RULE 116 (g) Unless a shorter period is provided by
ARRAIGNMENT AND PLEA
SECTION 1. ARRAIGNMENT AND PLEA; HOW
MADE. —
(a)The accused must be arraigned before
the court where the complaint or
information was filed or assigned for trial.
The arraignment shall be made in open
court by the judge or clerk by furnishing
the accused with a copy of the complaint
or information, reading the same in the
language or dialect known to him, and
asking him whether he pleads guilty or not
guilty. The prosecution may call at the trial
witnesses other than those named in the
complaint or information.
(b) The accused must be present at the
arraignment and must personally enter his
plea. Both arraignment and plea shall be
made of record, but failure to do so shall
not affect the validity of the proceedings.
(c) When the accused refuses to plead or
makes a conditional plea, a plea of not
guilty shall be entered for him. (1a)
(d) When the accused pleads guilty but
presents exculpatory evidence, his plea
shall be deemed withdrawn and a plea of
not guilty shall be entered for him. (n)
(e) When the accused is under preventive
detention, his case shall be raffled and its
records transmitted to the judge to whom
the case was raffled within three (3) days
from the filing of the information or
complaint. The accused shall be arraigned
within ten (10) days from the date of the
raffle. The pre-trial conference of his case
shall be held within ten (10) days after
arraignment. (n)
(f) The private offended party shall be
required to appear at the arraignment for
purposes of plea bargaining,
determination of civil liability, and other
matters requiring his presence. In case of
failure of the offended party to appear
despite due notice, the court may allow the
accused to enter a plea of guilty to a lesser
offense which is necessarily included in
the offense charged with the conformity of
the trial prosecutor alone. (cir. 1-89)
special law or Supreme Court circular, the
arraignment shall be held within thirty (30)
days from the date the court acquires
jurisdiction over the person of the
accused. The time of the pendency of a
motion to quash or for a bill of particulars
or other causes justifying suspension of
the arraignment shall be excluded in
computing the period. (sec. 2, cir. 38-98)
COMMENT:
1. Before Arraignment
The Court shall issue an order directing the
public prosecutor to submit the record of
preliminary investigation to the branch COC
for the latter to attach the same record of the
criminal case.
After Arraignment
The court shall forthwith set the pre-trial
conference within 30 days from date of
arraignment, and issue an order:
-requiring the private offended party to appear
thereat for purposes of plea-bargaining
EXCEPT for violations of RA165 and other
matters requiring his presence
-referring the case to the branch COC, if
warranted, for preliminary conference to be
set at least 3 days prior to the pre-trial mark
documents or exhibits to be presented by the
parties and copies thereof to be attached to
the records after comparison and to consider
other matters as may aid in its prompt
disposition
-informing the parties that no evidence shall
be allowed to be presented and offered during
the trial EXCEPT when allowed by the court
for good act shown.
EXCEPTIONS to rule g
-RA 4908
-RA 7610
2. TIME LIMIT FOR ARRAIGNMENT
Under SC circular no. 38-39
- the arraignment shall be held within thirty
(30) days from the date the court acquires
jurisdiction over the person of the
accused. The time of the pendency of a
motion to quash or for a bill of particulars
or other causes justifying suspension of
the arraignment shall be excluded in
computing the period.
NOTES:
1. Importance of Arraignment
- Arraignment as indispensable means for
bringing accused into court and informing
him of the nature and cause of accusation
against him – The procedural due process
mandate of the constitution requires that
the accused be arraigned so that he may
be informed as to why he was indicted
and what penal offense he has to face, to
be convicted only a showing that his guilt
is shown beyond reasonable doubt with
full opportunity to disprove th evidence
against him.
2. Need for arraignment on amended
information
- An arraignment on the amended
information is mandatory
- Conviction under 2nd information suffers
from reversible effect.
3. No obligation to point duplicitousness
- No obligation is expressly or implicitly
imposed on the judge to point out the
duplicitousness of an indictment on which
an accused is being arraigned.
4. Arraignment after prosecution rests, not
prejudicial
- The SC held that the arraignment of the
accused only after the prosecution has
rested is an error or irregularity that has
not prejudiced the rights or interests of the
appellant and considering that appelant’s
counsel had opportunit of cross-
examining all the witnesses who took the
witness stand for the government and
furthermore he agreed to the reproduction
of the evidence of the prosecution, the
error or defect had been substantially
cured.(People vs Atienza)
5. Manner of arraignment
- The reading of the information to the
appellant in the language or dialect known
to him is a new requirement imposed by
the 1985 Rules On Criminal Procedure.
Presumption that accused was arraigned
- In view of the presumption of regularity in
the performance of official duties, it can
be presumed that a person accused of a
crime was duly arraigned of anything to
indicate the contrary.
6. Where presumption of regularity not applied
- Where the records do not reveal that the
information written in the English
language against the accused was read in
the language or dialect known to him,
there being no showing what dialect is
known to him nor was the information
translated to his own dialect before his
plea of guilty.
7. Accused is not entitled to know in advance the
names of all prosecution witnesses
- The success of the prosecution might be
endangered if such right be granted to the
accused, for the known witness might be
subjected to pressure or coerced nnot to
testify.
8. Prosecution may call witnesses other than
those named in the information
- Sec. 1 Rule 116, expressly permits the
prosecution to present unlisted witness at
the trial and there is nothing in said
section which requires the previous
consent of the court before the
prosecution can present such witnesses.
9. Presentation or non-presentation of
prosecution witness depends on fiscal’s
discretion.
- The failure of a prosecuting officer to
present all the eye-witnesses to an act
does not necessarily give rise to an
adverse presumption, especially when
the testimony of the witness sought to be
presented is merely corroborative.
- In criminal cases it is the duty of the
accused, in addition to the other pleas
authorized by law, to plead whether be is
guilty or not of the crime charged. In that
way and in that way only can an issue be
created upon which the trial shall
proceed.
- For jeopardy to attach it is necessary that
the defendant has been arraigned and
has pleaded to the charge because it is
from the moment that the issues for the
trial are deemed joined. Jeopardy
attaches:
o Upon valid indictment
o Before a competent court
o After arraignment
o After plea

12. Acquittal despite plea of guilty.
- There is no rule which provides that
simply because the accused pleaded
guilty to the charge that his conviction
automatically follows Additional evidence
independent of the plea may be
considered to convince the judge that it
was intelligently made.
13. Statements regarded as plea of not guilty
- Neither is it an error for the trial court to
direct that the plea of “not guilty” be
entered for the defendant and try the case
upon its merits whenever there is a
reasonable doubt in his mind as to the
guilt of the defendant, even after he has
pleaded “guilty.”
SECTION 2. PLEA OF GUILTY TO A LESSER
OFFENSE. —
At arraignment, the accused, with the consent of
the offended party and the prosecutor, may be
allowed by the trial court to plead guilty to a lesser
offense which is necessarily included in the
offense charged. After arraignment but before
trial, the accused may still be allowed to plead
guilty to said lesser offense after withdrawing his
plea of not guilty. No amendment of the complaint
or information is necessary.
COMMENT:
A plea of guilty for a lesser offense after
prosecution rests is allowed only when the
prosecution does not have sufficient evidence to
establish guilt of the crime charged.
SECTION 3. PLEA OF GUILTY TO CAPITAL
OFFENSE; RECEPTION OF EVIDENCE. —
When the accused pleads guilty to a capital
offense, the court shall conduct a searching
inquiry into the voluntariness and full
comprehension of the consequences of his plea
and require the prosecution to prove his guilt and
the precise degree of culpability. The accused may
present evidence in his behalf.
COMMENT:
1. The rule is mandatory
Three things are enjoined of the trial court
after a plea of guilty to a capital offense has
been entered by the accused:
a. The court must conduct a searching
inquiry into the voluntariness and full
comprehension of the consequences of
his plea
b. The court must require the prosecution to
present evidence to prove the guilt of the
accused and the prescribe degree of his
culpability
c. The court must ask the accused if he
desires to present evidence in his behalf
and allow him to do so if he desires.
2. Prosecution must present evidence
Notwithstanding the waiver made by the
appellant as to the presentation of evidence
by the prosecution, the presentation of
evidence should be required in order to
preclude any room for reasonable doubt in the
mind of the trial court, or the SC on review, as
to the possibility that there might have been
some misunderstanding on the part of the
accused as to the nature of the charge to
which he pleasded guilty, and to ascertain the
circumstances attendant to the commission of
the crime which justify or require the exercise
of greater or lesser degree of severity in the
imposition of prescribed penalties.
3. Meaning of search inquiry
- A searching inquiry under the rules,
means more than informing cursorily the
accused the he faces a jail term but also,
the exact length of imprisonment under
the law and the certainty that he will serve
att the national penitentiary or penal
colony.
- A searching inquiry likewise compels the
judge to content himself reasonably that
the accused has not been coerced or
placed under state of dures, and that his
guilty plea has not therefore been given
improvidently, either by actual threats of
physical harm from malevolent quarters
or simply because of his, the judge’s,
intimidating robes.
The searching inquiry of the trial court must be
focused on:
- The voluntariness of the plea
- The full comprehension of the
consequences of the plea
4. Reception of evidence is Mandatory
- In a plea of guilty, the present rule
requires proof of the aggravating
circumstances, otherwise, there is an
improvident plea.
The judge must ask the accused:
1. The manner the latteer was arrested or
detained
2. 2. Whether he was assisted by counsel
during the custodial and preliminary
investigation.
3. In addition, the defense counsel should
also be asked whether he conferred with
the accused and completely explained to
him the meaning and consequiences of
plea of guit.
4. Furtehrmore, since the age, educational
attainment and socio-economic status of
the accused may reveal insights for a
proper verdict in the case, the trial court
must ask questions concerning them.
Guidelines:
1. Ascertain from the accused himself (the
letters a and b of the preceding
paragraph)
2. Ask the defense counsel a series of
questions as to whether he had conferred
with, and completely explained to, the
accused the meaning and consequences
of plea of guilty.
3. Elicit information about the personality
profile of the accused
4. Inform the accused the exact length of
imprisonment or nature of the penalty
under the law and the certainty that he will
serve such sentence.
5. Require the accused to fully narrate the
incident that spawned the charges
against him or make him reenact the
manner in which he perpetrated the
crime, or cause him to supply missing
details of significance.
Adequacy of evidence cures the defect
SECTION 4. PLEA OF GUILTY TO NON-CAPITAL
OFFENSE; RECEPTION OF
EVIDENCE, DISCRETIONARY. —
When the accused pleads guilty to a non-capital
offense, the court may receive evidence from the
parties to determine the penalty to be imposed.
NOTES:
1. Effect
- The plea of guilty by the accused admits
the facts set out in the information, and if
these do not constitute a crime or a
violation of law, such plea does not have
of admitting the commission of the crime
or the violation of a law, for there is a non-
charge in the information, or of supplying
what has been omitted or what has not
been pleaded therein, to the extent of
curing a defective information or one that
does not allege facts sufficient to
constitute a public offense or violation of
law.
-
SECTION 5. WITHDRAWAL OF IMPROVIDENT
PLEA OF GUILTY. —
At any time before the judgment of conviction
becomes final, the court may permit an
improvident plea of guilty to be withdrawn and be
substituted by a plea of not guilty.
NOTES:
1. Plea of guilty cannot be collaterally attacked
- It is well-settled that a voluntary and
intelligent plea of guilty made by an
accused person, who has been advised
by competent counsel, may not be
collaterally attacked. It is also well settled
that the plea agreements are consistent
with the requirement of voluntariness and
intelligence because each side may
obtain advantages when a guilty plea is
exchanged for sentencing concessions,
the agreement is no less voluntary than
any other bargained for exchange. It is
only when the consensual character of
the plea may be impaired. Only when it
develops that the defendant was not fairly
appraised of its consequences can his
plea be challenged under the due process
clause.
2. Withdrawal of Plea of Guilty
- It is clear from the language of this section
that the withdrawal of the plea of guilty is
not a matter of strict right to the accused
but of sound discretion to the trial court,
and appellate courts shall not interfere
with such discretion in the absence of a
clear abuse thereof.
3. Plea of Guilty Must be unconditional
- The essence of plea of guilty is that the
accused admits his guilt, voluntarily and
with a full knowledge of the
consequences and meaning of his act
and with a clear understanding of the
precise nature of the crime charged in the
complaint or information.(US vs Borlado)
4. Need to amend information
- Formal plea of not guilty should properly
be entered by the court if an accused
admits the truth of some or all the
allegations of the information, but
interposes excuses or additional facts
which, if duly established would exempt or
relieve him part or in whole of criminal
responsibility.
SECTION 6. DUTY OF COURT TO INFORM
ACCUSED OF HIS RIGHT TO COUNSEL. —
Before arraignment, the court shall inform the
accused of his right to counsel and ask him if he
desires to have one. Unless the accused is
allowed to defend himself in person or has
employed a counsel of his choice, the court must
assign a counsel de officio to defend him.
NOTES:
1. Four-fold duty of Court
- Under this provision, when a defendant
appear without an attorney, the court has
four important duties to comply with:
1. It must inform the defendant that it is
his right to have an attorney before
being arraigned
2. After giving him such information the
court must ask him if he desires the
aid of an attorney.
3. If he desires and is unable to employ
an attorney, the court must assign an
attorney de officio to defend him
4. If the accused desires to procure an
attorney of his own, the court must
grant hi, a reasonable time therefore.
2. Reason for rule
- The right to be heard would be of little
avail if it does not include the right to be
heard by counsel. Even the most
intelligent or educated men may have no
skill in the science of the law, particularly
in the rules of procedure, and without
counsel, he may be convicted not
because he is guilty but because he does
not know how to establish his innocence.
And this can happen more easily to
persons who are ignorant and
uneducated.
 3. Failure to comply with duty of court is denial
of due process.
- Where the record discloses that the court
did not inform the accused of his right to
have an attorney nor ask him if he desired
the aid oof one. The trial court failed to
inquire whether or not the accused was to
employ an attorney, to grant him
reasonable time to procure one or to
assign ad attorney de officio,
- Distinguisged from duties during trial.
4. Presumption of regularity
- The claim that the accused failed to
appeal from the judgment of conviction
because he did not have the assistance of
counsel cannot prevail over the
presumption that the proceedings had
been regular and in accordance with the
provisions of the Rules of Court, to wit:
That he was afforded the assistance of
counsel and that he was informed by the
court that it was his right to have an
attorney before arraignment and was
asked if he desired the aid of one.(Amar
vs Moscoso)
SECTION 7. APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL DE
OFICIO. —
The court, considering the gravity of the offense
and the difficulty of the questions that may arise,
shall appoint as counsel de oficio only such
members of the bar in good standing who, by
reason of their experience and ability, can
competently defend the accused. But in localities
where such members of the bar are not available,
the court may appoint any person, resident of the
province and of good repute for probity and
ability, to defend the accused.
NOTES:
1. Private Prosecutor Disqualified as Counsel de
Oficio
- A private prosecutor who assisted the
prosecuting attorney in the prosecution
against one defendant, is disqualified
from acting as counsel de oficio for the
other defendants In the same case. An
attorney cannot act in double capacity.
The appearance of such injustice must be
avoided.
2. Counsel de oficio need not be choice of
accused
- It is not essential that the trial court should
appoint or designate a counsel chosen by
the accused. The court may refuse the
request of the accused that a certain
attorney be assigned on the ground that
he is of more legal experience.
3. Duties of Court During Arraignment
- When he is arraigned, there is a duty laid
bu the rules upon the court to inform the
accused of certain rights and to extend to
him, on his deman, cerain others. This
duty is an affirmative one which the court,
on ots own motion, must perform, unless
waived. No such duty, however, is laid on
the court with regard to the right of the
accused which he may be entitled to
exercise during trial.
4. Duty of counsel de officio
- As members of the bar, all lawyers, paid
or hired for pro bono purposes, are called
upon to pursue their cases with identical
passion and with utmost concern for the
fullest protection of their client’s rights and
interst.
5. Public attorney’s duties where accused is
imprisoned.
the public attorney assigned to defend a
person charged with a crime knows that he
latter is preventively detained, either because
he is charged with a bailable crime but has no
means to post bail,
or, is charged with a non-
bailable crime, or, is serving a term of
imprisonment in any penal institution, it shall
be his duty to do the
following:
(a) Shall promptly undertake to obtain
the presence of the
prisoner for trial or cause a notice to be
served on the person having custody of the
prisoner requiring such person to so advise
the prisoner of his right and demand trial.
 (b) Upon receipt of that notice, the custo
dian of the prisoner shall promptly advise
the prisoner of the charge and of his right to
demand trial. If at any
time thereafter the prisoner informs his
custodian that he demands such trial, the
latter shall cause notice to that effect to be
sent promptly to the public attorney.
(c) Upon receipt of such notice, the pu
blic attorney shall promptly seek to obtain the
presence of the prisoner for trial.
(d) When the custodian of the prisoner
receives from the public
attorney a properly supported request for
the availability of the
prisoner for purpose of trial, the prisoner
shall be made available accordingly.
6. Reluctance of counsel de officio does not
amount to denial of right to counsel
- Lack of sympathy for defendant’s cause is
not sufficient to overcome the
presumption that the right of defendant to
be represented by counsel was duly
accorded.
7. Right to counsel substantially satisfied even
where counsel de officio appeared after trial
has commenced.
- Even where the appointed counsel
appeared only at the close of the direct
examination if the second witness for the
prosecution, there was already a
substantial observance of the right of an
accused person to have counsel, when
said counsel was given opportunity to
cross-examine both witnesses and the
accused made no objection to the
proceeding to trial in the absence of
counsel.
- But where the counsel appointed by court
did not appear at all to defend the case,
the case must be remanded to the trial
court for new trial.
8. No prejudicial error where accused
represented by non lawyer.
- None of the substantial rights of the
defendant is violated where he is
represented by a defensor who is not
licensed attorney and the trial was
permitted to proceed without objection.
The mere fact that he was represented by
a person who was not regular practicing
attorney, if it was error at all, was error
without prejusice.
- Where accused learned for the first time
after conviction that the person who
represented him in court is not a member
of the Philippine bar in which case the SC
vacated the judgment and granted new
trial.
9. Presumption that the accused informed of
right to counsel.
- Where the record of the case does not
show whether or not the court informed
the appellant of his right to have counsel,
this cannot be interrupted in the sense
that the court failed to so inform him of
such right. On the contrary, because of
the presumption that the law has been
complied with, it is to be presumed that
the court has complied with its duty and
that it has informed the appellant that he
may have counsel, even counsel de
officio if he wanted to.
10. Court must vigorously comply with duty to
inform accused right to counsel
- In criminal cases, judges are required to
observe and comply vigorously with the
requirements of section 6 of rule 116,
rules of court, and not to pass sentence
on an accused without having warned him
of his right to make a defense, one of
which is the right to be represented by a
counsel, and any failure to abide by such
rule should not only be censured and
disapproved but also condemned.
 a. Right To Counsel de parte During
arraignment and trial is not absolute
- The court may restrict the accused option
to retain counsel de parte if the accused
insists on an attorney he cannot afford or
the chosen counsel is not a member of the
bar, or the attorney declines to represent
the accused for a valid reason.(conflict of
interest and the like)
11. The right to counsel may be waived
- When denial of counsel should be raised
*The defendant in criminal case
cannot raise the question of his right
to have an attorney, or that he was
deprived, or not informed, of that
right, for the first time on appeal. If the
question is not raised in the trial court,
the prosecution may go to trial. The
question will not be considered in
appellate court, for the first time when
the accused fails to raise the question
in lower courts.
12. Duty of the court during arraignment does
not include information as to penalty for
the offense.
- There is nothing in the law that imposes
upon the court the duty to apprise him of
what the nature of the penalty to be
metted out to him might be if he would
plead guilty to the charge, its duty being
limited to have him informed of the nature
and cause thereof. This may no longer
true since the Speedy Trial Law and the
Rule encourages plea bargaining.
SECTION 8. TIME FOR COUNSEL DE OFICIO TO
PREPARE FOR ARRAIGNMENT. —
Whenever a counsel de oficio is appointed by the
court to defend the accused at the arraignment, he
shall be given a reasonable time to consult with
the accused as to his plea before proceeding with
the arraignment.
SECTION 9. BILL OF PARTICULARS. —
The accused may, before arraignment, move for a
bill of particulars to enable him properly to plead
and to prepare for trial. The motion shall specify
the alleged defects of the complaint or information
and the details desired.
NOTES:
1. Reason for allowing Bill of Particulars.
- The remedy against an indictment that
fails to allege the time of the commission
of the offense with sufficient definition is a
Motion for Bill of Particulars and not a
motion to quash
- Bill of Particulars is available to specify
the allegation of raping a minor below 12
years old which is different from a minor
below seven years old which calls for the
imposition of death penalty.
2. Failure to ask for Bill of Particulars Amounts
to waiver of right
- Failure to move for specifications or for
the quashing of information on any of the
grounds provided for in the ROC,
deprives him of the right to object to
evidence which could be lawfully
introduced and admitted under an
information of more or less general terms
which sufficiently charges the defendants
with a definite crime.
-
- The absence of a detailed list of personal
property found in the house on the
occasion of a robbery, the value of which
is specifically alleged in the information,
vitiates neither the proceedings nor the
judgment, not being jurisdictional in
nature. Defendant could have demanded
such a list, but failure to do so constitutes
waiver objection which cannot be raised
on appeal.
-
- Where it is alleged in the information that
the crime was committed within the
jurisdiction of the court, the accused can
ask for more specific allegation, if he does
not so, whatever vagueness there may be
in the allegations may be cured by
evidence.
SECTION 10. PRODUCTION OR INSPECTION OF
MATERIAL EVIDENCE IN POSSESSION OF
PROSECUTION. —
Upon motion of the accused showing good cause
and with notice to the parties, the court, in order
to prevent surprise, suppression, or alteration,
may order the prosecution to produce and permit
the inspection and copying or photographing of
any written statement given by the complainant
and other witnesses in any investigation of the
offense conducted by the prosecution or other
investigating officers, as well as any designated
documents, papers, books, accounts, letters,
photographs, objects or tangible things not
otherwise privileged, which constitute or contain
evidence material to any matter involved in the
case and which are in the possession or under the
control of the prosecution, police, or other law
investigating agencies.
1. Mode of discovery in criminal cases
- This rule refers to the right of the accused
to move for production or inspection of
material evidence in the possession of
thhe prosecution. It authorizes the
defense to inspect, copy or photograph by
any evidence of the prosecution in its
possession after obtaining the permission
of the court. A motion showing good
reasons for the granting of the permission
must be filed by the defense for this
purpose, with notice to all parties.
2. The right of accused to discovery procedures
during preliminary investigation
- The US SC held that “ the suppression by
the prosecution of evidence favorable to
an accused upon request violates due
process where the evidence is material
either to guilt or punishment, irrespective
of good faith or bad faith.
- Its purpose is not to displace the
adversary system as the primary means
by which truth is uncovered, but to ensure
that a miscarriage of justice foes not
occur.
SECTION 11. SUSPENSION OF ARRAIGNMENT.
—
Upon motion by the proper party, the arraignment
shall be suspended in the following cases:
(a) The accused appears to be suffering
from an unsound mental condition which
effective renders him unable to fully
understand the charge against him and to
plead intelligently thereto. In such case,
the court shall order his mental
examination and, if necessary, his
confinement for such purpose;
(b) There exists a prejudicial question; and
(c) A petition for review of the resolution of
the prosecutor is pending at either the
Department of Justice, or the Office of the
President; provided, that the period of
suspension shall not exceed sixty (60)
days counted from the filing of the petition
with the reviewing office.
1. Effect of Insanity
Under Art. 12(1) of the RPC, an insane person
is exempt from criminal liability unless he has acted
during a lucid interval.
However, where the Court examines the
mental condition of the accused and discovers that he
is laboring under a condition of insanity such that he
ought not to be brought to trial, it is, of course, the duty
of the court to hold the criminal proceedings in
abeyance and to commit him to any asylum or hospital
for the insane as the case may require.
2. Test whether the proceedings will be suspended
The Judges should bear in mind that not every
aberration of the mind or exhibition of mental
deficiency is sufficient to justify the suspension.
3. The purpose of the rule was to avoid repetition of
what happened in Paul Roberts, et al. vs CA and
Dimatulac vs. Villa, where the same trial court insisted
on the arraignment of an accused notwithstanding the
pendency of a petition for review either with the DOJ
or with the Office of the President, was incorporated
as a ground for the suspension of the arraignment.
4. Period of Suspension Pending Review of by the
Secretary of Justice
A petition for review of the resolution of the
prosecutor is pending at either the Department of
Justice, or the Office of the President; provided, that
the period of suspension shall not exceed sixty (60)
days counted from the filing of the petition with the
reviewing office.
 In any event, what the Rule prohibits is the
suspension of arraignment beyond 60 days. This may
interpreted to mean that while the Court may not
suspend the arraignment beyond the 60 day limitation,
it may still suspend the trial pending final resolution of
the DOJ.

f. The arraignment may thus be conditional, i.e.

subject to the outcome of the petition for review. In the
case of Serag, DOJ Circular which provides that: “Any
arraignment made after the filing of the petition shall
not bar the Secretary of Justice from exercising his
power to review.”