "esult of e)idence afte" t"ial. K6n 2People vs. G Montejo 2808 %hil D8/ A89D0B 3' !he"e the a*ended info"*ation alle$ed &e"oy S. B"o!n' City 7ayo" of Basilan City' as such' has o"$ani9ed $"oups of police pat"ol and ci)ilian co**andos consistin$ of "e$ula" police*en and ? ? ? special police*en' appointed and p"o)ided by hi* !ith pistols and hi$h po!e" $uns and then established a ca*p ? ? ? at Tipo(tipo !hich is unde" his co**and ? ? ? supe")ision and cont"ol !he"e his co(defendants !e"e stationed' ente"tained c"i*inal co*plaints and conducted the co""espondin$ in)esti$ations' as !ell as assu*ed the autho"ity to a""est and detain pe"sons !ithout due p"ocess of la! and !ithout b"in$in$ the* to the p"ope" cou"t' and that in line !ith this set(up established by said 7ayo" of Basilan City as such' and actin$ upon his o"de"s his co(defendants a""ested and *alt"eated A!alin Teba$ !ho died in conseFuence the"eof. !e held that the offense cha"$ed !as co**itted in "elation to the office of the accused because it !as pe"pet"ated !hile they !e"e in the pe"fo"*ance' thou$h i*p"ope" o" i""e$ula" of thei" official functions and !ould not ha)e been co**itted had they not held thei" office' besides' the accused had no pe"sonal *oti)e in co**ittin$ the c"i*e' thus' the"e !as an inti*ate connection bet!een the offense and the office of the accused. KEnli.e in Montejo, the info"*ations in C"i*inal Cases Nos. 811D2 and 811D/ in the cou"t belo! do not indicate that the accused a""ested and in)esti$ated the )icti*s and then .illed the latte" in the cou"se of the in)esti$ation. The info"*ations *e"ely alle$e that the accused' fo" the pu"pose of e?t"actin$ o" e?to"tin$ the su* of %/1/'000.00 abducted' .idnapped and detained the t!o )icti*s' and failin$ in thei" co**on pu"pose' they shot and .illed the said )icti*s. For 58/ 0ur0o / o4 +/5/r.1n1n7 ?ur1 +1251on, 15 1 58/ / a33/7a51on 58a5 8a33 2on5ro3' and not the e)idence p"esented by the p"osecution at the t"ial.H 6n the afo"ecited case of People vs. Montejo' it is note!o"thy that the ph"ase co**itted in "elation to public officeH does not appea" in the info"*ation' !hich only si$nifies that the said ph"ase is not !hat dete"*ines the #u"isdiction of the Sandiganbayan. Ihat is 2on5ro331n7 is the 0/21412 4a25ua3 a33/7a51on in the info"*ation that !ould indicate the close inti*acy bet!een the discha"$e of the accused4s official duties and the co**ission of the offense cha"$ed' in o"de" to Fualify the c"i*e as ha)in$ been co**itted in "elation to public office. ConseFuently' fo" failu"e to sho! in the a*ended info"*ations that the cha"$e of *u"de" !as inti*ately connected !ith the discha"$e of official functions of the accused %N% office"s' the offense cha"$ed in the sub#ect c"i*inal cases is plain *u"de" and' the"efo"e' !ithin the e?clusi)e o"i$inal #u"isdiction of the Re$ional T"ial Cou"t'l??iiiA7/B not the Sandiganbayan# L"#R#FOR#' the constitutionality of Sections 4 and 7 of R.A. 8249 is he"eby sustained. The Addendu* to the 7a"ch 1' 8997 Resolution of the Sandiganbayan is RECERSE>. The Sandiganbayan is he"eby di"ected to t"ansfe" C"i*inal Cases Nos. 2/047 to 2/017 2fo" *ultiple *u"de"3 to the Re$ional T"ial Cou"t of :ue9on City !hich has e?clusi)e o"i$inal #u"isdiction o)e" said cases. SO OR(#R#(. Da'ide$ )r#$ +#)#$ ,omero$ Bellosillo$ -elo$ "uno$ .itug$ Kapunan$ -endo/a$ "anganiban$ 0uisumbing$ "urisima$ "ardo$ Buena$ and Gon/aga ,eyes$ ))#$ concu"#

i ii iii i) ) )i )ii )iii i? ? ?i ?ii ?iii ?i) ?) ?)i ?)ii ?)iii ?i? ?? ??i ??ii ??iii ??i) ??) ??)i ??)ii ??)iii ??i? ??? ???i ???ii ???iii ???i) ???) ???)i ???)ii ???)iii ???i? ?l ?li ?lii ?liii ?li) ?l) ?l)i ?l)ii ?l)iii ?li?

l li lii liii li) l) l)i l)ii l)iii li? l? l?i l?ii l?iii l?i) l?) l?)i l?)ii l?)iii l?i? l?? l??i l??ii l??iii