Professional Documents
Culture Documents
!:1
111
I
II
I
:I
II
I
I
I
Revised
I
I
I
I
I
I
MANUAL for
II
II PROSECUTORS
II
II
I
,I
II
Special Sections on Human Rights and Tax Cases
:1
I
2008
II
II tl EP,i\RTMENT OF JUSTICE
FOil( GFEC~AL USE ONLY
j
I
I
I
I Published by the National Prosecution Service, Department of Justice, Manila, Philippines with funding
support from the United States Agency for International Development through its Rule of Law Effectiveness
I Project, The Asia Foundation, Miilenium Challenge Account - Philippines Threshold Program, Technical
Assistance Project and the Asian Development Bank.
ISBN 978-971-561-753-6
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
J
2 Revised Manual for Prosecutors
I
CONTENTS
I
FOREWORD 19
I ACKNOWLEDGMENT 21
I I. GENERAL PRINCIPLE 23
I B. INFORMATION
1. The Information Need Not be Under Oath; Matter Which a
31
I or Information 36
I
j
I
I 4. Title of the Complaint or Information
5. Qualifying and Generic Aggravating Circumstances; To be
37
I 8. Amendment by Substitution
a. Requisites for the substitution of a defective information
with the correct one
39
39
I I 9. Prescriptive Period; How Computed and Interrupted
a. for an offense penalized under the Revised Penal Code
40
40
b. for violation of a special law or ordinance 40
Dispensed With 48
I 5. Charges and Counter-charges
6. Determination of the Arrest by the Inquest Prosecutor Meaning
48
49
J
I 4 Revised Manual for Prosecutors
(
I
B. INQUEST PROPER 50
I 1. Contents of the Information
2. Action to be Taken When There is an Absence of
51
I Probable Cause
3. Action to be Taken When the Arrested Person Executes a
Waiver of Article 125 of the Revised Penal Code
51
52
I
I rv RELEVA1'1T JURISPRUDENCE 55
I V. HELPFUL HINTS 57
I
I NPS INQ Form No. 01, s. 2008 - Order to Submit
Additional Evidence! Documents 62
NPS INQ Form No. 02, s. 2008 - Release Order of
I I Detained!Arrested Person
NPS INQ Form No. 03, s. 2008 - Subpoena to Respondents
64
66
Recovered Articles 69
I NPS INQ Form No. 07, s. 2008 - Request for Release
with Undertaking 71
I
, FLOWCHART OF THE INQUEST PROCEEDINGS
I
j
I
PART Ill: SUMMARY INVESTIGATION 74
I I. GENERAL RULES ..........................................................•....................... 74
I II. PROCEDURE 76
II I. GENERAL RULES 77
II 2. It is Preliminary in Nature
3. It is a Summary and Inquisitorial Proceeding
77
77
4. It is a Judicial Inquiry or Proceeding 78
C. Right to a Preliminary Investigation ., 78
II
I II. PROCEDURE 83
85
'I
J
•
I
I
3. Where Respondent Cannot be Subpoenaed or if Subpoenaed
I Does not Submit Counter-Affidavit
4. Objects as Evidence
87
87
5. Guidelines to be Observed in the Service of Subpoenas 87
I D. Submission of the Counter-affidavits by the Respondent/s
1. Extension of Time Within Which to Submit
88
Respondent's Counter-Affidavit... 89
I 2. Filing of a Motion to Dismiss, Memorandum or Motion
in Lieu of a Counter-Affidavit 89
I a. General Rule
b. Exceptions
3. Effect of the Filing of a Motion to Dismiss or a Motion for a
89
90
Desistance 90
I 5. Suspension of Proceedings Due to the Existence of a
Prejudicial Question 91
a. Concept of a Prejudicial Question 91
I b. Elements of a Prejudicial Question
c. Issuance of an Order Suspending the Proceedings Due
91
I I 3. No Right to Counsel...
F. Reply-Affidavits, Rejoinders and Memoranda;
When to Allow the Filing Thereof..
92
93
G. When Complaints May be Consolidated 93
II H. Actions on Motions to Disqualify/Inhibit
1. Submission of the Case for Resolution
94
94
I I
J. Preparation of the Resolution 94
1. When There is Lack of Probable Cause 94
2. When There is a Finding of Probable Cause 94
3. Form of the Resolution and Number of Copies 95
iI a. Caption of Resolution
b. Names of Parties
95
95
II c. Case Number
d. Designation of Offense/s Charged
e. Contents of the Body of the Resolution
96
97
97
I f. Parts of a Resolution
g. Parties Who Need to be Furnished a Copy of the Resolution
97
98
h. Signatures and Initials of Investigating Prosecutor 98
I 4. Period to Conduct the Preliminary Investigation 99
,I
Revised Manual for Prosecutors 7
I
I
'
I
I 5. Written Approval Required in the Dismissal of a Complaint or
the Filing of an Information in Court 99
I
I
K. Transmittal of the Recommendatory Resolution and Information
Together with the Complete Record of the Case ~
1. Preparation of the Information and its Contents
99
99
a. lack of a certification 100
I b. designation of offense not binding upon the court
2. Recommended Bail; How Written
100
101
110
I
J
nr'.' ,,!Ii·
'.'.';';
"::';;';'
"
Sample Resolution...••.....•...............•.........•....•....•....•.•....••....•........•.119
I Sample Information I
Sample Information 2
123
125
Sample Information 3 , 127
I Sample Information 4 129
I Flowchart 2
Flowchart 3
'" 135
136
A. Principles 137
I B. Concepts............................................................................................ 137
I
I C. Applicable Rules in Cases Where the Accused Pleads Guilty
to a Lesser Offense 139
D. When a Plea of Guilty to a Lesser Offense Not Allowed 139
E. When Accused Pleads Guilty to a Capital Offense 139
I I Ill. RELEVANT JURISPRUDENCE 139
I I
PART VI: PRE-TRIAL...•...•.•..•..•.....•........•...•.•...••...•.....•....•......•.........•.... 140
I I I. CONCEPT 140
I
j
I . D. Waiver ofObjeetions to the Admissibility of Evidence 141
I I. CONCEPTS
A. Purpose of Bail...
143
143
B. Nature of the Right to Bail 143
I C. Basis of Bail
D. When Bail Not Required
143
143
I
j
I •\, ",,!
-_.,~~?<
"
I D. Defense Evidence
E. Discharge of Accused to be State Witness
F. Admission to the Witness Protection Program of an Accused
154
154
I m. PROCEDURE
A. Continuous Trial until Terminated
157
157
I B. Order of TriaL..................................................................................
C. Presentation ofWitnesses
157
158
D. Conditional Examination of Witness for the Prosecution 159
I
,
J
Revised Manual for Prosecutors 11
I
PART X: APPEAL/PETITION FOR REVIEW 162
I I. GENERAL RULES 162
, 12
A. Inquest Proceedings , 171
IJ
- - -- -- . - - . - -- ._---------
I aChild :
B. Preliminary Investigations
173
174
1. If the Child is the Victim 174
I 1. Evidence Required
2. Pointers
183
184
, 1. Pointer.......................................................................................... 184
~
I F. ECOLOGICAL SOLID WASlE MANAGEMENTACT (RA9003)_185
I 1. Pointer 185
I 2. Pointer
188
I A. General Rules
B. Duties of the Prosecutor
188
189
I
SPECIAL SECTION ON PROSECUTING HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATIONS
A. Background 198
I Definition
B. Dealing With Torture Under Substantive Law
198
199
I I. Unconstitutionality
2. Direct Criminal Prosecution for Maltreatment of Prisoners
199
IJ
B. Remedies Available Under Ordinary Actions 210
1. Avaiiment of Generic Remedies for Human Rights Violations 210
I.~"
2. Criminal Actions 210
C. Remedies Available for Information Gathering 211
I _. I. Rationale 211
2. Right to Information; extent tbereof.. 212
II
I
2. Availing of the Rule on the Writ of Habeas Corpus
(Rules of Court, Rule 102)
3. Availing of the Rule on the Writ ofAmparo
219
!I A. Background
B. Guidelines in the Delimitation of the Right of Abode and Right
231
II
!
C. Remedies Available for Violation
1. Action for Damages Under the Generic Remedies for
232
I I A. Present Context
B. Action for Damages under the Civil Code (Article 32)
233
234
1. Nature and Quantum of Evidence Required 234
2. By Whom Filed 234
I I 3. Against Whom Filed
4. Grounds to be Alleged (Elements of Cause ofAction)
234
234
I 5. Relief That May be Granted. 235
I':1j
Revised Manual for Prosecutors 15
I C. Filing a Claim Before the Boards of Claims of the Department of Justice
I B. Sec. 255. Failure to File return, Supply Correct and Accurate Information,
Pay Tax Withheld and Remit Tax and Refund Excess Taxes Withheld on
C ompensation 244
I 1. Elements of Sec. 255
2. Documentary Evidence Required
: 244
244
I Registration
1. Elements of Sec. 257 (B)(8)
246
247
2. Documentary Evidence Required 247
I 3. Revised Penal Code Provision on falsification in Relation to
Sec. 257(b)(8) of the NIRC 248
I
,
D. Sec. 258. Unlawful Pursuit of Business 249
1. Elements of Sec. 258 249
2. Documentary Evidence Required : 249
I
J
r~.f··
E. Sec. 267. Declaration Under Penalties of Perjury.•..•.•......••...••.....250
I 1. Elements of Sec. 267
2. Documentary Evidence Required
250
250
I F. Sec. 236(J), last par. - Securing More Than One TIN.••....•..•....•... 251
l. Elements of Sec. 236(J) 251
252
B. Philippine Jurisprudence on IntentIWillfulness in Tax Cases 253
I l. Supreme Court Decisions
2. Court of Tax Appeals Decisions
253
257
I.·:',·..··
Revised Manual for Prosecutors 17
I ". . f.~'.',:- '-.
'-'i-c'
;-~~:.
I
,I ' APPENDICES
I Appendix "A" - D.O. No. 39, s. 2007 - Rules on Inquest with Respect
to Children in Conflict with the Law as Defined Under RA 9344
Appendix "F" - D.C. No. 47, s. 2000 (Preparation ofa Trial Guide)... 311
I Appendix "G" - D.C. No. 26, s. 2008 (Jurisdiction to Conduct Preliminary
Investigation of Cases Against Public Officers/Employees) 313
I Appendix "H" - Guide for Media Practitioners on the Reporting
_ and Coverage of Cases Involving Children .., 316
I Appendix "I" - Participants of the Validation Sessions 324
I
I
I
I
I
I, 18 Revised Manual for Prosecutors
I 1
8.;;1;""'" ~at
It was in 1996 the first Manualfor Prosecutors ofthe D.epartment ofJu~tice was
"'" ,. issued as a unified guide for prosecutors m their day-to-day services to the public. In the
I>
'C:' ensuing years, the Rules on Criminal Procedure had undergone revisions, several special
laws were enacted, and various jurisprudence emerged, thus, affecting the work of the
. prosecutors. Yet, the Manual remained as it was in 1996. The need to revisit the Manual to
keep it attuned to recent developments in law and procedure is the prime consideration for
I those involved in this project.
This Manual will provide for the procedural guidelines that will standardize in-
I vestigative and prosecutorial work in the National Prosecution Service in a unified and
simplified manner.
II I thank all those who have labored and partnered with the Department for the de-
velopment and production of this Manual. May you continue with such noble work for
I the Filipino people, and may more join you in efforts to strengthen the Department as an
institution and the justice system as a whole.
I To all DOJ prosecutors and prosecution attorneys, this is your Manual. A lot ofhard
work, time and resources went into it to make sure that it is comprehensive enough to cover
the peculiarities of your work, while being a user-friendly reference to you.
I It is my hope that this would help you in the discharge of your sworn duty to the
people and ultimately improve the administration of justice in our country.
I
I . GONZALEZ
I Secretary of Justice
I
I
I
I
,
, Revised Manual for Prosecutors 19
I
I'
Republika ng Pilipinas
I I KAGAWARAN NG KATARUNGAN
Department ofJustice
Manila
I 05 October 2007
I In the interest of the service and pursuant to the provisions of existing laws, the following
prosecutors are hereby constituted as members of the Technical Working Group (TWG) in connec-
tion with the preparation of the: 1) Systems and Procedures Manual for the National Prosecution
I CP LORNA T. LEE
SSP ROSALINA P. AQUINO
SSPMA. EMlLIAL. VICTORIO
Member
Member
Member
I The Technical Working Group, which shall be under the direct supervision of Chief State
Prosecutor Jovencito R. ZUllo and assisted by ACSPMiguel F, Gudio, Jr. andACSPRJchardAnthony
D. Fadullon, shall be charged with the review and assessment of existing policies; formulation and
I development of policy recommendations; oversee the progress of the manuals' preparation; and
conduct the evaluation and validation of said manuals nationwide in coordination with the DOJ
Management Services Office (MSO).
I The Technical Working Group shall be assisted by a Secretariat. the members of which are
the following:
I Corazon S. Navarrete Dept. Legislative Liaison Specialist
Eleanor P. Singson Dept. Legislative Liaison Specialist
I Imelda A. Ballesteros
Evangeline C. Cruz
Dept. Legislative Liaison Specialist
Stenographic Reporter IV
I Support services, particularly the Administrative Service and the Finance and Management
Service shall extend the necessary assistance to the Technical Working Group.
This Department Order shall take effect immediately and shall remain in force until further
I orders.
I j
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
.<-
~ .•....i.'.-.-.-....
;"'_
Foremost, the distinguished institutions and individuals who, by their support and
I cooperation, have made the revision of the Manual for Prosecutors and the drafting of
the Handbook on Administrative Case Management possible: the USAID represented
by Mr. Gerardo Porta, Senior Civic Participation Specialist; USAID-ROLE represented
I by Atty. George V. Carmona, Chief of Party, ROLE and Atty. Redentor Buban; The Asia
Foundation represented by Dr. Steven Rood, Country Representative, Atty. Carolyn A.
Mercado, Sr. Program Officer, Atty. Damcelle Torres-Cortes, Program Officer and Ms.
I Michelle H. Domingo, Assistant Program Officer; MCA-PTP represented by Mr. Benjamin
Allen, Chief of Party and Atty. Noel del Prado; and the ADB represented by Mr. Jaseem
I Ahmed, Director, Governance, Finance & Trade Division, Ms. Debra Kertzman, Mr. Joven
Z. Balbosa, Mr. Thatha Hla and Atty. Christine Lao.
I State Prosecutor Severino H. Gafia, Jr., Assistant Chief State Prosecutor Miguel F. Gudio,
Jr., Assistant Chief State Prosecutor Pedrito L. Ranees and Assistant Chief State Prosecutor
Richard Anthony D. Fadullon should be acknowledged.
I The critical job of reviewing, rationalizing and updating the old Manual and pre-
senting the matrices during the validation sessions and the round table discussion were
I diligently and skillfully done by a technical working group (TWG): Chairperson SSP
Purita Mercado-Deynata, Co-Chairperson RSP Antonio B. Arellano, and members RSP
Nonnatus Caesar R. Rojas, CP Jacinto G. Ang, CP Lorna T. Lee, SSP Rosalina P. Aquino
I and SSP Ma. Emilia Lucena-Victorio (please refer to D.O. No. 844, s. 2007 on the previous
page, and Appendix 'T' on p. 322 ofthis Manual).
I This Manual was initially made possible through the Organizational Development
Program for the National Prosecution Service (NPS) and its component project, the
,
by Director Ma. Monica P. Pagunsan, assisted by its Planning Staff, Mr. Ryan C. Thomas,
Ms. Janet A. Covarrubias and Ms. Marjorie Tan-delos Santos. These people provided
-I
Secretariat and other administrative work were effectively and efficiently carried
out by Ms. Eleanor P. Singson, Ms. Corazon S. Navarrete, Ms. ImeldaA. Ballesteros and
Ms. Evangeline C. Cruz. They are the staff of Assistant Secretary Teresita R. Domingo
who most willingly committed them for this endeavor.
I The Financial and Management Service and Administrative Service have also been
very supportive of the project by providing the necessary funding and logistics.
I Lastly, retired Justice Romeo J. Calleja, Sr., a great thinker who, with his expertise
and smart thinking, proffered relevant and distinct suggestions during the round table dis-
I CUSSIOn.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
, 22 Revised Manual for Prosecutors
I
J
r..".,'.,i
I~~:-··
I 1. The prosecution of cases shall be under the direct control and supervision of the
prosecutor. While he may turnover the actual prosecution of the criminal case to
a private prosecutor, it is necessary that he be present at the trial until the final
I I 2. The trial prosecutor may, at any time, in the exercise of his discretion, take over
from the private prosecutor the actual conduct of the trial.
I 4. The prosecution office has no more control over cases filed in court; thus, a motion
for reinvestigation should be addressed to the trial judge (Baltazar v. Pantig, G. R.
No. 149111, August 9,2005).
I 5. Once a case has already been filed in court, a trial prosecutor may be compelled
to prosecute the case notwithstanding his personal convictions or opinions. He
I should present the case to the best of his ability and let the court decide the merits
of the case on the basis of the evidence adduced by both parties.
I n. DEFINITION OF TERMS
I arraignment is necessary in order to fix the identity of the accused, to inform him
of the charge and to give him an opportunity to plead (14 Am. Jur., p.939, G. V
Jacinto, Criminal Procedure).
I 2. Arrest - the taking of a person into custody in order that he may be bound to
answer for the commission of an offense (Sec. 1, Rule 113, Revised Rules on
I Criminal Procedure).
3. Bail - is the security given for the release of a person in custody of the law,
I furnished by him or a bondsman, to guarantee his appearance before any court as
, required under the conditions hereinafter specified. Bail may be given in the form
I
J
I of corporate surety, property bond, cash deposit or recognizance (Sec. 1, Rule
I 114, Revised Rules on Criminal Procedure).
4. Bail Bond - is an obligation given by the accused with one or more sureties, with
I the condition to be void upon the performance by the accused of such acts as he
may legally be required to perform (Villasenor v. Abano, 21 SCRA 312).
I with the enforcement of the law violated (Sec. 3, Rule 110, Revised Rules on
Criminal Procedure).
I or not said persons should remain under custody and correspondingly be charged
incoun.
I 10. Offended Party - is the person against whom or against whose property the crime
was committed (Sec. 3, Rule 110, supra) and to whom the offender is civilly liable
\
I
I
in light of Article 100 of the Revised Penal Code that "every person criminally 1
I liable is also civilly liable (Garcia v. CA, 266 SCRA 678 [1997]); the person
actually injured and whose feeling is offended. 1j
I
I
11. Personal Knowledge of Facts (in arrests without warrant) - must be based
upon probable cause which means an actual belief or reasonable grounds of
1
I suspicion,
I
.J
24 Revised Manual for Prosecutors
I
j
IF fw
I,
founded on probable cause, "coupled with good faith on the part of the peace
I officers making the arrest." (Umil, et. al. vs. Ramos, 202 SCRA 251 [1991]).
12. Plea - is the reply of the accused to the charge. In criminal prosecution, the
I accused has to plead to the indictment, which he may do (1) by pleading to the
jurisdiction, that is, alleging that the court has no jurisdiction to try him; (2) by a
I demurrer; or (3) by some plea in bar, either a general plea, "guilty" or "not guilty"
s
(Osborn Concise Law Dictionary, l i" Ed. John Burke, p. 254).
I 13. Plea Bargaining - the process where the accused usually pleads guilty to a lesser
offense, or to only one or some of the counts of a multi-count indictment in return
for a lighter sentence than that for the graver charge (Blacks Law Dictionary, 5th
I Ed., p. 1037).
16. Probable Cause (as a ground for warrantless arrest) - an actual belief or
I reasonable grounds of suspicion (People vs. Tudtud, GR No. 144037, Sept. 26,
2003) that the person to be arrested is about to commit or is attempting to commit
a crime, or is in the act of committing a crime, or has committed a crime, either in
I the presence or without the presence of the arresting officer.
18. Release on Recognizance - the pre-trial release of an arrested person who prom-
I ises, usually in writing but without a surety or posting bond, to appear for trial at
a later date (Black's Law Dictionary, p. 1316).
penalty of imprisonment does not exceed four (4) years and two (2) months,
Ii regardless of the fine.
I 21. Trial-is ajudicial examination of the claims at issue in a case which is presented
by the prosecution and defense to enable the court to arrive at a judgment pro-
nouncing either the guilt or innocence of the accused (US v. Raymundo, 14 Phil.
I 416 [1909]).
A written complaint filed with the Office of the Prosecutor may come in
I different forms, to wit:
c. a letter (sworn or not) from the offended party, or other persons autho-
I rized by law to file the complaint;
I the prosecutor shall warn the complainant that any false statement in the
complaint may give rise to a finding of a prima facie case for perjury
before the same office.
I
, 26 Revised Manual for Prosecutors
I
J
•It: c;.~ :
• •. .:...•-'
'~~y---
...
.;._.-- _-
"
I offended party (People v, Sangil, 4 SCRA 722). However, upon the start
of the investigation, the investigating officer should administer the oath to
the complainant.
I • This liberal policy is premised upon the fact that the complainant is
unschooled in law, (Grenen v. Consolacion, 4 SCRA 722 [1962J) and
I it is the inherent power of the prosecutor to even initiate motu proprio
a criminal investigation without waiting for a formal complaint to be
filed by the police agency or the aggrieved party. (Sec. 3, Rule 110,
I supra.).
I c. any law enforcement officer charged with the enforcement of the law
violated.
I
J.
I
m
l'
In offenses which cannot be prosecuted de oficio, only the follow-
I ing persons may file the complaint:
I ian, the State shall initiate the criminal action in her behalf (Sec.S,
par. 3,Rule 110, supra);
I •
sides, or where he/she works;
At least three (3) responsible citizens where the violation oc-
curred.
-I
J
28 Revised Manual for Prosecutors
e. In cases of violation of RA 9208 (Anti-Trafficking in Persons Act), any
r".' .;
'J~ ••.....
one of the following may file the complaint:
1. trafficked person;
2. parents;
3. spouse;
I 4.
5.
siblings,
children,
6. legal guardian;
I 7. any person who has personal knowledge of the commission of the
offense.
I a. police officers;
b. NBI agents;
I c. officials of the Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency (PDEA) for viola-
tions ofRA 9165 (Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of2002);
I d. officials of the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BlR) for violations of the
National Internal Revenue Code (NlRC);
I e. officials of the Bureau of Customs (BOC) for violations of the Tariff and
Customs Code;
I f. officials of the Bureau of Forestry Development (BFD) or other officials
of the Department of Environment and Natural Resources for violations
g. officials of the Social Security System (SSS) for violations ofRA 1161, as
I amended by RA 8282 (SSS Law);
I I. officials of the PAG-IBIG for violations of the PAG-IBIG Fund Law (PD
1752); and
'I,
Revised Manual for Prosecutors 29
I
J
I
I J. Other agencies specially tasked with the enforcement of certain special
laws.
I the complaint with the proper officer for the purpose of conducting the
requisite preliminary investigation (Sec. 1 (a), Rule 110, supra.).
I • Criminal actions for violations of the civil and political rights of per-
sons suspected of or detained for the crime of terrorism or conspiracy
to commit terrorism may also be commenced by the filing of the com-
I plaint with the Commission on Human Rights (Sec. 55, RA. 9372).
I .~
,
J
30 Revised Manual for Prosecutors
,,
-j
Ie; trip, including the place of departure and arrival (Sec. 15 (b), Rule 110,
supra.).
I' b. Where the' offense is committed on board a vessel in the course of its
voyage·
I The criminal action shall be instituted in the proper court of its first
port of entry or of any municipality or territory through which the vessel
passed during such voyage subject to the generally accepted principles of
I intemationallaw (Sec. 15(c) Rule 110, supra).
I c. Where the crimes are committed outside the Philippines but punishable
under Article 2 of the Revised Penal Code -
, with a statement that his true name is unknown. (Sec. 7, par. 1, Rule 110.
supra.).
To properly inform the accused of the nature and cause of the ac-
cusation against him, the Complaint or Information shall state, whenever
possible -
I 3. prostitution, or
I The body of the information states that the accused "embraced" the
complainant, "held her breasts and kissed her lips". Such allegations con-
stitute specific averment of ultimate facts constituting the offense of child
I abuse under Sec. 5 ofRA 761O. This, despite the fact that the caption and the
preamble of the Information designated the offense charged as "Violation
ofRA 7610". The omission to cite the specific section or subsection. ofRA
I 7610 violated is not sufficientto invalidate the Information since there is
no doubt that the allegation of the ultimate facts of "embracing" the victim,
"holding her breast" and "kissing her lips" clearly refer to the "ultimate
I facts" of the generic term "acts of lasciviousness" which is penalized under
Sec. 5 of RA 7610. Hence, the Information was valid (Olivarez v. CA G. R.
~ 34
I Revised Manual for Prosecutors
·
1:-''- .
'
•••.
• In order for the court to impose the penalties under R. A. No. 9346 in
I rape cases, the following attendant circumstances must be stated in the
Information:
I 1. When the victim is under eighteen (18) years of age and the offender
is a parent, ascendant, step-parent, guardian, relative by .consan-
I 2. When the victim is under the custody of the police or military au-
thorities;
i
l 3. When the rape is committed in full view ofthe husband, parent, any
of the children or other relatives within the third degree of consan-
guinity;
I 4. When the victim is a religious or a child below seven (7) years old;
I ment agency;
7. When, by reason or on the occasion of the rape, the victim has suf-
I fered permanent physical mutilation. (Sec. 11, RA 7659 [The Death
Penalty Law)).
I 9, Rule 11 0, supra.).
••
J
I element of the offense charged or is necessary for its identification (Sec.
I at anytime within the period of the statute of limitation and before the
commencement of the action (US v. Smith, 3 Phil 20 ri903)).
The Complaint or Information must state the name and surname of the
I person against whom or against whose property the offense was commit-
ted, or any appellation or nickname by which such person has been or is
known. If there is no better way of identifying him, he must be described
I under a fictitious name (Sec. i2, Rule 110, supra.).
I Information:
I b. the criminal intent of the accused and its relation to the act or omission
complained of;
I, 36 Revised Manual for Prosecutors
I
j
• '
-""""",{/:::.:-.:.
",.oc_.
-,,-, ,
I d. all matters that are essential to the constitution of the offense, such as the
ownership and/or value of the property robbed or destroyed; the particu-
lar knowledge to establish culpable intent; or the particular intention that
I characterizes the offense;
I e. age of the minor accused, and whenever applicable, the fact that he/she
acted with discernment; and,
The charge is not defective for duplicity when one single crime is set forth
I in the different modes prescribed by law for its commission, or the felony
is set forth under different counts specifying the way of its perpetuation,
I or the acts resulted from a single criminal impulse. Neither is there duplic-
ity when the other offense described is but an ingredient or an essential
element of the real offense charged nor when several acts are related in
I describing the offense (People v Mantilla, 285 SCRA 703).
I
I
-I
J
Revised Manual for Prosecutors 37
I
5. Qualifying and Generic Aggravating Circumstances; To be Alleged and
I Proved
a. The prosecutor must always consider and allege the applicable quali-
I fying and/or generic aggravating circumstances in any Complaint or
Information that he prepares.
I proved during trial, except as a ground for the grant of exemplary dam-
ages in the civil aspect of the criminal action where applicable, pursuant
to Article 2230 of the New Civil Code.
I 6. List of Prosecution Witnesses
I The Information shall contain the complete names and addresses of all
identified witnesses for the prosecution. In cases for violation of B.P. BIg.
22 and estafa cases, the list of witnesses shall include the complainant, the
I bank representative with specific reference to the check and account numbers
involved and, in proper cases, the company auditor.
I In physical injuries cases, the Information shall indicate the name of the
attending physician with specific reference to the medical report and date of
I the incident.
I only upon motion by the prosecutor, with notice to the offended party and
with leave of court (Sec. 14, par. 2. Rule 110, supra.).
The amendment may be made only with leave of court and only as to
I matters of form wherein the same can be done without prejudice to the
rights of the accused (Sec. 14. par. 1, Rule 110, supra.).
I
,I
38 Revised Manual for Prosecutors
I
J
•....'.'.',
1<"
c. during the trial
I An amendment may also be made but only with leave of court and
also only' as to matters of form wherein the same can be done without
I prejudice to the rights of the accused (Sec.14, par. 1, Rule 110, supra.).
I I 8. Amendment by SUbstitution
At any time before judgment, if there has been a mistake in charging the
I proper offense, the court shall dismiss the original Complaint or Information
upon the filing of a new one charging the proper offense in accordance with
Rule 119, Sec. 11,provided the accused would not be placed thereby in double
I I jeopardy. The court may also require the witnesses to give bail for their ap-
pearance at the trial (Sec. 14, par. 3, Rule 110, supra.).
I
J
Revised Manual for Prosecutors 39
I
I
9. Prescriptive Period; How Computed and Interrupted
I a. For an offense penalized under the Revised Penal Code -
I The period of prescription shall commence to run from the day of the
commission of the violation, and if the same is not known at the time,
from the discovery and the institution of judicial proceedings for its in-
I vestigation and punishment. The prescription shall be interrupted only by
the filing of the Complaint or Information in court and shall begin to run
I again if the proceedings are dismissed for reasons not constituting double
jeopardy (Sec. 2, Act. No. 3326, as amended).
I Prescription shall not run when the offender is absent from the coun-
try (Art. 91, par. 2, Revised Penal Code).
I
,
, 40 Revised Manual for Prosecutors
IF"
--,-
• In cases where the imposable penalty is imprisonment andlor a
t fine, the greater penalty shall be the basis for the computation of
prescription.
Prescription shall not run when the offender is absent from the coun-
I try.
I addressed to the Secretary of Justice who has control and supervision over the
conduct of a preliminary investigation which is a function of the Executive
Department and not the Judiciary (Larranaga v. CA .. 287 SCRA 581).
II 2. Where the crime for violation ofPD 532 (Anti-Piracy and Anti-Highway Robbery
Law of 1974) was committed aboard a jeepney, the criminal action may be insti-
I tuted in the court of any municipality or territory where the vehicle passed during
the trip including the place ofdeparture and arrival (People v. Panlilio, 255 SCRA
503).
II 3. Where the transport of cigarettes commenced out of Clark Airbase and continued
when the goods pushed through Valenzuela, Bulacan until they were seized in
I Quezon City, the courts in any of these places had jurisdiction over the offenses
(Co Kiat v. CA., 187 SCRA 5 [1990}).
, circumstances provided for under Sec. 11 of RA 7659 must be stated with par-
6. The exact age of the victim at the time of the commission of the offense must be
I stated in the Information. (People v. Arillas, GR No. 130593, June 19, 2000.).
7. Where the Informations state that the offense was committed with the aggra-
I vating circumstances of insult or in disregard of the respect due the offended
party on account of the fact that the accused is the father ofthe complainant, said
Informations properly pleaded the special circumstance of relationship of father
I and daughter that would enable a "person of sufficient understanding" to know
what offense is intended to be charged (People v. Alarcon, 310 SCRA 729).
I 2230 of the New Civil Code even if the Information or criminal Complaint has
not alleged said circumstances as required by the Rule (People v. Victor, G. R. No.
127904, December 05,2002).
I 9. The court gave fair warning to prosecutors that they must prepare well-crafted
Informations that allege the circumstances qualifying and aggravating the crimes
I charged; otherwise, the same will not be considered by the court in determining
the proper penalty (People v. Rodolfo Oling Madraga, January 20, 2003).
I 11. When conspiracy is charged as a mode in the commission of a crime, the allega-
tion in the Information should allege, thus: a) by the use of the word "conspire"
f'~< 13. An Information for bigamy must state the time and place ofthe second wedding
(People'v. Bustamante, 105 Phil. 64).
I 14. Time is irrelevant in rape (People v. Bugayong, 299 SCRA 128) and violations of
the Dangerous Drugs Law cases. (People v. Requiz, 318 SCRA 635).
I 15. Where murder or homicide results from the use of an unlicensed firearm, the
crime is no longer qualified illegal possession, but murder or homicide, as the
I case may be. The use of the unlicensed firearm is not considered as a separate
crime but shall be appreciated as a mere aggravating circumstance (People v.
Lazaro, 317 SCRA 435).
I 16. An amendment after plea which changes the nature of the offense is prohibited
,I (Ricers v. CA., GR No. 16041, February 09,2007). The factor that characterizes
the charge is the· actual recital of facts. The real nature of the criminal charge is
determined not from the caption or preamble of the Information nor from the
,I specification ofthe provision oflaw alleged to have been violated they being con-
clusions of law but by the actual recital of facts in the Complaint or Information
(Lacson v. Executive Secretary, 301 SeRA 298 [1999J; People vs. Gutierrez, 403
I SCRA 178).
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
IJ
Revised Manual for Prosecutors 43
I
I
PART II. INQUEST
I
I I. GENERAL RULES
A. CONCEPT
I B. COVERAGE
1. All offenses covered under the Revised Penal Code and special laws, rules
I and regulations;
2. Where the respondent is a minor (below eighteen [18] years old), the inquest
I investigation shall cover only offenses punishable by imprisonment of not
less than six (6) years and one (1) day, provided that no inquest investigation
shall be conducted unless the child-respondent shall have first undergone the
I requisite proceedings before the Local Social Welfare Development Officer
pursuant to the Rules on Inquest With Respect to Children in Conflict With
the Law (CICL) (please refer to Department Circular No. 39, s. 2007 on
I the "Rules on Inquest With Respect to Children in Conflict with the Law as
Defined Under Republic Act No. 9344, Otherwise Known as the "Juvenile
I Justice and Welfare Act of 2006" found in Appendix "A" on p. 300 of this
Manual).
I City Prosecutor, those assigned to inquest duties shall discharge their functions
,
during the hours of their designated assignments and ouly at the police sta-
1. When Commenced
'.I
presentation of the documents listed below to wit:
,
I • cenified true/machine copy of the cenificate of death of the victim;
I
I
• autopsy report and the certificate of post-mortem examination, if readily
I •
available; and
marriage certificate in parricide cases.
I •
days from the date of the inquest;
machine copy or photograph of the buy-bust money, if available; and
• affidavit of the poseur-buyer, if any.
I d. Theft and Robbery, Violation of the Anti-Piracy and Anti-Highway Robbery
Law (PD 532) and Violation of the Anti-Fencing Law (PD 1612)
I • a list/inventory of the articles and items subject of the offense; and
• statement of their respective values.
I e. Rape, Seduction and Forcible Abduction with Rape
I • the medico-legal report (living case report), if the victim submitted herself
for medical or physical examination.
I •
•
machine copy of the certificate of motor vehicle registration;
machine copy of the current official receipt of payment of the registration
fees ofthe subject motor vehicle;
I
,
• photograph of the vehicle, if readily available;
~
• certification from the Traffic Management Group / Land Transponation
Office; and
• other evidence of ownership,
• gambling paraphernalia;
• photograph of the gambling paraphernalia, if any; and
• cash money, if any.
I <;':
.~:::._,-
• ballistics report, if readily available.
I I •
•
affidavit/evidence of "dating relationship", if applicable; and
barangay protection order (BPO), if any.
I •
•
birth certificate; or
dental chart accompanied by a certification from the dentist; or
• affidavits of any of the parent/disinterested parties;
I • certificate of discernment from the LSWD in cases covered by RA
9344 (the Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act).
I
,
Other pieces of evidence may also be submitted to establish the commis-
sion of the foregoing offenses/crimes.
,~~
'~
~~
I
I 3. Incomplete Documents
When the documents presented are not complete to establish probable cause,
I the inquest prosecutor shall direct the law enforcement authorities to submit in
the proper form, the required evidence within the period prescribed under the
provisions of Article 125 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended (please refer
I to NPS INQ Form No. 01. s. 2008 on p. 62 of this Manual). Failure to submit
the required evidence within the periods prescribed shall constrain the inquest
prosecutor to order the release of the detained person (please refer to NPS INQ
I Form No. 02, s. 2008 on p. 64 ofthis Manual).
I •
•
if he is confined in a hospital; or
if he is detained in a place under maximum security;
I The absence of the detained person for any of the foregoing reasons shall be
noted by the inquest prosecutor and reflected in the record of the case.
All charges and counter-charges arising from the same incident shall, as far as
I practicable, be consolidated, and the conduct of the inquest proceedings shall be
held jointly to avoid contradictory or inconsistent dispositions.
I The inquest prosecutor shall first determine ifthe arrest ofthe detained person
was made in accordance with paragraphs (a), (b) and (c) of Sec. 5, Rule 113 of the
Revised Rules on Criminal Procedure which provide that arrests without a war-
I rant may be effected: (Go vs. Court ofAppeals. 206 SCRA 138 [1992]; Umil, et.
al. vs. Ramos, 202 SCRA 251 [1991J and companion cases People vs. Malmstedt,
198 SCRA 401 and People vs. Aminnudin, 163 SCRA 402 [1998J).
I a. when, in the presence of the arresting officer, the person to be arrested has
committed, is actually committing, or is attempting to commit an offense; or
I b. when an offense has in fact just been committed, and the arresting officer has
probable cause to believe, based on personal knowledge of facts or circum-
I
,
stances, that the person to be arrested has committed it; and
~
._- ----
c. when the person to be arrested is a prisoner who has escaped from a penal
establishment or place where he is serving final judgment or is temporarily
confined while his case is pending, or has escaped while being transferred
6#-. .•. . . .'"
I~f;;::·- from one confinement to another.
For this purpose, the inquest prosecutor may summarily examine the arrest-
I mitting a crime, or has committed a crime, either in the presence or without the
presence of the arresting officer.
Should the inquest prosecutor find that the arrest was not made in accordance
I •
•
recommend the release of the person arrested or detained;
prepare a resolution indicating the reasons for the action taken; and
• forward the same, together with the record of the case, to the Chief State
I or Provincial/City Prosecutor for appropriate action.
Where the recommendation for the release of the detained person Is approved
I by the Chief State Prosecutor or by the Provincial/City Prosecutor but the evi-
dence on hand warrants the conduct of a regular preliminary investigation, the
• serve the order of release on the law enforcement officer having custody
I of said detainee and (please see NPS INQ Form No. 02, s.2008 on p. 64
ofthis Manual);
• direct the said officer to serve upon the detainee the subpoena or notice
I of preliminary investigation, together with the copies of the charge sheet
or complaint, affidavits or sworn statements of the complainant and his
witnesses and other supporting evidence (please refer to NPS INQ Form
I No. 03, s. 2008 on p. 66 ofthis Manual).
I
I
j
I The detained person, with the assistance of a lawyer of his own choice, shall
then be made to execute a waiver of the provisions of Article 125 of the Revised
I Penal Code, as amended. (please refer to NPS INQ Form No. 04, s. 2008 on p.
67 ofthis Manual).
I B. INQUEST PROPER
Where the detained person does not opt for a preliminary investigation or
I otherwise refuses to execute the required waiver, the inquest prosecutor shall
proceed with the conduct of the inquest proceeding, notwithstanding the absence
of a counsel, by examining the sworn statements/affidavits of the complainant
I and the witnesses and other supporting evidence submitted.
If necessary, the inquest prosecutor shall require the presence of the com-
I plaining witnesses and subject them to an informal and summary investigation or
examination for purposes of determining the existence of probable cause.
I If the inquest prosecutor finds that probable cause exists, he shall forthwith
prepare the resolution with the corresponding Complaint/Information with the
I Procedure and RA 6036 where no bail is required, the inquest prosecutor shall
recommend the release of the arrested person and prepare the Information for
filing with the court.
I Thereafter, the record of the case, together with the resolution and the
ComplaintlInformation, shall be forwarded to the Chief State Prosecutor or the
I ProvinciallCity Prosecutor for approval and subsequent filing before the proper
Court.
I
, 50 Revised Manual for Prosecutors
~
:. ~.::.:
If "..•. ••
...---'~-;.-.---
...•...•....
I g. description of the items subject matter of the complaint, if there are any;
1. the age of the complainant or the accused, if below eighteen (18) years of
I age;
the full names and addresses of the parents, custodians or guardians of the
I
J.
minor complainant or accused, as the case may be;
~
2. Action to be Taken When There Is an Absence of Probable Cause
I be, for automatic review. (please refer to DOJ Circular No. 46, s. 2003 on
"Automatic Review ofDismissed Cases Involving RA 9165 [Comprehensive
Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002]" found in Appendix "B" on p. 303 of this
I Manual)
a. If offense is bailable
II simply prepare a certification that the person arrested is being charged for
an offense in an inquest proceeding and specifying the recommended bail
therefor. Applying for and posting bail does not result in the waiver of
the invalidity of an unjustified warrantless arrest (People vs. Barros, 231
I SCRA 557.)
I b. If offense is non-bailable
The inquest prosecutor must move for the suspension of the bail
....-------- .- .-.-
1
1
I 1. forthwith proceed to the crime scene or place of discovery of the dead per-
son;
I 2. cause the immediate autopsy of the dead person to be conducted by the ap-
propriate medico-legal officer in the locality or the PNP medico legal division
or the NBI medico-legal office, as the case may be;
I 3. direct the police investigator to cause the taking of photographs of the crime
I ties as well as the recovery of all articles and pieces of evidence found thereat;
to see to it that the same are safeguarded; and that the chain of the custody
thereof be properly recorded; and
I 5. submit a written report of his/her :findingto the Chief State Prosecutor or the
Provincial/City Prosecutor as the case may be for appropriate action.
I 11. SAt"ffiIGANBAYAt~ CASES
D. RECOVERED ARTICLES
I 1. Responsibility ofthe Inquest Prosecutor:
I a. see to it that all the articles recovered by the law enforcement authorities
at the time of the arrest or apprehension of the arrested/detained person
are physically inventoried, checked and accounted for;
-I
J
......
54 Revised Manual for Prosecutors
Ii"
r~": .
b. make sure that the corresponding photographs of the recovered articles!
properties are taken and which photographs should be attached to the
record of the case; and
I:"" c. ensure that the items recovered are duly safeguarded by the law enforcer
and the chain of custody is properly recorded.
The inquest prosecutor shall, with the prior approval of the Chief State
1. there is a written request for their release (please refer to NPS INQ Form
I No. 07, s.2008 on p. 71 ofthis Manual);
2. the person requesting the release of said articles is shown to be the lawful
I owner or possessor thereof;
3. the requesting party undertakes under oath to produce said articles before
I the court when so required;
I effected in hot pursuit; (3) arrests ofescaped prisoners (People vs. Macalaba, 395
SCRA 461).
I
J
Revised Manual for Prosecutors 55
il
I
2. After the filing of the Information in court without a preliminary investigation,
I the accused may, within five (5) days from the time he learns ofits filing, ask for
a preliminary investigation with the same right to adduce evidence in his defense
I as provided under Sec. 6, Rule 112 of the Rules on Criminal Procedure. This
five-day rule is mandatory (People vs. Figueroa, 27 SCRA 1239 [1969]).
I 3. Reliable information alone, absent any overt act indicative of a felonious en-
terprise in the presence of and within the view of the arresting officers, are not
sufficient to constitute probable cause that would justify an in flagrante delicto
I arrest (People vs. Molina, GR No. 133917, February 19, 2001, en bane; See also
People vs. Chua, 396 SCRA 657; People vs. Nuevas, G. R No. 170233, February
22,2007).
I 4. A warrantless arrest is not justified by the mere fact that a crime is being com-
mittedin one's presence. The arresting officer must have personal knowledge of
I such commission. The knowledge must precede the arrest. The arrest cannot be
justified by discovery thereafter that the person was committing a crime (People
5. Buy-bust operations are considered arrests inflagrante delicto. (people vs. Lacap,
6. "Just been committed" connotes immediacy in point of time (the time interval
I between the actual commission of the crime and the arrival of the arresting officer
must be brief). (People vs. Del Rosario, 305 SCRA 740 [1999])
I 7. A warrantless arrest made three (3) days after the commission of the crime
(People vs. Monda, November 22. 1993, 48 SCAD 478, 228 SCRA 115) or 19
hours thereafter (People vs. Manlulu, April 22, 1994, 50 SCAD 71, 231 SCRA
I 701) were held to be unlawful. .
I 8. When a police officer sees the offense, although at a distance, or hears the distur-
bances created thereby, and proceeds at once to the scene thereof, he may effect
an arrest without a warrant since the offense is deemed committed in his presence
9. The "personal knowledge" of the fact ofrape which was supplied by the ra p e
I victim herself to the arresting officer falls within the purview of a warrantless
arrest (People vs. Alvario, 275 SCRA 529[1997]).
I 10. A letter invitation is equivalent to arrest. Where the invitation comes from a
powerful group composed predominantly of ranking military officers and the
designated interrogation site as a military camp, this is obviously a command or
I an order of arrest (Sanchez, vs. Demetriou, 46 SCAD 152, 227 SCRA 627).
I
J 56 Revised Manual for Prosecutors
I
J
r· V. HELPFUL HINTS
5. During the conduct of inquest proceedings, the inquest prosecutor must keep
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Revised Manual for Prosecutors 57
I
)-~\--:
dfs;;,.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I .
I
-I
J
58 Revised Manual for Prosecutors
I~~C
I-
I
I
I TEMPLATES OF INQ1JEST FORMS
I I
I
I
I
I
I
I
i I
I
i I
I• Revised Manual for Prosecutors 59
I
J
I
NPS Investigation Form No. 01, s.2008
Receiving Staff: _
I
I To be accomplished by complainant/counsel/law enforcer
(Use back portion if space is not sufficient)
I
I LAW/S VIOLATED: WITNESSIES: Name & Address
I
I DATE & TIME of COMMISSION: PLACE of COMMISSION:
I
I 1. Has a similar complaint been filed before any other office? * YES _ NO_
2. Is this complaint in the nature of a counter-charge?" YES NO'
I If yes, indicate details below.
3. Is this complaint related to another case before this office?" YES NO
If yes, indicate details below.
I LS. No.: -:::-_ _~
Handling Prosecutor:
~ __
_
I
I NPS INQ Form No. 01, s.2008
I
Republic of the Philippines
I Department of Justice
NATIONAL PROSECUTION SERVICE
I
I Complainant/s,
1.S. No. _
i
I Respondent/s.
x-----------------------------------------x
1
j
I i
ORDER
(To submit additional evidence/documents)
1
I
I I
I In connection with the investigation being conducted in the above-captioned case, you
are hereby directed to submit the following evidence/documents, to wit:
I 1. _
I 2.
,
_
I
j. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
4. _
I 5. ---:.- _
I
I
~ 62 Revised Manual for Prosecutors
~
'It:.;, .-".:},..::~,:.,.,
within hours from receipt hereof (the period shall not exceed twelve [12] hours,
eighteen [18] hours or thirty-six [36] hours, as the case may be, from arrest); otherwise, the
undersigned shall order the release of the above-named respondent, and this case shall be set for
preliinary investigation.
tIt:-
;... ,...
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _"Philippines
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ 20_ _
I Inquest Prosecutor
(Signature over printed name)
I
Received copy, this _ day of -----', 20 __
I
Copy received by:
I Investigating/Police Officer
I
,I
I
I
I
I
I
~ Revised Manual for Prosecutors 63
I
;
I
NPS INQ Form No. 02, s. 2008
I Republic of the Philippines
Department of Justice
I NATIONAL PROSECUTION SERVICE
I
I Complainant,
1.S. No. _
- versus- For: _
I
Respondent.
I x- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -x
I RELEASE ORDER
(Of Detained!Arrested Person)
I
I
I Unless otherwise detained for some other legal cause, you are hereby directed to release
the person of who is presently under your custody in
connection with the above-captioned case, it appearing that: *
I o respondent was not lawfully arrested pursuant to the provisions
of Section 5, Rule 113 of the Revised Rules on Criminal Procedure.
I o the documents required by the undersigned have not been
submitted by the police investigating officer.
In this connection, you are hereby directed to serve upon the above-named respondent
I the attached subpoena together with the copies of the charge sheet/complaint, affidavit and other
supporting documents/evidence.
I
I
)
64 Revised Manual for Prosecutors
I
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _, Philippines.
,r
i 20 _
Inquest Prosecutor
I
: }::~ ~
(Signature over printed name)
,'-.,,-'.
I:" ~ APPROVED:
I
I
II
I
I
i
I
I
I
,
, Revised Manual for Prosecutors 65
I
NPS INQ Form No. 03, s. 2008
I Republic of the Philippines
Department of Justice
I NATIONAL PROSECUTION SERVICE
I
I Complainant/s,
1.S. No.
For: _
_
-versus-
I
Respondent/s,
I x-----------------------------------------x
I SUBPOENA TO RESPONDENT/S
I TO:
I GREETINGS:
I Under and by virtue of the authority vested in me by law, you are hereby directed to submit
your counter-affidavit and other supporting documents or affidavits ofyour witness/es, if any, to be
I You are hereby WARNED that failure on your part to comply with the subpoena shall
be considered as a waiver of your right to present your defense and the case shall be considered
submitted for resolution based on the evidence on record.
I WITNESS MY HAND this day of _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _, 200_ at
I _ _ _ _ _--', Philippines.
I
INVESTIGATING PROSECUTOR
I
~ 66 Revised Manual for Prosecutors
I
i NPS INQ Form No. 04, s, 2008
I
Complainant,
I -versus-
For:
LS. No. _
-------
I x-----------------------x
Respondent.
I (Place)
(Date)
I Respondent
(Signature over printed name)
I
I I Assisted By:
I Counsel
(Signature over printed name)
I
I
I,
II
' Revised Manual for Prosecutors 67
il~£~~:_'.
,- . .-
I I
NPS INQ Form No. 05, s.2008
I
I
CERTIFICATION
II (For Information in Inquest Cases)
I
I I hereby certify that the foregoing Information is filed pursuant to Sec. 6, Rule 112 of the
1985 Rules on Criminal Procedures, as amended, the accused not having opted to avail of his
I right to preliminary investigation and not having executed a waiver pursuant to Article 125 of the
,I Revised Penal Code. I further certify that this Information is being filed with the prior authority of
the Chief State Prosecutor/Provincial/City Prosecutor.
II Inquest Prosecutor
(Signature over printed name)
I
I I
I I
I
I I
I I,
I
I
I
I• 68 Revised Manual for Prosecutors
I
;; '" .•.
.•.
1---:;·
....
I
I Complainant,
1.S. No. _
I -versus- For:
I Respondent.
x- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -x
I RELEASE ORDER
(Of Recovered Articles)
I
THE EVIDENCE CUSTODIAJ~
I
I On the basis of the request made by for the release to his
I
I you are hereby directed to release to said , the above-described
articles/properties which are presently under your custody, unless the same are being held for some
I other lawful cause.
I Inquest Prosecutor
(Signature over printed name)
continued, nextpage> >
I
I
I
I APPROVED:
I I
Chief State! Provincial! City Prosecutor
I
I Evidence Custodian
(Signature over printed name)
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
J
70 Revised Manual for Prosecutors
I
J
NPS INQ Form No. 07, s.2008
I
I - versus-
Complainant,
1.S. No. _
I Respondent.
For:
------
I x-----------------------x
REQUEST FOR RELEASE
I with
lJNDERTAKING
I (Of Recovered Articles by Requesting Party)
I
I am respectfully requesting the release to my custody of certain articlesf properties, more
I particularly described as follows:
I
I which were recovered by the. police authorities and presently in the custody of
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _"and in connection therewith, I declare under oath:
I 2. That said articles/properties are not instruments or tools in the commission of any offense
nor the proceeds thereof;
3. That I undertake to produce the same before your Office or the court when so required;
I 4. That I have caused the said articlesfproperties to be photographed/photocopied and certi-
fied by the police custodian as accurately representing the same;
5. That I affirm the affidavit/statement executed by me on before
I _----,---:-::_ _---,---_ _---,- and hereby bind myself under penalty of law to appear and
testify thereon in court when so required.
continued, nextpage> >
I··
I ..
Revised Manual for Prosecutors 71
I.~'.'..
I
I _ _ _ _ _ _, Philippines, 20 _
•I Requesting Party
(Signature over printed name)
•I 20 "at , Philippines.
Administering Officer
i'
(Signature over printed name)
•I RECOMMENDING APPROVAL:
Investigating Prosecutor
(Signature over printed name)
•I APPR OVED:
•I
I
I
I
i I
I
d
72 Revised Manual for Prosecutors
I
"
-------------- - . . . ·• .: ·.· ... 1
~
It>
:So
~
It>
c, INQUEST PROCEDURE o
s: (12 hours for light; 18 hours for less grave offense; 36 hours for grave offenses) ~
'"C
:J ("')
~
'" FILING OF INFO IU
,0'
,-e RECOMMENO
I SUSTAIN ~ I
COURT
I
o
~
fll
WITH
PROBABLE
FILING OF
INFO IN
o
Z
n
C
~
,o
CAliSE
COIIRT
I REVERSE I~
DISMISSAL OF COMPLAINT &
>-3
~
G<,
EFFECTED
RECOMMENDS CONTINUE WITilINQUEST
DISMISSAL OF
COMPLAINT +
RELEASE OF
RESPONDENT i
DISMISSAL OF COMPLAINT.
RELEASE OF RESPONDENT
...-..
I PART ill. SUMMARY INVESTIGATION
I
I. GENERAL RULES
I A. CONCEPTS AiW PRINCIPLES
I of the fine.
B. COVERAGE
I All offenses punishable by imprisonment ofless than four (4) years two (2) months
and one (l) day, viz:
I 1. Violations of Traffic Laws, Rules and Regulations;
I 2.
3.
4.
Violations of the Rental Law;
Violations of Municipal or City Ordinances;
All other criminal cases where the penalty prescribed by law for the offense charged
I property through criminal negligence, this rule shall govern where the imposable fine
does not exceed ten thousand pesos (P 10,000.00).
I Agents of Such
4) Art. 153 - Tumults and Other Disturbances of Public Order
5) Art. 154 - Unlawful Use of Means of Publication and Unlawful
I Utterances
6) Art. IS5 - Alarms and Scandals
7) Art. 175 - Using False Certificates
I
J 74 Revised Manual for Prosecutors
I
j
~;
.;
8) Art. 178 - Using Fictitious Name and Concealing True Name
I' 9) Art. 179 -
10) Art. 200 -
Illegal Use of Uniforms and Insignia
Grave Scandal
11) An. 202 - Vagrants and Prostitutes (lst Offender)
I 12) Art. 217 - Abandonment of Minor by Person Entrusted With His
Custody
13) Art. 265 - Less Serious Physical Injuries
I 14) Art. 266 - Slight Physical Injuries
15) Art. 239 - Unlawful Arrest
16) Art. 275 - Abandonment of Helpless Person
I 17) Art. 276 - Abandoning a Minor (Paragraph 1)
18) Art. 281 - Other Forms of Trespass
I 35) Art. 339 - Acts of Lasciviousness with the Consent of the Offended
Party
36) Art. 358 - Light Oral Defamation (2nd Par.)
I 37) Art. 363 - Incriminating Innocent Person
38) Art. 364 - Intriguing against Honor
39) Art. 389 - Light Slander by Deed (2nd Par.)
I 40) PD 1227 - Unlawful Entry to U.S. Naval Facilities
41) PD603 - Non-Support
I
I
I
I
I'
Revised Manual for Prosecutors 7S
II
I
II. PROCEDURE
I Within ten (10) days from assignment of the complaint, the investigating prosecutor shall
1. Act on the complaint based on the affidavits and other supporting documents submit-
3. Prepare a resolution and the corresponding Information for the approval of the Chief
I State Prosecutor/Regional State Prosecutor, Provincial! City Prosecutor if he finds
sufficient ground to engender a well- founded belief that a crime has been committed
and the respondent is probably guilty thereof and should be held for trial; and,
I 4. File the Information in court if the resolution is approved. The Information shall not
Where the prosecutor opts to conduct preliminary investigation, he/she shall follow the
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
i
76 Revised Manual for Prosecutors
I
J
PART IV. PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION
1. It is an Executive Function.
I 2. It is Preliminary in Nature.
I who may be reasonably charged with a crime, to enable the prosecutor to prepare his
Complaint or Information (Tandoc v. Resultan, 175 SCRA 37 [1989J).
I
J
I 4. It is a Judicial Inquiry or Proceeding.
I gender a well-founded beliefthat a crime has been committed and that the respondent
is probably guilty thereof, and should be held for trial" is, like court proceedings,
subject to the requirements of both substantive and procedural due process. This is
I because a preliminary investigation is considered a judicial proceeding wherein the
prosecutor or investigating officer, by the nature of his functions, acts as a quasi-
judicial officer (Cruz v. People, 237 SCRA 439, reiterating Cojuangco v. PCGG, 190
I SCRA 226 [1990J).
I for the filing of the Information in inquest cases, even without the conduct of a pre-
liminary investigation.
I 3. It is a Personal Right.
I In inquest cases, the accused impliedly waives his right to a preliminary inves-
tigation, if he fails to invoke the same within five (5) days from the time he learns
I , " ••
",i.:t
..~
of the filing of the Information. This five-day period for the filing of a motion for
I preliminary investigation after an Information has been filed in court against an ac-
cused who was arrested without a warrant, has been characterized as mandatory (Sec.
6, Rule 112, supra.).
I 4. It is a Substantive Right.
I All offenses where the penalty prescribed by law is at least four (4) years, two (2)
months and one (l) day, without regard to the fine (Sec. 1. par. 2, Rule 112, supra.).
I All offenses punishable by imprisonment of less than four (4) years two (2) months
and one (l) day where the prosecutor believes that a preliminary investigation should be
I conducted.
All offenses committed by public officials or employees in connection with the per-
I fonnance of their official duties and functions.
The term does not mean "actual and positive cause" nor does it import abso-
I lute certainty. It is merely based on opinion and reasonable belief. Thus, a finding
of probable cause does not require an inquiry into whether there is sufficient
I
'.::.";
evidence to procure a conviction. It is enough that it is believed that an act or
omission complained of constitutes the offense charged. Precisely, there is a trial
for the reception of evidence of the prosecution in support ofthe charge (Paredes,
I,
·I..·'.
~~~,~:~-
.-
:~·····
"e>-'·-._
Revised Manual for Prosecutors 79
-f_
II
I .
b. A finding of probable cause needs only to rest on evidence showing that
I more likely than not a crime has been committed and was committed by
the suspects. Probable cause need not be based on clear and convincing
evidence of guilt, neither on evidence establishing guilt beyond reason-
II able doubt and definitely, not on evidence establishing absolute certainty
of guilt. As well put in Brinegar vs. U.S., while probable cause demands
more than "bare suspicion" it requires "less than evidence which would
'I
I
justify" conviction. A finding of probable cause merely binds over the
suspect to stand trial. It is not a pronouncement of guilt (Webb v. De Leon,
247 SCRA 652 [1995]).
I c. A probable cause has been defined as the existence of such facts and cir-
I evidence, in his opinion, is sufficient or not to establish the guilt of the ac-
cused beyond reasonable doubt.
I I
The approach ofthe courts to the quashing of criminal charges necessarily
differs from the way a prosecutor would handle exactly the same question - a
court faced with a fifty-fifty proposition of guilt or innocence always decides
I'I
in favor of innocence, while a prosecutor, conscious that he represents the
offended party, may decide to leave the problem to the discretion ofthe court
I I
(Venus vs. Desierto, 198 SCRA 196 [1998}).
Ii
'I
I J
80 Revised Manual for Prosecutors
I
.iF,,,'PURPOSES OF THE CONDUCT OF A PRELIMINARY
,~ii;·1NVESTIGATION
2. to protect the State from having to conduct useless and expensive trials
(Tandoc v. Resultan, 175 SCRA 37 [1989]).
G.O~CERSAUTHOmzEDTOCONDUCTPRELIMINARY
::.~;~~~7::-: __ . INVESTIGATIONS
11~r
:{c;"--' -
~~:~f;::'
The following may conduct preliminary investigations (Sec. 2, par. 1, Rule
112, supra):
,T 1. Provincial or City Prosecutors and their assistants;
I their office.
I officers and employees, not only those within the jurisdiction of the
Sandiganbayan, (Sec. 15 (1) and Sec. 11 (4) of R A. No. 6770 [An Act
'I
I
Revised Manual for Prosecutors 81
I
I
, Providing jar the Functional and Structural Organization oj the Office
I of the Ombudsman, and jor Other Purposesj) but also those within the
jurisdiction of the regular courts (Uy v. Sandiganbayan, 354 SCRA 651,
657-659 [2001]; Reiterated in Decin v. Tayco, GR No. 14996, February
I 04,2007 and Chavez v. CA, G. R. No. 125813, February 06, 2007).
I empowered under Executive Order No. 14, series of 1986, to file and
prosecute before the Sandiganbayan, all cas~s investigated by it under
I
j
82 Revised Manual for Prosecutors
Ii'i:i47',rit",
Executive Order No.1, dated February 28, 1986 and Executive Order No.
2 dated March 12, 1986, as may be warranted by its findings. The cases
referred to under E.O. 010. 1 and E.O. No.2 were the ill-gotten cases of
former PresidentFerdinand Marcos.
I· . ·'.~;.'· .· .,·
.)::2_;E~ NOTE: For other violations of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices
Act not otherwise falling under E.O. No.1 and E.O. No.2 as afore-
I···:·,.·i . ..... '
mentioned, the jurisdiction is vested in the Ombudsman and other
duly authorized agencies such as the National Prosecution Service
of the Department of Justice, uuless authorized by the President in
I accordance with Sec. 2(b) ofE.a. No.1 (Republic ofthe Philippines
v. Migrinio, 189 SCRA 289 [1990]).
I II. PROCEDURE
I 2. by referral from or upon request of the law enforcement agency that investi-
gated a criminal incident;
I NOTE: When the referral came from or is upon the request of a law
enforcement agency that investigated the complaint, the latter shall sub-
I !
Revised Manual for Prosecutors 83
I I j
I 3. upon request of a person arrested or detained pursuant to an arrest without
I warrant who executes a waiver in accordance with the provisions of Article
125 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended;
I 1. the full and complete names and exact home, office or postal addresses
of the complainantJs and his/their witness/es;
I 2. the full and complete name and exact home, office or postal address of
the respondentJs;
I 3. the offense/s charged and the place and exact date and time of its/their
commission; alld,
I 4. whether or not there exists a related case and, if so, the docket number
of said case and the name of the investigating prosecutor thereof.
I b. Number of Copies of Affidavits; Other Requirements
,
il
84 Revised Manual for Prosecutors
I
under Sec. 412 (a) ofRA 7160, "The Local Government Code of 1991."
Otherwise, the prosecutor shall not take cognizance of the case.
rt ee
'·
The affidavits shall be subscribed and sworn to before any prosecutor
or government official authorized to administer oath; or, in their absence
or unavailability, before a notary public, each of whom must certify that
I..· .'
he personally examined the affiants and that he is satisfied that they vol-
-.' untarily executed and understood their affidavits (Sec. 3, par. (a), Rule
112, supra.).
I COMPLAINT FILED
Within ten (10) days from receipt of the complaint by the prosecutor, he/she
I shall:
:1
;
Revised Manual for Prosecutors 85
'.1
I
d. that the complainant failed to submit a barangay certification for of-
I fenses covered by the Katarungang Pambarangay Law.
I but below eighteen (18), the prosecutor shall determine whether or not the
child acted with discernment.
I plaint together with the affidavits of witnesses and other supporting docu-
ments (Sec. 3 rbi, Rule 112, supra.). (please refer toNPS INVForms Nos.
03, 04, and 05, s. 2008 on pp. 112, 113and 114 ofthis Manual)
I C. SERVICE OF THE SUBPOENA TOGETHER WITH THE COMPLAINT
AND SUPPORTING AFFIDAVITS AND OTHER DOCUMENTS TO THE
I RESPONDENT/S
I in the course of the service of a subpoena through ordinary modes, the in-
vestigating prosecutor may require the respondent or other parties to appear
before him on a designated date, time and place and then and there personally
I furnish them with copies of the complaint, supporting affidavits and other
documents.
I At the said or any other setting, the respondent shall have the right to
examine all other evidence submitted by the cotp-plainant and to obtain cop-
11
86 Revised Manual for Prosecutors
II
"I' ies thereof at his expense. If such records are voluminous, the complainant
may be required to specify and identify those which he intends to present
against the respondent to support the charge against the latter and these shall
be made available for examination, copying or photographing by respondent
I' at his expense (Sec. 3 (b), par. 2., Rule 112, supra.; Commissioner ofInternal
Revenue v. Court ofAppeals, 257 SCRA 200).
I The investigating prosecutor shall issue and send the subpoena, together
with copies of the complaint, supporting affidavit/s and other docunaents, by
I registered/special delivery mail with return card to a respondent who resides
in a distant place.
I 4. Objects as Evidence
I Objects as evidence need not be furnished either party but shall be made
accessible for exanaination, copying or photographing at the expense of the
requesting party (Sec. 3, par. (b), Rule 112, supra.).
I 5. Guidelines to be Observed in the Service of Subpoenas
:1
i
Revised Manual for Prosecutors 87
:1
Ie
:f;,~~_
I
City/Municipal Station Commanders ofthe Philippine National Police
I (pNP) maybe requested for the purpose.
I 1. the name and return address of the sender, and the typewritten!
printed phrase "First Notice Made on ", thus instructing
the postmaster/postal employee of the necessity of informing the
I sender of the date that the first notice was made on the addressee;
and
Within ten (10) days from receipt of the subpoena together with the com-
I plaint and supporting affidavit/s and document/s, the respondent shall submit
his counter-affidavit and that of his witness/es and other supporting documents
which shall be subscribed and sworn to and certified based on the NPS Sample
I Format "A" s. 2008 on p. 131 ofthis Manual. Copies of the counter-affidavit/s
and supporting documents, if any, shall be furnished the complainant/s by the
I respondents.
I
~ 88 Revised Manual for Prosecutors
I
J
f 1. Extension of Time within which to Submit Respondent's Counter-
I' Affidavit
a. General Rule
I Arnemorandum, manifestation or motion to dismiss signed by counsel
.\:;
-~,.
" "'.
..
I~~
I
However, if such memorandum, manifestation or motion to dismiss
The filing of a motion for the dismissal of the complaint or for the submission
I of a bill of particulars shall not suspend or interrupt the running of the period for
the submission of the counter-affidavitfs and other supporting documents.
I desistance.
I
I
j
90 Revised Manual for Prosecutors
I
j
5. Suspension of Proceedings Due to the Existence of a Prejudicial Question
c."';'::-'
Upon marion of a party or when raised in a counter-affidavit, the inves-
i~~C2 tigating prosecutor shall suspend preliminary investigation proceedings if the
existence of a prejudicial question is satisfactorily established.
I cedent of the issue involved in a case and the cognizance of which pertains
to another tribunal (Ras v. Rasul, 100 SCRA 125 [1980J; Quiambao v. Osorio,
G. R. No.48157, March 16, 1988.).
I It is based on a fact distinct and separate from the crime charged but so
intimately connected with it that it determines the guilt or innocence of the
I accused. To suspend the criminal action, it must not only appear that said
case involves facts intimately related to those upon which the criminal pros-
ecution would be based but also that in the resolution of the issue or issues
I raised in the civil case, the guilt or innocence of the accused would necessar-
ily be determined. (Donato v. Luna, G. R. No.53642, April 15, 1988; Prado
v. People, 133 SCRA 602 [1984J; and Librodo v. Coscolluela, Jr., 116 SCRA
I 303 [1982})
I II
Revised Manual for Prosecutors 91
I ~I
'J;&>
I Upon approval and issuance of the order, the complaint is considered
I archived.
I but without the right to examine or cross-examine. If'they so desire, they may
submit written questions to the Investigating Prosecutor who may propound
such questions to the parties or witnesses concerned (Sec. 3(e), Rule 112,
I I supra).
I
2. RecordINotes During the Clarificatory Hearing
II The investigating prosecutor may record the facts and issues clarified and/
or the questions asked and answer/s given during the clarificatory question-
I ing which shall be signed by the parties concerned and/or their respective
counsels. Said notes shall form part of the official record of the case.
I Parties who desire to file an appeal or petition for review of the investigat-
ing prosecutor's resolution may, at their option, cite specific portions of the
I I 3. No Right to Counsel
I
It has been held that there is nothing in the rules which render a prelimi-
I nary investigation invalid without the assistance of counsel (People v. Narca,
275 SCRA 696)
I The clariiicatory questioning shall be terminated within five (5) days from its
inception.
I il
--_.--
"
,~-,.,
I
I C<·
F. REPLY-AFFIDAVITS, REJOINDERS AND MEMORANDA; WHEN TO
ALLOW THE FILING THEREOF
The investigating prosecutor shall not require or allow the filing or submis-
I ~:,-' .
sion of reply-affidavits and/or rejoinders except:
1. where new issues of fact or questions of law which are material and sub-
I stantial in nature are raised or invoked in the counter-affidavit or subsequent
pleadings; and,
In such a case, the period for the submission of reply affidavits or rejoinders
I shall in no case exceed five (5) days unless a longer period is authorized by the
Chief Stare Prosecutor/Regional State Prosecutor/ Provincial or City Prosecutor
concerned.
I Neither shall the investigating prosecutor require nor allow the filing or
submission by the parties of memoranda unless the case involves difficult or
I complicated questions of law or of fact. In any event, the filing of memoranda by
the parties shall be done simultaneously and the period therefor shall not exceed
I ten (l0) days, unless a longer period is authorized by the Chief State Prosecutor/
Regional State Prosecutor/Provincial or City Prosecutor concerned (please refer
to NPS Sample Format "A". s. 2008 on p. 131 ofthis Manual).
I 2. when the complaints arose from one and the same incident or transaction or
series of incidents or transactions; and
I 3. cases involving common parties and founded on factual and/or legal issues of
the same or similar character.
I
;
I
f'
93
Revtsed Manual for Prosecutors
I
I H. ACTIONS ON MOTIONS TO DISQUALIFY!INHIBIT
I 2. The Secretary of Justice, the Chief State Prosecutor or the Regional State
Prosecutor shall designate a prosecutor from another province or city within
the region or a state prosecutor in the Regional State Prosecution Office, as
I Acting City or Provincial Prosecutor, to investigate and prosecute a case in
instances where parties question the partiality or bias of prosecutors of a
I particular provincial or city prosecution office (par. 11, DOJ Order No. 318
dated 28 August 1991 [found in Appendix "C" on p. 304 ofthis Manual), as
amended by DOJ Order No. 54 dated 20 February 1992[Appendix "D" on
I p. 308}). (please refer to NPS INV Form No. 09, s. 2008 on p. 118 of this
Manuals.
The investigating prosecutor shall consider the case submitted for resolu-
I tion:
1. when the respondent cannot be subpoenaed or, if subpoenaed, does not sub-
I mit his counter-affidavit within the reglementary period. In such a case, the
investigating prosecutor shall base his resolution on the evidence presented
I proof or documents, in which event, he shall, upon the evidence thus adduced,
determine whether or not there is sufficient ground to hold the respondent for
trial (Sec. 3(j), Rule 112, supra).
I J. PREPARATION OF THE RESOLUTION
If the investigating prosecutor does not find sufficient basis for the pros-
I ecution of the respondent, he shall prepare the resolution recommending the
dismissal of the complaint.
I
Where the respondent is a public officer or employee or a member of
the Philippine National Police (pNP), the investigating prosecutor shall also
determine whether or not the offense with which he is charged was committed
in relation to IDS office and, if so committed, such fact should be alleged in
the Information to be filed with the Sandiganbayan through the Office of the
Ombudsman; (Republic v. Maximiano Asuncion, G. R. No. L-108208, March
1994)
It;,.. .
:'~:j~·;:·· . . .-
a. Caption of resolution
I
·~' The caption of the resolution shall indicate the:
,",L:
:~:".--_."" -
5. the date of the assignment of the case to or receipt of the case record
I shall appear in the caption. In cases referred to the prosecution by the law
enforcement agency where there is no identified victim, as in prohibited
drugs cases, the complainant shall be the police station involved, followed
I by the name and designation of the police officer representing the police
station.
I
I
Revised Manual for Prosecutors 95
I
I
In the case of a corporation or judicial entity, its corporate name
I or identity shall be indicated and written as follows, " 'X' Corporation,
represented by its (position title), (name of corporate officer)".
I c. Case Number
I • Sequential codes:
I • lllustrative examples:
I o I-OI-INV-08A-OOOOI
•I Region I
ORSP
• 01
I • INV
• 08
regular
year 2008
PI or summary investigation case
I o I-05a-INQ-08A-OOOI0
•I Region I
• 05 OPP La Union
I •a
• INQ
Agoo Sub-Station
inquest case
I • 08
• A
• 00010 -
year 2008
month of January
lOth inquest case for year 2008
I o XV-OI-INV-08L-OI000
• XV National Capital Region
I • 01
• INV
OCP Antipolo
regular PI or summary investigation
case
I
j
96 Revised Manual for Prosecutors
I
• 08 year 2008
'L month of December
• 01000 - 1,000th PI/summary investigation case
for year 2008
o XVI-INV-08L-03000
• XVI OCSP
• INV regular PI or summary investigation
• 08 year 2008
•L month of December
• 03000 3,000th PI/summary investigation case
for year 2008
For offenses that are punishable under the Revised Penal Code, the
caption shall set forth the denomination of the offense and the specific
article and paragraph of the statute violated.
f. Parts of a Resolution
1. Part 1 shall state the nature of the case as disclosed in the evidence
presented by the complainant such as his affidavit-complaint, the
I be cluttered with details that are not necessary to show the elements of
the offense.
I 3. Part 3 shall allege the respondent's version of the incident. This must
also be concise.
The complete names and addresses of the complainant and the re-
I spondent shall be set out at the end of the resolution-after the signature
of the investigating prosecutor and the head of the Prosecutor's Office
concerned under the phrase: "Copy furnished:".
I If the parties are represented by counsel and the latter's appearance is
entered formally in the record, the counsel; not the party, shall be given a
I -copy of the resolution. (Sec. 4, par. I, Rule 112, supra)
I resolution consists of two or more pages, the prosecutor shall initial all of
said pages, excluding the signature page.
I
I
J
98 Revised Manual for Prosecutors
I
4. Period to Conduct the Preliminary Investigation
a. capital offenses
I
I.< b.
c.
d
e.
f.
complex issues
with counter-charges
consolidation of related complaints
reassigmnent
otherurgentlvalid reasons
_.:.<~:';-
·'·
.;,.-'
NOTE: Pursuant to Sec. 90 of RA 9165, otherwise known as the
I ::-- Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2004, the preliminary investiga-
tion of illegal drugs cases shall be terminated within thirty (30) days frOID
the date offiling.
I e. Written Approval Required in the Dismissal of a Complaint or the Filing
II ,
of an Information in Court
I THE CASE
i City Prosecutor concerned within five (5) days from the date of his resolution.
(Sec. 4, par. 2, Rule 112, supra.)
I • the age and date of birth of the complainant or the accused, if eighteen
(18) years of age or below;
I • the full names and addresses of the parents, custodian or guardian of the
minor complainant or accused, as the case may be;
I • the place where the accused is actually detained;
I that the accused was informed ofthe complaint and of the evidence submitted
against him and that he was given an opportunity to submit controverting
evidence; and that he is filing the Information with the prior authority and
I approval of the Chief StatelProvinciallCity Prosecutor concerned (Sec. 4, par.
1, Rule 112. supra.). (please refer to Sample Information Format on pp. 123-
,129 ofthis Manual)
I a. Lack of a Certification
I The designation ofthe offense is not binding upon the Court (Cinco
v. Sandiganbayan, 96SCRA 86).
I
J
100 Revised Manual for Prosecutors
I
2. Recommended Bail; How Written
l~!"
SCRA 192 [1994]).
1 0
: ' :
4. Confidentiality of Resolutions
1. approving the resolution and directing the transmittal of a copy thereof to the
I parties; or,
•'. 2. disapproving the resolution and returning the same to the investigating pros-
ecutor for further appropriate action; or
!,
,
the Chief State/Regional State/Provincial or City Prosecutor
I~
I
I a. may tile the corresponding Information in court (except the Regional State
Prosecutor); or
I b. direct any other state prosecutor or assistant prosecutor, as the case may
be, to do so.
I In both instances, there is no more need for the head of office concerned to
conduct another preliminary investigation (Sec. 4, par. 3, Rule 112, supra.).
I After a case under preliminary investigation has been submitted for resolu-
tion under the provisions of the preceding section but before the approval and
promulgation of said resolution, the preliminary investigation may, upon motion
II 1. the motion is verified and a copy thereof furnished the opposing party;
I 2. the motion is accompanied with the newly discovered evidence and/or re-
spondent's counter-affidavit; and,
II 3. the motion sufficiently and satisfactorily shows valid and justifiable reason
for the failure of the movant to submit the newly discovered evidence or the
counter-affidavit during the preliminary investigation.
I
I
J
102 Revised Manual for Prosecutors
I
O. FILING OF THE INFORMATION IN COURT; RULES TO FOLLOW
Amotion for reconsideration filed within fifteen (15) days from receipt of the
I resolution shall be acted upon within thirty (30) days from receipt of the motion
by the assigned prosecutor. The motion must be verified and accompanied by
proof of service to the opposing party, It must state clearly and distinctly the
I grounds relied upon in support of the motion.
I Where the Information has already been filed in court, the Chief State!
Provincial/City Prosecutor may not give due course to the motion for reconsid-
eration until there is a showing that the movant has filed a motion with the court
I for the suspension of the proceedings, and the court has granted such motion to
suspend proceedings.
I Once the motion for reconsideration has been resolved, a motion should be
filed in court by the Chief State/Provincial/City Prosecutor or his/her authorized
assistant, attaching thereto the resolution on the motion for reconsideration, in-
I forming.the court of the action taken thereon and asking it either to proceed with .
the case, or withdraw the Information or cause such other measures to be done as
may be warranted.
I Q. ACTION ON A REINVESTIGATION
I provided that when the case has been appealed to the Secretary of Justice or the
Regional State Prosecutor, such motion may be filed with the said offices.
I After the trial court has acquired jurisdiction over the case, any motion for
reinvestigation shall be addressed to the court and not to the public prosecutor or
Secretary of Justice. It is the trial judge who has sole authority to grant or deny
I the motion for reinvestigation (Crespo v. Mogul, 151 SCRA 469; Velasquez v.
Tuquero, 182 SCRA 388).
I'~;
f:"'::\'/,<'
Revised Manual for Prosecutors 103
'I'~;
, .l;
--_. __ ..
I (Abugol v. Tiro, etc., et. Al, L-40552, August 30,1975). The head of office
shall have discretion to assign the reinvestigation of the case to a specific
prosecutor, and not the judge issuing the court order.
I Provincial Prosecutor.
I prosecutor, who shall assist the movant in filing a motion to suspend pro-
ceedings in court upon receipt of the order/directive for reinvestigation.
Thereafter, he/she shall immediately conduct and resolve the case Within
I the period prescribed in the order.
I
I
I
I
,
il 104 Revised Manual for Prosecutors
I '.
,----- - - - -
m. RELEVANT JURISPRUDENCE
1. The prosecutor is not bound by the qualification of the crime but by the evidence
I~#;?'
presented during the preliminary investigation (Orquinaza v. People, G. R. No.
165596, November 17.2005).
', 2. If, after preliminary investigation, a case is filed in the Court of First Instance
I ··c···'·- (now the Regional Trial Court), the prosecutor cannot file another Information
charging a different offense based on the same preliminary investigation. He must
conduct another preliminary investigation (Luciano v. Mariano, et. al., 40 SCRA
1 187).
I when the amended Information was filed, should have asked, but did not, for a
re-investigation of said case within the period offive (5) days from the time he
leamed of the amended Information (Lava v. Gonzales, 11 SCRA 650 [1964J).
I 4. A new preliminary investigation is not called for when the court orders the filing
ofthe correct Information involving a cognate offense, such as unfair competition
I to infringement of trademarks (Sy Lim v. CA, 113 SCRA 334).
I void for lack of authority to file the same, it cannot be cured nor resurrected by an
.amendment. Another preliminary investigation must be undertaken and thereaf-
ter, based on the evidence adduced, a new Information should be filed (Cruz, Sr.,
I
l
v. Sandiganbayan, 194 SCRA 474).
I SCRA 70).
8. The principle is not, however, applicable where the delay in the termination of the
;
of incidents which are attributable to the accused and his counsel (Gonzales v.
r•
Revised Manual for Prosecutors 105
~--w.c,,:
I Sandiganbayan, 199 SCRA 298; Defensor-Santiago v. Garchitorena, 228 SCRA
214).
I 9. In Dee vs. Court ofAppeals (November 21, 1994,56 SCAD 684, 238 SCRA 254),
the Supreme Court reiterated its pronouncement in Crespo vs. Mogul (151 SCRA
I 462), that the Secretary of Justice, as far as practicable, should refrain from en-
tertaining a petition for review or appeal from the action of the prosecutor when
I the Complaint or Information has been filed in court. The matter should be left
entirely for the determination of the Court.
I I
i I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
i I
J 106 Revised Manual for Prosecutors
I
I'
I
I
I·
I
TEMPLATES&SN~LEFORMS
I USED IN THE CONDUCT OF THE
PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATIONS
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I "·:'" ,
I,'·~,; "
".. .:
I ~"~.,;:
-~i:,:' --.
;
I
I To he accomplished hy complainant/counsel/law enforcer
(Use hack portion if space is not sufficient)
COMPLAINANTIS: Name, Sex, Age & RESPONDENTIS: Name, Sex, Age &
I Address Address
I
I LAW/S VIOLATED: WITNESSIES: Name & Address
I
I DATE & TIME of COMMISSION: PLACE of COMMISSION:
I
I 1. Has a similar complaint been filed before any other office? ' YES _ NO_
2. Is this complaint in the nature of a counter-charge?" YES NO
,
L
. . --- ..... - _.-...
I
I
C E R T I F1 CAT I 0 N*
I I CERTIFY, under oath, that all the information on this sheet are true and correct to the best of my
knowledge and belief, that I have not commenced any action or filed any claim involving the same issues
I in any court, tribunal, or quasi-judicial agency, and that if I should thereafter learn that a similar action
has been filed and/or is pending, I shall report that fact to this Honorable Office within five (5) days from
knowledge thereof,
I
I Prosecutor Administering Oath
i-,.
':11
I
NPS Investigation Form No. 02, s. 2008
Complainant,
I.S. No. _
For:
versus -
Respondent.
x-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----ox
RESOLUTION
Section 3(b), Rille 112 of the Revised Rilles on Criminal Procedure, provides that the
investigating officer shall either dismiss the complaint if he finds no ground to continue with the
investigation or issue a subpoena to the respondent.
In this connection, we are constrained to dismiss the complaint for the following
reason(s):
[The investigating prosecutor may choose any of the reasons for dismissing the com-
plaint}
U the offense charged in the complaint was committed outside the territorial jurisdic-
tion of this Office; (Brief explanation)
U at the time of the filing of the complaint, the offense charged therein had already
prescribed; (Brief explanation)
U the complainant is not authorized under the provisions ofpertinent laws to file the
complaint; (Brief explanation)
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ (place), (date) .
lNVESTIGATING PROSECUTOR
APPROVED:
IP ;
.tr-
.,-.,,;
Copy Furnished:
(Head of Office)
I ,-_.
All Parties and/or their counsel
,. .. Address
ii-
II
II
I .
I
I I
I
I I
I
I
Revised Manual for Prosecutors 111
-_._--
Complamant/s,
1.S. No. _
-versus- For: _
Respondent/s.
;(-----------------------------------------)[
SUBPOENA TO COMPLAINANT
(optional but not necessary)
TO:
GREETINGS:
Under and by virtue of the authority vested in me by law, you ate hereby required to
appear before me at , on
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _--', 200_ at _ a.m./p.m. in the preliminary investigation of the above-
entitled complaint to be held at the time and place-above-specified
,
! Ii WITNESS MY HAND this _ _ day of , 200_ at _
;1 J
Philippines.
,
INVESTIGATING PROSECUTOR
"I ;',
~(
':6t'r;:'
!::~21;;: NPS INV Form No. 04, s.2008
.-.'.-,
Republic of the Philippines
Department of Justice
I" NATIONAL PROSECUTION SERVICE.
I
Complainant/s,
I -versus-
1.S, No.
For:
_
_
I Respondent's.
I x-----------------------------------------x
I . SUBPOENA TO RESPONDENT/S
TO:
I
I GREETINGS:
Under and by virtue of the authority vested in me by law, you are hereby directed to submit
I your counter-affidavit and other supporting documents or affidavits ofyour witness/es, if any, to be
sworn to before me on , 200_ at _ _ a.mzp.m, Attached is a copy
You are hereby WARNED that failure on your part to comply with the subpoena shall
I be considered as a waiver of your right to present your defense and the case shall be considered
submitted for resolution based on the evidence on record.
I
INVESTIGATING PROSECUTOR
I
I
, '; < ';.,
Revised Manual for Prosecutors 113
1;..~ ss-
I
,I NPS INV Form Nil. 05, s.2008
I Department of Justice
NATIONAL PROSECUTION SERVICE
I
I Complainant/s,
LS. No. _
-versus- For: _
I
I Respondent/s.
x------------------------------------------x
I SUBPOENA TO RESPONDENT
(To obtain copies of the complaint and other supporting evidence)
I TO:
I
GREETINGS:
I In connection with the above-entitled complaint, and by virtue of the authority vested in
me by law, you are hereby directed to obtain, personally or through your representative, copies of
I the complaint, supporting affidavits and other evidence submitted by the complainant at
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _-', on ,200_ at _ _ a.mzp.m.
_
I You or your representative are/is likewise entitled to examine all other evidence submitted by
complainant on the date and time herein specified.
I You are hereby WARNED that failure on your part to comply with the subpoena shall be
considered as a waiver of your right to be furnished copies of the complaint, supporting affidavits
and other documents, as well as to examine all other evidence submitted by the complainant.
I WITNESS MY HAND this day of 200_ at
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _, Philippines.
I
I INVESTIGATING PROSECUTOR
'.
NPS INV Form No. 06, s. 2008
•
, ,c···,.
':;'"
;:;;,'-··-.':0
:":
NATIONAL PROSECUTION SERVICE
~ .
•'
" ,,:,'
.)~\t:
- versus -
Complainant,
1.S. No.
For:
_
I :.-'::
Respondent.
I x------------------------------"----------x
I ORDER
I Considering the difficult and/or complicated questions of fact and of law involved in the
instant case, the parties are hereby required to simultaneously submit their respective memoranda
within ten (10) days from receipt hereof. After the lapse of the said period, this case shall be
SO ORDERED.
I _______, Date.
I
I INVESTIGATING PROSECUTOR
I
I
I
I
F-_-o
Revised Manual for Prosecutors l1S
It
Ii
- -----------
Complainant/s,
1.S. No. _
-versus- For: _
Respondent/s.
)[------------------------------------------x
SUBPOENA FOR CLARIFICATORY HEARING
TO: (Witness)
GREETINGS:
Pursuant to Sec. 3(e), Rule 112 of the Revised Rules on Criminal Procedure, and by virtue
of the authority vested in me by law, you are hereby required to appear before me at _
_ ---,--_----=---:-----=-__--" on ; 200_ at _ _ . a.mJp.m., for the
conduct of clarificatory questioning where only the undersigned can ask questions. You are hereby
I informed of your right to be represented by counsel in the said hearing. If you so desire, you may
,., I
I submit written questions to the undersigned that may be asked of the party/ies and/or witness/es.
INVESTIGATING PROSECUTOR
Complainant,
LS, No, _
- versus - For:
Respondent,
x-------------------------------------- X
Complainant,
1,S, No, _
- versus - For:
Respondent,
x---------------------------------x
ORDER OF CONSOLIDATION
< - ) arose from one and the same incident or transaction or series of incidents or transactions;
< - ) involve common parties and are founded on factual and/or legal issues of the same or
similar character,
the same are hereby ordered consolidated and the joint preliminary investigation thereof shall be handled by
Asst. City ProsecutorlAsst. Provincial Prosecutor/State Prosecutor to whom
the complaint with the lowest docket number has been raffled/assigned or at the discretion of the head of
office, He/she shall terminate the proceedings within the prescribed period of sixty (60) days from receipt
of the assignment,
SO ORDERED,
_ _ _ _ (Place), _ _ _ _ (Date) _
(Date)
RE DESIGNATION OF PERSONNEL
In the interest of the service, and pursuant to existing laws, rules and regulations, and by
reason of the inhibition of the Office of the , which is
hereby approved, ASST. CITY PROSECLJTOR / ASST. PROVINCIAL PROSECUTOR / STATE
PROSECUTOR of the Office of the CitylProvincial
Prosecutor of is hereby designated as Acting CitylProvincial Prosecutor
of to conduct the preliminary investigation in 1.S. No.----c --,--,,-
entitled " ", for , and, if warranted by
the evidence, to file the corresponding Information/s in court.
This Order shall take effect immediately and shall remain in full force until revoked or
superseded.
Copy furnished:
All Concerned.
HI.!i '
~ ;
"
r
1+:.,:
Sample Resolution
I
~c ~
:-~- -
I: .. ':"
,
I ."
Complainant,
1.S. No. _
I - versus - For:
I Respondent.
x-------------------------------------------x
I
RESOLUTION
I I
This resolves the above-entitled complaint for violation of Sec. 19(b), paragraphs (I) and
I (2), ofRA 8239, otherwise known as the "Philippine Passport Act of 1996", filed by the Department
of Foreign Affairs against a.k.a. _
I
1 ~~
Record shows that on April 4, 2007, respondent went to the Inter-Agency
Committee Against Passport Irregularities (rCP!) Secretariat and voluntarily surrendered Passport
I Nos. MM860451 andHH160901, both issued in Manila and in the name of a.k.a. on 19April 2004
and 07 May 2001, respectively. The photograph attached to both passports indubitably belongs
to respondent . In her affidavit of explanation submitted to the DFA, respondent
I: admitted having bought the birth certificate of one a.k.a. somewhere in Libertad, Pasay City for
P8,000.00, sometime in 2001. She, then, went to the DFA to apply for a passport using the said
birth certificate, pursuant to which she was issued a passport in the name of a.k.a.. She did so in
!I order for her to be able to again work in Taiwan after her employment contract in the said country
had expired in 1999. Using the said passport, she got employed in Taiwan in 2001 and finished
the said contract in 2004. She was hired by another company in Taiwan in 2004, which contract
I she finished in March this year. Meanwhile, she met a Taiwanese boyfriend who knew about her
change of name. As they decided to get married, they applied for legal capacity from the Taipei
I- Economic and Cultural Office (TEeO). In the course thereof, she was asked to get a clearance
from the DFAregarding her change of name.
"'·
e -;;
I -:,
~;~~:'.-
....".", -
Complainant, thus, accuses respondent for assumption of identity and use of passports
issued under an assumed name, under Sec. 19(b), pars. I & 2, ofRA 8239. He claims that re-
spondent personally applied for Passport Nos. HHI6090 1 and MM860451 under the name a.k.a.,
~ >~:.
Is..
' --..
f~;J~
I
Revised Manuai for Prosecutors 119
; 't:
;'~..
which passport issuances were confirmed by the DFA computer database. She also used the said
passports in going to and from Taiwan as a contract worker. The Department's computer database
also revealed the following issuances in the name of . born on December 2, 1972
in Cebu City, to wit: '
To substantiate his claim, complainant submitted the application record of Passport Nos.
MM860451 and Vv0166339, as well as the photopage and pertinent pages of Passport Nos.
HH160901 and MM8604S1 showing the visas and Bureau of Immigration departure and anival
stamps.
Finally, complainant claims that based on the application records of Passport Nos.
iV1M86045l andVVO 166339, itclearly appears that the photographs of a.k.a. and _
belong to one and the 'same person. Hence, this complaint.
In exculpation, respondent argues that she could not be held liable under Sec. 19(b) of
RA 8239 as she did not make any falsity in the procurement of Passport Nos. MM86045land
HH16090 1. The fact that her photograph appears on both passports does not mean that she au-
thored any kind of falsity, the truth being that she merely paid an old woman "fixer" the amount
ofP8,000.OO, who also assured her that she would be able to leave for and work in Taiwan for the
second time. The said old woman "fixer" who was only known to her as "Manay" might have
confederated with some DFA employees since after only five (5) days, she gave her the passport
bearing the name a.k.a.
She was compelled to use the subject passports in going to Taiwan out of sheer necessity as
she was rendered jobless after her employment contract in Taiwan had expired. Returning to work
as a factory worker in Taiwan was the only means for her to improve her family's living conditions,
she being the sole breadwinner. Then, she met a Taiwanese boyfriend who expressed interest to
marry her. Together, they went to the TEca to secure legal capacity to marry, whereupon she was
told to clear with the DFA the matter of her having used the subject passports in the name of a.k.a
At the DFA, she voluntarily surrendered the subject passports and prepared a written explanation
on how they were issued, as advised by complainant. She did so in all honesty and good faith,
hoping that it would solve her problem. She never expected that her having sought the help of the
DFA would result in her being charged criminally.
j
: ·r
Finally, she denies any criminal intent, imploring the kind understanding of authorities, as
she had been merely forced by circumstances beyond her control, like the lack ofjob opportunities
, I in the country. She argues that even the Supreme Court in the case of People versus Librero, GR
No. 132311, September 28, 2000, recognizes the difficult times we are in and realizes that hopes
for a better future for many Filipinos lie in overseas employment.
II~?: !f;f\:;:r;~
::~[~:j-ri~
..
." We now resolve.
ITJ~
i
...
ii- Attached to the record are copies of the application records of Passport No. MM86045l
in the name of a.k.a. and Passport No. VV0166339 in the name of respondent , both
bearing photographs belonging to one and the same person. It is not disputed that the photograph
attached to both passport applications belongs to respondent. By attaching her photograph to the
I ··,":"--
passport application, thereby making it appear that she is a.k.a, the person named in Passport
No. MM86045l, respondent has assumed the identity of a.k.a in the said passport application, in
violation of Sec. 19(b)(l) ofRA 8239.
I ·~ _,J -- , Sec. 19(b)(l) ofRA 8239 penalizes any person who willfully and knowingly "makes any
·. false statement in any application for passport with the intent to induce or secure the issuance of
I -:":
,- "
a passport under the authority of the Philippine Government, either for his own use or the use of
another x x x'', Given the above factual backdrop, there is no gainsaying that respondent has
committed a false statement or misrepresentation in the application for Passport No. MM86045l
I when she stated therein that she is a.k. a, born in Marikina on February 21, 1978 when, in truth and
in fact, she is not.
I I Respondent's claim of good faith and lack of criminal intent is unavailing in the instant
case. Firstly, RA 8239 is a special law which does not require criminal intent; the offense being
malum prohibitum and the mere commission of the prohibited act is punishable. Moreover, being
I malum prohibitum, good faith is not a valid defense. Secondly, evidence adduced shows that
Passport No, :MM:86045I is a renewal of Passport No. HHl60901. Thus, it appears that respondent
has assumed the identity of a.k.a not only once but twice, in 2001 and 2004, which is anathema
I to any claim of good faith and/or lack of criminai intent. Thirdly, record shows that the respective
applications for Passport Nos. HH160901 and MM860451 were personally filed by respondent
applicant. Necessarily, respondent who posed to be a.k.a personally appeared and processed the
I subject passport applications. She has, therefore, knowingly participated in the commission of the
prohibited act. Even assuming gratia argumenti that somebody else has instigated the commission
I of the prohibited act, respondent is still criminally liable for her own acts. In fact, she knowingly
acceded to the scheme allegedly proposed by a fixer named "Manay", even paying the latter a
sizeable amount.
I However, considering that the application record of Passport No. HHl6090l had already
been disposed of, respondent could no longer be prosecuted for assumption of identity in relation
I to the said passport for lack of documentary evidence to prove the violation. As regards Passport
No. MM86045l which is amply supported by the passport application record, probable cause
exists against respondent for violation of Sec. 19(b)(l) ofRA 8239.
I Evidence adduced likewise sufficiently shows that after securing Passport No. MM86045l
'I in violation of Sec. 19(b)(I) ofRA 8239, respondent used the said passport on three (3) separate
instances, to wit: (1) on October 7,2004 when she applied for a visa to Taipei at the TECO; (2)
'· on October 13, 2004 when she left the Philippines for Taipei; and (3) on March 27, 2007 when she
I'0::<
",-'
arrived in and entered the Philippines from Taipei. All these acts fall under the second paragraph
of Sec. 19(b), RA 8239, which penalizes any use or attempt to use a passport that has been secured
and issued by means of any false statement. Again, inasmuch as RA 8239 is malum prohibitum,
,~c
',·
~-::~"." - Revised Manual for Prosecutors 121
I ~,'''(;;~:
-
"" ',.-:~,-
.
.'i.--
the offender is criminally liable for every single violation of the law. In this case, respondent is
liable for three (3) counts of violation of Sec. 19(b)(2) ofRA 8239.
While we agree tliat Filipino migrant workers have greatly contributed to our economy, that
a better future for Filipinos lie in overseas employment, we cannot bargain away faithful observance
of our laws and legal processes in the name of economic prosperity. Trite as it may sound, ours is a
government oflaws and not of men. For government stability and good governance, our laws must
be fully enforced, especially those relating to the issuance and use of Philippine passports which
carry the seal of our Republic and embody a request for other governments to allow the bearer
to pass safely and freely. In that sense, a Philippine passport is not only a public document but a
representation of our government. To protect its integrity, tinkering with the said document must
be dealt with severely.
Investigating Prosecutor
RECOMMENDING APPROVAL:
A P PRO VE D:
Copy Furnished:
DIRECTOR _
Passport Division
DEPARTMENT OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS
Roxas Blvd., Pasay City
Respondent
(Address)
I 8239, otherwise known as "The Philippine Passport Act of 1996", committed as follows:
CONTRARY TO LAW.
Investigating Prosecutor
~.'
I
.u '
City of Manila, Philippines, December 7,2007
Investigating Prosecutor
WITNESSES:
1. _
c/o Secretariat, Inter-Agency Committee
Against Passport Irregularities
Department of Foreign Affairs
Roxas Blvd., Pasay City
3. AND OTHERS
Enclosures:
,' ,~;'.
Republic of the Philippines
REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
I'-'" , -'~~},r
;./;-)';
National Capital Judicial Region
Branch , Pasay City
I',.':, '
:~;_.:~::-'
,' • .1'.'.
'c'·', People of the Philippines,
Plaintiff,
-.~-{ . - versus -
CRIM. CASE NO.
(I.S, No.
For: Violation of Sec. 19(b)(2)
-:-
)
I' ':D/
:;~;;:-'
'1--:::'~-'
,c" _ _ _ _ _ _a.k.a. _
ofRA8239
k ;{':."'::
~.J,,"...~ -At-Large-
x
Accused.
,"------x
'I INFORMATION
I That on October 13, 2004 or thereabout, in Pasay City, Metro Manila, and
within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused did then
and there knowingly, unlawfully and criminally use or attempt to use, in her de-
'I parture to Taipei, Passport No. MM860451 in the name of a.k.a, born on February
21, 1978 in Marikina, which passport was secured by the said accused by means of
,I false statements in the application for passport, in violation ofRA 8239 as well as
the rules and regulations prescribed in relation thereto.
CONTRARY TO LAW.
"
I
City of Manila for Pasay City, December 7,2007,
I Investigating Prosecutor
l
''' ' ~i
.~
'''':-
~'_.:'''-''
CERTIFICATION
~
crime charged has been committed and that the accused is probably guilty thereof; that the accused
was informed of the complaint and of the evidence presented against her and was given the op-
portunity to submit controverting evidence. I further certify that the filing of this Information is
-
" .: with the prior authority and approval of the Chief StatelProvincial/City Prosecutor.
" ",
• City of Manila, Philippines, December 7, 2007
U,i,!
~ Investigating Prosecutor
U
,,: SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me on this day of
'I <I _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ in the City ofManila, Philippines.
"
~ ,~!~ ':
WITNESSES:
1. _
c/o Secretariat, Inter-Agency Committee
Against Passport Irregularities
Departmentof Foreign Affairs
Roxas Blvd., Pasay City
3. AND OTHERS
1 !'
I
BAIL RECOMMENDED: THIRTY THOUSAND (P30,OOO.OO) PESOS
Enclosures:
Approved Resolution dated December 7, 2007
Complaint-Affidavit of with attachments
Counter-affidavit of dated September 11, 2007
I.:~~
_z,2?:;L People of the Philippines,
'1"':,·
,
Plaintiff,
:;'J~'i;-~-_
... ':."j-,:
....•.. CRIM. CASE NO. _
-"(st· - versus - (I.S. No )
}/<'c'
For: Violation of Sec. 19(b)(2)
I'" ofRA8239
a.k.a.
-At-Large-
II (c/o address),
Accused.
x------------x
I
INFORMATION
I
The undersigned State!Assistant Provincial/Assistant City Prosecutor, hereby accuses _
I I ---=a.k.a. with violation of Sec. 19(b),
paragraph 2, of RA 8239, otherwise known as "The Philippine Passport Act of 1996", committed
as follows:
III
That on March 27, 2007 or thereabout, in Pasay City, Metro Manila, and
within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused did then
I and there knowingly, unlawfully and criminally use or attempt to use, in her arrival
in, and entry to, the Philippines from Taipei, Passport No. MM860451 in the name
I of a.k.a., born on February 21, 1978 in Marikina, which passport was secured by
the said accused by means of false statements in the application for passport, in
violation of RA 8239 as well as the rules and regulations prescribed in relation
I thereto.
CONTRARY TO LAW.
1 City of Manila for Pasay City, December 7, 2007.
I
, Investigating Prosecutor
continued, next page>
127
i'"
Revised Manual for Prosecutors
e:
:~:<
-----------
I
~
I
CERTlFICATION
'I sworn-statements and other evidence presented, there is reasonable ground to believe that the
crime charged has been committed and that the accused is probably guilty thereof; that the accused
was informed of the complaint and of the evidence presented against her and was given the op-
I portunity to submit controverting evidence. I further certify that the filing of this Information is
with the prior authority and approval ofthe Chief State/Provincial/City Prosecutor.
I
I
City of Manila, Philippines, December 7, 2007.
I WITNESSES:
1. _
I Enclosures:
i', I
J
128 Revised Manual for Prosecutors
I
~~ ~
kc;
F,:
.. ::~:!':
,It ..-'-
Sample Information 4
Republic of the Philippines
REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
'., I:
~-~;-."'. -
National Capital Judicial Region
Branch , Makati City
Ie ofRA8239
_ _ _ _a.k.a. _
I: -At-Large-
(c/o address),
Accused.
I x- -x
I INFORMATION
I MM860451 in the name of a.k.a., born on February 21,1978 in Marikina, in her ap-
plication for visa to Taipei, which Passport No. MM860451 was secured by the said
accused by means of false statements in the application for passport, in violation of
I RA 8239 as well as the rules and regulations prescribed in relation thereto.
CONTRARY TO LAW.
I City of Manila for Pasay City, December 7,2007,
I
I Investigating Prosecutor
J~.,~.:~
continued, next page>
i :
·
:i'-',_",
.,.,.,;:....
'it_
Revised Manual for Prosecutors 129
CERTIFICATION
Investigating Prosecutor
WITNESSES:
1. _
c/o Secretariat, Inter-Agency Committee
Against Passport Irregularities
Department of Foreign Affairs
Roxas Blvd., Pasay City
3. AND OTHERS
Enclosures:
Complainant,
1.8. No. _
- versus - For:
Respondent,
x-------------------------------------------------------x
ORDER
This treats of the motion to suspend proceedings filed by respondent based on the existence
of a prejudicial question.
(Brief discussion)
Considering the pendency of a civil case which involves facts intimately related to those
upon which the instant complaint for is based, and that in the resolution ofthe issue
or issues raised in the said civil case, the guilt or innocence of the accused would necessarily be
determined, undersigned finds the existence of a prejudicial question, thus, warranting the suspen-
sion ofthis preliminary investigation.
SO ORDERED.
_ _ _ _ _ _"Date.
continued, next page>
I
I 1
RECOMMENDING APPROVAL:
I
I APPROVED:
I
-I
j
I
'I
il
:.
~
,
;~1
,
,I
132 Revised Manual for Prosecutors
NPS SAMPLE FORMAT "B", s.2008
CERTIFICATION
Investigating Prosecutor
PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION
(within 60 to 90 days)
"0
~
~
1+ SUBPOENA
....... RESPONDENT
....... CLARIFICATORY
.......
II
W/GROUNO RESOLUTION
~
RESPONDENT COUNTEIlS QUESTIONING
~, ,;11 ~
til
>-3
REPLY/REJOINDER I ....
~
COMPLAINT-
AFFIDAVIT I I I ~
....
0
'Z
I
.s.
co
..
~
0-
S
\. NO GROUND I....... I RESOLUTION
DISMISSAL
'"t::>
'"
0'
~
-c
."
~
o
~
...o
C
~
~
'"'"
<
;;;. t:l
o
'"
Q.
s: ~
PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION
~..
W
(within 60 to 90 days)
'cw"
d'
~ FILING OF INFO N
"0 IN COURT
~t""
(3
IYES I
'"rorv
c
rl
o
;;: RECOMMEND
FILING OF ..
•
:t( , , MRiAPPEAU
';t f~l ~
tf INFORMATION
~
PETITION FOR
~B
REVIEW
L . ,
WI PROBABLE
/ ~
CAUSE
<If ~
IOSECJ
C'-l
~
..
RESOLUTION DISMISSAL OF]
COMPLAINT Q
11 ~
' WIO PROBABLE ,
CAUSE
,
..,IVESI "- r - - - ,_ _,
MRiAPPEAIJ
/E sz
I'EJ
~, PETITION fOR
RECOMMEND ACTION BY REVIEW
DISMISSAL OF CPIPPICSP
COMPLAINT
~
~~
,,/
FILING OF INfO
!
IN COURT
l::
I~, r-tl r-· .r~- ~~ _'= _~ _~~ _-- _- _--_ _ _
L I
PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION
(within 60 to 90 days)
• .J f"'-!.
H
..
u)
"d
~
I I+-
~
SUSTAIN
PURSUE FILING
OF INFO IN
• I
- .... f BAil I ' " I
I I ARRAIGNMENT
I . I I
I I 11 COURT' I I - I I I I
FOR FILING
OFINFO IN
COURT
~
~
~
~
11
I I~_--,
I REVERSE I. DISMISSAL OF
COMPLAINT
I_ M .... !PETITION FOR CERTIORARI (COURT OFAPPEALS) ~
r:/).
MRiAPPEAL d
C)
PETITION
FOR REVIEW
~
,...
I I+- O::S:~~~~N~F o
.
YES - 'PETITION FOR CERTIORARI (COURT OFAPPEALS)
~
w ....
:xl
I!>
<
Vi- I 111 z
I!>
FOR
DISMISSAL
,
Q,
#
s: OF
'"c:
:J
'"d'
~
'to
~
I
COMPLAINT
J~
I-NO---". PURSUE FILING
OF INFO IN
COURT
I......
B I
BAIL I . . . f
I
ARRAIGNMENT
I . I
j I
I
I
o
'"
I!>
"c:
S
~
. , . ,I; -:,"(~:"'.:~':i'~<;i.
f "
; - ",~::-
I perform.
3. The filing of a petition for review affects the arraignment of the accused in court.
I B.CONCEPTS
I
• 1. Arraignment - is the formal mode and manner of implementing the constitutional right
of the accused to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation against him (Sec.
l3{2], 1987 Constitution ofthe Philippines). An arraignment is necessary in order to fix
,
the identity of the accused, to inform him of the charge and to give him an opportnnity to
plead (14 Am. JUT., p.939, G_ V Jacinto, Criminal Procedure).
,I 2. Plea - is the reply ofthe accused to the charge. In criminal prosecution, the accused has
to plead to the indictment, which he may do (1) by pleading to the jurisdiction, that is,
I
• •
n.
alleging that the court has no jurisdiction to try him; (2) by a demurrer; or (3) by some
plea in bar, either a general plea or a specific plea (Osborn s Concise Law Dictionary, 15th
Ed John Burke, p. 254).
PROCEDURE
The trial prosecutor shall examine the Information vis-a-vis the resolution of the
investigating prosecutor in order to make the necessary corrections or revisions and
to ensure that the Information is sufficient in form and substance.
'. 1-
He shall ensure that the private offended party appears at the arraignment for
purposes of plea bargaining, determination of civil liability and other matters requir-
ing his presence (Sec.I (j), Rule 116, Revised Rules on criminal procedure).
,I
/(.'::
-\
,,,,
;, ..
}}:{i:
• Republic Act No. 4908, which requires that in criminal cases where the com-
plainant is about to depart from the Philippines with no de:finite date ofreturn,
I
Revised Manual for Prosecutors 137
*I the accused should be arraigned without delay and his trial should commence
within three (3) days from arraignment and that no postponement of the initial
hearing should be granted except on the ground of illness on the part of the
I I During the arraignment, the prosecutor seeks to give the accused the opportunity
at the first instance to know why a case has been filed against him. It is the solemn
I
I duty of the trial prosecutor to be present during the arraignment. He must be atten-
tive at all times during the arraignment so that he can ensure, among others, that the
requirements of a valid arraignment are duly observed, the identity of the accused is
I
I
ascertained and the Information being read to the accused is the same Information as
filed.
I
,
3. After the Arraignment
The trial prosecutor shall prepare his witnesses for trial. Government witnesses,
I When an aggrieved party manifests in court that he has a pending petition for review
with the Department of Justice and moves for a deferment/suspension ofthe arraignment
I I pending resolution of his petition, the trial prosecutor may conform thereto once proof of
said petition has been presented by the petitioner to his satisfaction.
I 1. The trial prosecutor- shall immediately move for the suspension of the proceedings
whenever the accused manifests his intention in court to plead guilty to a lesser of-
fense, when applicable. This will enable the trial prosecutor to confer with the private
I
,.
complainant and evaluate the implications of the offer of the plea bargain.
2. The trial prosecutor may dispense with the presentation of evidence when the accused
pleads guilty to a lesser offense which is not a capital offense unless the court directs
him to do so for purposes of determining the penalty to be imposed.
I I 3. The trial prosecutor, with the consent of the offended party, may motu proprio agree
to the offer of the accused to plead guilty to a lesser offense if the penalty impos-
I I able therefor is prision correccional (maximum of six [6] years) or less or a fine not
exceeding Php12,OOO.OO.
,J
J
138 Revised Manual for Prosecutors
I
4. When the penalty imposable for the offense charged is prision mayor (at least six
,.". [6] years and one [1] day or higher) or a fine exceeding PhpI2,000.OO, the trial
prosecutor shall first submit his comment/recommendation to the Provincial or City
IL·'·. .·
'....'_'e".'·...
·'::if-:i:.
;,c,.;";:.
,,-..;;.,
Prosecutor or'to the Chief State Prosecutor, as the case may be, for approval. If the
recommendation is approved in writing, the trial prosecutor, may, with the consent
of the offended party, agree to a plea of guilty to a lesser offense. For this purpose,
',I.:.
I .:\i: .• :- .:
':'~:-.,
'~';
the Chief State Prosecutor or the Provincial or City Prosecutor concerned shall act on
the recommendation of the trial prosecutor within forty-eight (48) hours from receipt
thereof. In no case shall the subject plea to a lesser offense be allowed without the
written approval of the above respective heads of office.
S. In all cases, the penalty for the lesser offense to which the accused may be allowed to
\ ...... '
plead guilty shall not be more than two (2) degrees lower than the imposable penalty
,
I" .. "
for the crime charged, notwithstanding the presence of mitigating circumstances.
The lesser offense shall also be one that is necessarily related to the offense charged
I"
~
or the offense must belong to the same classification or title under the Revised Penal
Code or the relevant special laws (DOJ Circular No. 55, dated 31 July 1990).
I 1. In criminal cases, it is the duty of the accused, in addition to the other pleas authorized
by law, to plead whether he is guilty or not ofthe crime charged. In that way, and in that
way only, can an issue be created upon which the trial shall proceed (Golez vs. CA. 237
I SCRA 685).
2. The period of suspension shall not exceed sixty (60) days counted from the filing of the
I petition with the reviewing office. (Sec. 11, par.(c), Rule 116, Rev. Rules on criminal
procedure). However, the court may still suspend the trial pending final resolution by the
DOJ (Luman law v. Judge Eduardo Peralta, Jr; G. R. No. 164953, February 13,2006).
I
:i'"
Revised Manual for Prosecutors 139
:u
~>-
~:t,:..
I _ .."
PART VI. PRE-TRIAL
I. CONCEPT
A pre-trial is a process whereby the accused and the prosecutors in a criminal case
work out, usually at the arraignment stage, a naturally satisfactory disposition of a
case subject to court approval in order to expedite the trial of the case (Black's Law
Dictionary, 5" Ed.• 1979. p.1 037).
The pre-trial conference is scheduled after arraignment and within thirty (30)
days from the date the court acquires jurisdiction over the person of the accused,
unless a shorter period is provided for in special laws or circulars of the Supreme
Court, order a pre-trial conference (Sec. 1, par. 1, Rule 118, supra.).
The pre-trial order binds the parties, limits the trial to matters not disposed of, and
controls the course of the action taken during the trial, unless modified by the court
to prevent manifest injustice (Sec. 4, Rule 118, supra.).
A. PLEA BARGAINING;
This is a process where the accused usually pleads guilty to a lesser offense
or to only one or some of the counts of a multi-count indictment in return for a
lighter sentence than that for the graver charge (Black's Law Dictionary, 5" Ed.
1979, p. 1037).
Plea bargaining is not allowed under the Dangerous Drugs Act where the
itnposable penalty for the offense charged is reclusion perpetua to death.
B. STIPULATION OF FACTS;
This refers to the agreement of the parties on some facts admitted, some facts
covered by judicial notice (Sec. 1, Rule 129, supra.), judicial admissions (Sec. 2,
Rule 129, supra.), or on matters not otherwise disputed by them.
The trial prosecutor shall make sure that he appears at the pre-trial conference to
avoid being sanctioned by the court. (Sec. 3, Rule 118, supra.)
The prosecutor should know every fact and detail of the case. This can be ac-
complished by interviewing the complainant and other witnesses and after a thor-
ough examination of the available documentary and other physical evidence.
The prosecutor should also place importance on the testimony of the expert
witness. The knowledge that the prosecutor will gain from said witness will help
him determine the procedures undertaken in the examination of a subject or thing;
the scientific or technical terms applied, and the reason/s in arriving at a certain
conclusion.
I
•
B. DURING THE PRE-TRIAL PROCESS
The prosecutor shall bear in mind that in the course of the trial, any stipula-
tions/admissions entered into during the pre-trial will help him prove his case
'I beyond reasonable doubt and that every act or incident should be proved by the
II The trial prosecutor shall ensure that all agreements or admissions made or
entered during the pre-trial conference are reduced in writing and signed by the
accused and counsel and approved by the court.
•I
I
V. RELEVAJ"IT JURISPRUDENCE
1. The omission of the signature of the accused and his counsel, as mandatorily
required by the Rules, renders the Stipulation of Facts inadmissible in evidence
(pule v. Court ofAppeals, 162 SCRA 446).
I
iI
2. A proffer ofevidence on the basis of the evidence exhibited by the accused during
the pre-trial is not sufficient. His acquittal on the basis thereof is a nullity for want
I, of due process (People v. Judge Santiago, 174 SCRA 143).
,I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I !.
'
~
PART VII. BAIL
I. CONCEPTS
A. PURPOSE OF BAIL
zi~'
I ,''
The purpose ofbail is to entitle the accused to provisional liberty pending trial
:{,~c:~,':'
(Bravo, Jr. v, Borja, 134 SCRA 466 [1985]).
I
iI'",,·
-,~:~+,;_
;;~":_';.:::-
B. NATURE OF THE RIGHT TO BAIL
The right to bail is guaranteed by the Constitution. It is the duty of the pros-
ecutor to recommend such amount ofbail to the courts ofjustice as, in his opinion,
would ensure the appearance of an accused person when so required by the court.
I
::~~: (DOJ Circular No.6, series of1981)
--\"":-.-,
I ;,~~~/~-
•
",,',:}:~
::::",
>',: ':
C. BASIS OF BAlL
1. The basis for determining bail is the penalty prescribed by law for the offense
charged and not the penalty actually imposed for the accused in view of the
•I
.' 0,0'
2. To allow bail on the basis of the penalty actually imposed would require a
consideration not only ofthe evidence ofthe commission of the crime but also
I
evidence of the aggravating and mitigating circumstances. There would then
be a need for a complete triaL after which the judge would be just about ready
I to render a decision in the case. Such procedure would defeat the purpose
of bail, which is to entitle the accused to provisional liberty pending trial.
I 1_. (Ibid.)
D. ~NBAlLISNOTREQummD
'I Bail shall not be required of a person charged with violation of a municipal
or city ordinance, a light felony and/or a criminal offense the prescribed penalty
for which is not higher than six (6) months imprisonment and/or a fine of Two
I I
thousand pesos (p2,OOO.OO), or both, where said person has established to the
satisfaction of the court or any other appropriate authority hearing his case that he
•I is unable to post the required cash or bail bond, except in the following cases:
l'iii" ,
"l=.
~:".
3, when he is found to have previously escaped from legal confinement, evaded
sentence, or jumped bail;
7. when the accused has previously been pardoned by the municipal or city
mayor for violations of municipal or city ordinance for at least two times.
(Sec. 1, R. A. No, 6036)
No bail shall also be required when the law or the Rules issued by the Supreme
Court so provide.
When a person has been in custody for a period equal to or more than the
possible maximum imprisonment of the offense charged to which he may be sen-
tenced, he shall be released immediately without prejudice to the continuation of
I
the trial thereof or the proceedings on appeal. In case the maximum penalty to
which the accused may be sentenced is destierro, he shall be released after thirty
I1 (30) days of preventive imprisonment.
! .. I
i A person in custody for a period equal to or more than the minimum of the
".'1•,•
I :
principal penalty prescribed for the offense charged without application of the
Indeterminate Sentence Law or any modifying circumstance, shall be released on
[,
d, a reduced bail or on his own recognizance, at the discretion ofthe court. (Sec. 16,
Rule 114; supra.)
P?r·'
";:~·'1l'".:·. .'
.,,~. ',~
r~:~:-~''-
.>
Court, Municipal Trial Court in Cities or Municipal Circuit Trial Court; and
2. Before conviction by the Regional Trial Court of an offense not punishable by
death, reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment. (Sec. 4, Rule 114, supra.)
I,,1~:::::
..,,:;;2-
B. WHEN BAILIS A MATTER OF DISCRETION
•
• • •• • 1. Before conviction, bail is a matter of discretion when the offense charged is
--~:.~: punishable by death, reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment.
".';.,
a. That he is a recidivist, quasi-recidivist or habitual delinquent or has com-
I '":
or violated the conditions of his bail without valid justification;
e. That there is undue risk that he may commit another crime during the
I pendency of the appeal.
3. Ifupon conviction, the Regional Trial Court imposes the penalty of imprisonment
I in excess of six (6) years, but not exceeding twenty (20) years, the accused shall
be denied bailor his bail shall be cancelled, upon a showing by the prosecution,
4. Ifnone of the circumstances enumerated above exists, the grant of bail becomes
I a matter of right. (Sec. 5, Rule 114, supra.)
I
;· Revised Manual for Prosecutors 145
1 il;:~::_
,I;;::
I
I
When bail is a matter of discretion, it is the right of the prosecutor to be noti-
fied so he could present evidence to prove that the evidence of guilt ofthe accused
is strong. Denial of such notice deprives the State of its right to be heard, thereby
making the bail proceedings void.
,I D. RlGHT TO BAIL IN INQUEST CASES
'I A person lawfully arrested and detained but who has not yet been formally
charged in court can seek his provisional release through the filing of an applica-
tion for bail or release on recognizance.
I
,I E. GUIDELINES IN RECOMMENDING BAIL
, II
L When the bail is a matter of right, the prosecutor shall use the DOl Bail Bond
'I ',',j
Guide as his primary guide in recommending bail.
'.'I
I!
by the trial prosecutor for the reduction or increase of the amount of bail
shall be with the prior approval of the Chief StatelProvincialJCity Prosecutor
concerned.
u
3. The prosecutor should be able to refute, among others, the following factors
during the hearing on the application for bail:
I ,
d. the probability of the accused appearing at the trial,
I ,
i
f. whether or not the accused is under bond in other cases. (People v.
Dacudao, 170SCRA 489).
I , ~: ,."
I L' ~;i'
3. penalty for the offense charged;
'I ;
t \';~;f"
c;;';:;
4. age, state of health, character and reputation of the respondent/accused under
detention;
--,.<~:-/.
If, .,,;- -.
5. weight of the evidence against the respondent/accused under detention;
6. forfeiture ofother bonds and pendency ofother cases wherein the respondent/
t '"
:<',i-
accused under detention is under bond;
7. the fact that respondent/accused under detention was a fugitive from justice
when apprehended; and
I:·
8. other factors affecting the probability of the accused appearing at the trial.
I (Sec. 6. Rule n 4, RevisedRules on Criminal Procedure; DOJ Circular No.4,
series of1996)
I: ."".- .
1. Where the penalty is reclusion perpetua, life imprisomnent, reclusion per-
petua to death Dr death, bail is not a matter of right; hence, it shall not be
recommended.
1/ -r.
2. Where bail is a matter ofright and the imposable penalty is imprisonment and!
or fine, the bail shall be computed on the basis of the penalty ofimprisomnent
1';, applying the following rules:
'II
.:,,»>
;'i"-
...,.:..<.'
:~;
Revised Manual for Prosecutors 747
d. For crimes of reckless imprudence resulting in homicide arising from
violation of the Land Transportation and Traffic Code, bail shall be
,Php30,OOO.OO per deceased person.
e. For violation ofBatas Pambansa Blg.22, bail shall be fifty per cent
(50%) of the amount of checks but should not be less than Php2,OOO.OO
nor more than Php30,OOO.OO.
3. Where the imposable penalty is only a fine, bail shall be computed as fol-
lows:
b. Fine of more than Php2,000.00, bail shall be 50% of the fine but should
not exceed Php30,OOO.OO.
,,','" The prosecutor shall ensure that a hearing on the petition for bail is conducted
by the judge as it is absolutely indispensable for the latter to properly determine
whether the prosecution's evidence is weak or strong on the issue of whether or
not to grant bail to an accused charged with a heinous crime where the imposable
I
;y:
:r-,~:-'
penalty is death, reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment (Tabao v. Espino. 257
SCRA 298 [1996]). He must therefore be prepared for such a hearing.
I; •...
"
,--~-~~;:"
I. EXCEPTION TO THE RULE ON NON-BAILABLE OFFENSES
I~
An exception to the rule on non-bailability of offenses punishable by reclu-
sion perpetua, life imprisonment or death is when the accused is a minor since
minority is a special mitigating circumstance that allows the imposition of the
I, ~:-:"
penalty one degree lower than that prescribed by law (Bravo v. Borja, 134 SCRA
466 [l985J), aside from the fact that RA9344, otherwise known as the Juveniie
Justice and Welfare Act of 2006, provides that every child in conflict with the law
r (CICL) shall be entitled to bail and that the mitigating circumstance of minority
should be taken into consideration in the hearing for the petition for baii.
I~ Whether the motion for bail of a defendant who is in custody for an offense
punishable by reclusion perpetua, life imprisonment or death be resolved in a
summary proceeding or in the course of a regular trial, the prosecution must be
I given an opportunity to present, within a reasonable time, all the evidence that
it may desire to introduce before the court should resolve the motion for bail
• .'
-',- -
Should the prosecution be denied ofthe opportunity to present all the evidence
it may desire to introduce, there would be a violation of procedural due process
and the order of the court granting bail should be considered void.
In case a petition for bail is filed by the accused and the court orders a con-
I tinuous trial of the case, the public prosecutor shall be prepared to present his
principal witnesses. Where there are several accused and one or two filed a
I petition to bail, the trial prosecutor shall, before the presentation of his first wit-
ness, manifest in open court that the evidence to be presented in the hearing of
J
':;: Revised Manual for Prosecutors 149
l 'j~,~
:'~>
-------
the petition for bail shall be adopted as its evidence-in-chief, with a reservation
to present additional evidence during the trial proper when necessary.
Upon application filed with the court and after due notice to the prosecutor,
the bail bond may be canceled upon surrender of the accused or presentation of
proof ofhis death.
The bail bond shall be deemed automatically canceled upon acquittal of the
accused or dismissal of the case or execution of the final judgment of convic-
tion.
1. Whenever allowed pursuant to law or the Rules ofCourt, the court may release
a person in custody on his own recognizance or that of a responsible person.
2. A hearing on the petition for the custody of the accused for purposes of his!
her release on recognizance is mandatory (Loyola v. Gabo, Jr., AMNo. RTJ-
00-15-24, Jan. 26, 2000)
3. The prosecutor should see to it that hearing is conducted to ensure that the
requirements of Sec. 1 and 2 of R. A. No. 6036 are complied with. (Ibid.)
1. The accused comes within the coverage of Sec. I ofRA 6036 and RA 9344
(Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act) ;
2. The accused shall sign, in the presence of two (2) witnesses ofgood standing
in the community, a sworn statement binding himself, pending final dec i -
sion of his case, to report to the Clerk of Court hearing his case periodically
every two (2) weeks;
i\;':i~:~~: a. such person under whose custody the accused is placed, shall execute his
I~ own affidavit stating his willingness to accept custody of the accused;
and
f "c;
-~- b. the accused shall also include in his own affidavit mentioned above, a
statement that he binds himself to accept the responsibility of the
I::
1--"',:.,,,,-:
,
k
',.c,'"
citizen so appointed by the court as his custodian.
I
c"
- 3. Where the accused was charged for murder without the benefit of a preliminary
- ,-' investigation and trial had already began over his objections, the accused remains
I.
-'.;,"--
entitled to be released on bail as a matter of right pending the preliminary investi-
gation. Should the evidence already of record concerning the guilt of the accused
be, in the reasonable belief of the prosecutor, strong, the prosecutor may move in
I the trial court for cancellation of the bail. (Vide Tolentino v. Caano, Jn, 322 SCRA
•.--
559)
;,- 4. If the prosecution is denied the opportunity to present, within a reasonable time,
0,'._
;'~ all the evidence that it may want to introduce before the court may resolve the
application for bail, there would be a denial of due process, as a consequence of
1 ::'/--:'-- which, the court's order in respect of the motion or petition is void- (Carpio, et.
•
.
I
•- r:
:,
Revised Manual for Prosecutors 151
I~ PART VIII. ARREST
I 1. REMEDY, OF THE PROSECUTOR WHEN NO WARRAt'lT OF ARREST
I!I
WAS ISSUED BY THE JUDGE
If the investigating judge is satisfied that there is probable cause but did not issue
I the warrant of arrest contrary to the prosecutor/s belief that there is a need to place
the accused under custody, the speedy and adequate remedy of the prosecutor is to
II
immediately file the Information so that the Regional Trial Court judge may issue
the warrant for the arrest of the accused. (Samulde v. Salvani, Jn, 165 SCRA 724
[1988])
If a warrant of arrest has been issued, the prosecutor may request the warrant
I officer that he be furnished with the officer's return relative thereto. The prosecu-
lor shall, as far as practicable, coordinate with the witnesses from time to time to
~I
ascertain the whereabouts of the accused pending the latter's arrest.
I 1. The grounds of suspicion are reasonable when, in the absence of actual belief
~
of the arresting officers, the suspicion that the person to be arrested is probably
guilty of committing the offense, is based on actual facts, i. e. supported by cir-
cumstances sufficiently strong in themselves to create the probable cause of guilt
~ 2. An arrest signifies restraint on person, depriving one of his own will and liberty,
binding him to become obedient to the will of the law. (Larranaga v. Court of
1. Appeals, 287 SCRA 589)
I 3. A letter-invitation is equivalent to arrest. Where the invitation comes from
·1 a powerful group composed predominantly of ranking military officers and the
designated interrogation site as a military camp, this is obviously a command or
I
an order of arrest. (Sanchez v. Demetriou, 227 SCRA 627 [1993].
I.~ in treating with wanton violence the arrested person or in resorting to dangerous
means when the arrest could be effected otherwise. (Galang v. People. G. R. No.
128536, January 31, 2000)
5. A warrant of arrest does not become stale or functus oficio unlike a search warrant
which is valid only for ten days. A warrant of arrest remains valid until arrest is
effected or the warrant lifted. (Managan v. CFL 189 SeRA 217)
I. GENERAL RULES
A. CONCEPT
The object of a trial is to mete out justice, and to convict the guilty and
protect the innocent. Thus, the trial should be a search for the truth and not
a contest over technicalities and must be conducted under such rules as will
protect the innocent (23 C. J S. 274).
:B. COVERAGE
All criminal cases brought for trial before the Regional Trial Courts,
Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal Circuit Trial Courts, and Municipal Trial
Courts except those cases that are subject to the Rules on Summary Procedure.
n. TRIALPREPARATION
The prosecutor assigned to prosecute the case shall prepare the trial
guide. The trial guide, as accomplished, shall be made a permanent part of the
prosecution's records of the case. Its preparation shall be in accordance with
DOJ Circular No. 47, s. 2000 (please refer to Appendix "F" on p. 311 ofthis
Manual).
I
, As far as practicable, crucial witnesses shall be summoned by the trial pros-
ecutor before the actual trial dates for briefing on their testimony and demeanor
during the trial for orderly and efficient presentation in court.
C. OFFER OF EXHIBITS
I The trial prosecutor shall safely keep his documentary and other physical
evidence and prepare a list thereof in the order they have been marked as ex-
I hibits, identifying each by letter or number, describing it briefly, and stating its
specific purpose or purposes.
I D. DEFENSE EVIDENCE
~
1. Before reception of evidence for the defense starts, the trial prosecutor shall
ask from the adverse counsel the number of witnesses he intends to present
and the nature of their testimony.
I
j
2. If the names of the defense witnesses are disclosed, the trial prosecutor
shall elicit from reliable sources the whereabouts of these witnesses, their
moral character, background, reasons for testifying and relationship with
I the accused, among other things, to enable him to have a clear view of the
defense of the accused.
I
i
When two or more persons are jointly charged with the commission of any
offense, the trial prosecutor, before resting his case, shall move for the discharge
of one or more of the accused with their consent so that they may be witnesses
I for the State. The motion shall indicate that:
1. There is absolute necessity for the testimony ofthe accused whose discharge
I is requested (Sec. 17(a), Rule 119, Rules on Criminal Procedure).
2. There is no other direct evidence available for the proper prosecution ofthe
I offense committed, except the testimony of said accused, (Sec. i7[b], Rule
119, supra) as when he alone has knowledge of the crime, and not when his
, 154
points.
IJ
4. Said accused does not appear to be the most guilty (Lugtu v. Court of
Appeals, 183 SCRA 388),
-
_::-" .;;"~.;-:.' 5, Said accused has not, at any time been convicted of any offense involving
.~-}::,-.
>'~:\
.<!;',
. moral turpitude.
~·.
F. ADMISSION TO THE WITNESS PROTECTION PROGRAM OF AN
ACCUSED WHO HAS BEEN DISCHARGED
I ::,.:\ 6981, otherwise known as "The Witness Protection, Security and Benefit Act"
if he complies with the other requirements of said Act.
', ,
·
I.>.' G. OTHER PERSONS WHO MAY AVAIL OF THE WITNESS PROTECTION
PROGRAM
1-,
::~,".
":' The trial prosecutor shall recommend the admission to the Witness Protection
Program of the following persons:
I' 1. Any person who has witnessed or has knowledge of or information on the
commission of a crime and has testified or is testifying or is about to testify
before any judicial or quasi-judicial body, or before any investigating au-
I'" -',-" thority, Provided, that:
I -.;
• his testimony can be substantially corroborated on its material points;
• he or any member of his family within the second civil degree of con-
I
J",:,
,.---;«
Revised Manual for Prosecutors 155
I -t~(::-
".C.'_
,;;
,-
I ,
I
I
,
;
I 2. Any person who has participated in the commission of a crime and desires
• he has not at any time been convicted of any crime involving moral
I turpitude.
I 1. DISCONTINUANCE OF PROCEEDINGS
I J. PRESENTATION OF EVIDENCE
I
I
J 156 Revised Manual for Prosecutors
I
,
ill. PROCEDURE
Upon receipt of the notice of trial, the prosecutor shall review the record
of the case for trial and complete his preparation therefor bearing in mind that
trial, once commenced, may continue from day to day until terminated. He may,
however, move for postponement for a reasonable period oftime for good cause
(Sec. 2, par. 1, Rule 119, supra.).
3. Speedy Trial of Child Abuse cases - The trial of child abuse cases shall take
precedence over all other cases before the courts, except election and habeas
corpus cases. The trial in said cases shall commence within three (3) days
from the date. the accused is arraigned and no postponement of the initial
hearing shall be granted except on account of the illness of the accused or
other grounds beyond his control (Sec. 21, Rules and Regulations on the
Reporting and Investigation of Child Abuse Cases issued pursuant to Sec.
32 ofR. A. No. 7610, otherwise known as "the Child Abuse Act").
5. Under Administrative Code No. 104-96 of the Supreme Court, the cases
of kidnapping and/or kidnapping for ransom, robbery in band, robbery
committed against a banking or financial institution, violation of the Anti-
Carnapping Act of 1972 as amended, and Other Heinous Crimes (RA 7659)
committed within the respective terrirorial jurisdiction of the courts shall
,
(60) days from commencement of the trial.
B. ORDER OF TRIAL
Trial shall proceed in the following order pursuant to Sec. 11, Rule119 of
1. The prosecution shall present evidence to prove the charge and, in the proper
2. The accused may present evidence to prove his defense, and damages, if
any, arising from the issuance of any provisional remedy in the case.
Ii 3. The panies may then respectively present rebutting evidence only, unless
I
IH
4. Upon admission of the evidence, the case shall be deemed submitted for
decision unless the court directs the parties to argue orally or to submit
memoranda.
I 5. However, when the accused admits the act or omission charged in the
-I
Complaint or Information but interposes a lawful defense, the order of trial
may be modified accordingly.
J
C. PRESENTATION OF WITNESSES
I
!
form to the logical sequence of events obtaining in the case on trial in order to
present a clear, organized and coherent picture to the coun of the prosecution's
evidence.
Ii
drug subject of the case) and so that such evidence may be immediately identi-
fied by the other witnesses thus avoiding the recall of witnesses later on.
'I
I
The rule of logical sequencing notwithstanding, a witness whose testimony
is vital to the case and whose life is in danger or who may be sick/injured and
may possibly die should be made to testify as early as practicable.
I
I ,
I
D. CONDITIONAL EXAl\fiNATION OF WITNESS FOR THE
PROSECUTION
The trial prosecutor shall move for the conditional examination of a pros-
ecution witness who is too sick or infirm to appear at the trial or has to leave the
Philippines with no definite date of returning. Such examination shall be done
in the presence of the accused or in his absence after reasonable notice to attend
the examination has been served on him, shall be conducted in the same manner
as an examination at the trial. Failure or refusal on the part of the accused to
attend the examination after notice herein before provided shall be considered
'ie: a waiver (Sec. 15, Rule 119, Supra.).
i
~F~
E. CROSS-EXAlmNATION OF THE DEFENSE WITNESSES
The prosecutor shall endeavor to secure well in advance all available in-
formation about a defense witness in order to prepare for an effective cross-
examination. Where the testimony of a defense witness bears no effect on the
evidence of the prosecution, a cross-examination need not be conducted.
I
" ';;~
;.'r;,":<
R REBUTTAL EVIDENCE
The presentation and nature of rebuttal evidence will depend on the effect
which the defense evidence may have caused on the prosecution's evidence-in-
chief. The recall of a witness who already testified during the evidence-in-chief
presentation merely to refute what a defense witness may have stated during his
defense testimony is not generally rebuttal evidence. Where there is nothing to
I.;'
.';'.. :-..-".
refute, rebuttal evidence is unnecessary.
I· statement of accounts, etc.) prepared by him or by his office, the trial prosecutor
shall indicate the reference number of the report in the request for subpoena.
I
:
I'.
. . :.:.- -:»
H. CUSTODY OF PHYSICAL AND REAL EVIDENCE PENDING TRIAL
,I ',"
In keeping with the professional responsibility of the trial prosecutor, all the
physical and real evidence shall remain in custody with the police authorities
or other law enforcement officers. In those instances when the evidence is of
a perishable narure, the trial prosecutor shall ensure that measures are taken to
il provide for secondary evidence consisting of photographs, or pictures of the
physical and real evidence, which evidence shall be attached to the records of
f the case.
, " ..
.
~"-'-'
Revised Manuai for Prosecutors 159
III. RELEVANT JURISPRUDENCE
1. The general rule is that motions for postponement are granted only upon meritori-
ous ground and no party has the right to assume that his motion will be granted.
(De Guia v. Guerrero, Jr., 234 SCRA 625 [1994J);
2. Under Sec. 9, Rule 119 ofthe Revised Rules on Criminal Procedure, the petition-
ers have the burden of proving the factual basis of their motions for the dismissal
of the Informations on the ground of a denial of their right to a speedy trial and to
a speedy disposition of the cases against them. They were burdened to prove that
such delay caused by the prosecutor was vexatious, capricious or whimsical. On
.lj' the other hand, the prosecutor was burdened to present evidence to establish that
t the delay in the submission of his report on reinvestigation of the cases was rea-
sonably attributed to the ordinary process ofjustice, and that the accused suffered
no serious prejudice beyond that which ensued after an inevitable and ordinary
to delay. (Corpuz v. The Sandiganbayan, 442 SCRA 294 [2004J; Lumanlaw v. Judge
::ot' Edgardo Peralta, Jr; G. R. No. 164953, February 13, 2006);
I 3. The trial of an accessory can proceed without awaiting the result of the separate
charge against the principal. The corresponding responsibilities of the principal
I accomplice and accessory are distinct from each other. As long as the commis-
sion of the offense can be duly established in evidence, the determination of the
liability of the accomplice or accessory can proceed independently of that of the
principal. (Vino v. People, 178 SCRA 626.);
*I
'j :
I!
4. The right of two or more accused in a criminal case, to be tried separately is
essential and cannot be denied by the court (Sec. 33 of General Orders No. 58
(U. S. v. Torres, 62 Phil. 942). When a separate trial is demanded and granted,
I
it is the duty of the prosecution to repeat and produce all its evidence at each
and every trial, unless it had been agreed by the parties that the evidence for the
prosecution would not have to be repeated at the second trial and all the accused
~!
had been present during the presentation of the evidence for the prosecution and
their attorneys had had the opportunity to cross-examine the witnesses for the
prosecution who had testified, (people v. Carpio, 68 Phil. 490);
i
II' 5. The rule therefore, relative to the right of the government prosecutor to utilize
a person who has participated in the commission of a crime as a witness for the
prosecution is as follows:
I
i : a. when an offense is committed by more than one person, it is he duty of the
I
~ i
I'
prosecutor to include all of them in the Complaint or Information (Sec., Rule
110, Rules ofCourt);
I b. if the prosecutor desires to utilize one of those charged with the offense
as a government witness, the prosecutor may ask the court to discharge
c. there is nothing in the rule from which it can be inferred that before a person
can be presented as a government witness, hat he be first included as a co-
accused in the Information, for the prosecutor is free to produce as a witness
anyone whom he believes can testify to the truth of the crime charged (U.s. v.
Enriquez, 40 Phil. 603);
d. the failure to follow the requirements of the rule relative to the use of a per-
son, himselfparticeps criminis, as a government witness does not violate the
due process clause of the constitution, nor render his testimony ineffectual if
otherwise competent and admissible. (People v. Einsol, 100 Phil. 713.);
6. The discharge contemplated by the rule is one effected or which can be effected
at any stage of the proceedings, from the filing of the Information to the time the
defense starts to offer any evidence. (People v. Aninon, 158 SCRA 701);
7. The mere fact that the witness sought to be discharged had pleaded guilty to the
crime charged does not violate the rule that the discharged defendant must not
"appear to be the most guilty". And even if the witness should lack some of the
qualifications enumerated by Sec. 17, Rule 119, his testimony will not, for that
reason alone, be discarded or disregarded. (People v. De Leon, et. al. 108 Phil.
800 [1960);
8. The ground underlying the rule is not to let a crime that has been committed go
unpunished; so an accused who is not the most guilty is allowed to testify against
the most guilty, in order to achieve the greater purpose of securing the conviction
of the more or most guilty and the greatest number among the accused permitted
to be convicted for the offense committed. (People v.Bayona, et. al., 108 Phil.
104 [1960}). All the perpetrators of the offense bound in conspiracy are equally
guilty. (People v. Borja. 147 SeRA 169 [1987});
10. Meaning of "not the most guilty" is "not the least guilty" (People v. Court of
Appeals, 131 SCRA 107 [1984}). The rule does not require that he be the "least
guilty" but only that he not be "the most guilty". (People v. Faltado, 84 Phil.
89).
I,
,
3. In the National Capital Region, the appeals/petitions for review of the City
Prosecutors in cases falling under the jurisdiction of the Metropolitan Trial
I Courts, Municipal Trial Courts and Municipal Circuit Trial Courts shall be
filed with the Office of the Chief State Prosecutor. The resolution ofthe Chief
I tion of the Chief State Prosecutor and the Regional State Prosecutor notwith-
standing, the Secretary of Justice may, in the interest of justice and pursuant
to his residual authority of supervision and control over the prosecutors of
the Department of Justice, order the review by his office of the resolutions
I of the Chief State Prosecutor and the Regional State Prosecutors in the cases
appealed to the them.
I The appeal/petition for review must be filed within fifteen (15) days from
receipt of the questioned resolution by the party or his counselor if a motion
I for reconsideration has been filed, within fifteen (15) days from receipt of the
,
, 162 Revised Manuai for Prosecutors
J
resolution denying the motion for reconsideration. Only one (1) motion for re-
consideration shall be entertained.
D. FORMAl"ID CONTENTS
4. the specific material dates showing that it was filed on time; "
"
5. a clear and concise statement of the facts, the assignment of errors, and the
;·/;::- legal basis of the appeal/petition for review;
"'5"
1
';?·:"',
",\-
~r-:'- 6. proof of service of a copy/ies of the appeal/petition for review to the adverse
party/ies or counsel and the prosecution office concerned;
I
::.:;~~,
:""
',,.;>
7. proof of payment of the appeal fee
-
,
•
I
',,~c",-:
The investigating/reviewing/approving prosecutor shall not be impleaded as
appellee. The party taking the appeal shall be referred to in the appeal as either
"complainant-appellant" or "respondent-appellant".
I E. DOCUMENTARY ATTACHMENTS
,
,, Revised Manual for Prosecutors 163
1-:'
I
F. EFFECT OF FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS
I of the action of the court on the motion to defer proceedings. Failure of the
appellant to inform shall be a ground for the dismissal of the appeal/petition for
revrew,
I
H. WHEN ACCUSEDIAPPELLAi~TIS ARRAIGNED DURING PENDENCY
I OF APPEALIPETITION FOR REVIEW
When the accused is arraigned during the pendency ofthe appeal, the prosecu-
I tor concerned shall likewise immediately inform the Secretary of Justice/Chief
State Prosecutor/Regional State Prosecutor of such an arraignment.
I 1. APPELLEE'S COMMENT
I proof of service of the comment to the appellant. If no comment is filed, the case
shall be resolved on the basis of the appeal/petition.
I J. SUMMARY ACTION
I finally resolved, in which case the questioned resolution shall stand as if no ap-
peal/petition has been taken.
At any time after the filing of the appeal/petition and before its resolution,
the appellant/petitioner may file a motion for reinvestigation before the Office
of the Secretary of Justice! Office of the Chief State Prosecutor! Office of the
Regional State Prosecutor on the ground that new and material evidence has
been newly discovered which appellant/petitioner could not, with reasonable
diligence, have discovered during the preliminary investigation and which, if
produced and admitted, would probably change the resolution.
I
·; ::.~~~· 2. When an Information Has Been Filed in Court
s->:
·'t:,t·',-
If the case is pending appeal and an Information has been filed in court,
II~;~;~i?::
the appellant shall inform the court of the filing of a motion for reinvesti-
gation with the Office of the Secretary/Regional State Prosecutor and shall
ask the court to defer proceedings. The reinvestigation of the case shall be
I
·~ · conducted by the prosecution office from which the appeal was taken. (see
-'~;:~-.i;
Marcelo vs. CA., 235 SCRA 39 [1994]; Roberts vs, CA., 254 SCRA 207
I 1"-.: [1996]; Dimatulac vs. Vilon, 297 SCRA 679 [1998]; Solar Entertainment vs.
How, 338 SCRA 511 [2000]; Community Rural Bank ofGuimba vs. Talavera,
~.:-
,''-J,
o
.- ,.:.~. 455 SCRA 34 [2005])
I' The Office of the Secretary or the Office of the Regional State Prosecutor,
as the case may be, shall then issue a resolution directing the reinvestigation
of the case, if stiillegally feasible. When reinvestigation is granted, it shall
I
I
I take place in the Office of the Prosecutor from which the petition was taken.
II
I
2. that the offense has prescribed;
I I
4. that the procedure or requirements herein prescribed have not been complied
with;
I
I
. I' .
Revised Manual for Prosecutors 165
!I
-
I 5. that the questioned resolution is interlocutory in nature, except when it sus-
6. that the accused had already been arraigned when the appeal/petition for re-
I view was taken, or was arraigned during the pendency of the appeal/petition;
or,
The aggrieved party may file with the offices concerned, a motion for recon-
I sideration within a non-extendible period of fifteen (15) days from receipt of the
resolution on the petition/appeal.
I He/She shall:
I I. furnish the adverse party or his counsel and the prosecution offices concerned
with copies thereof;
I The appeal/petition for review shall not prevent the filing of the Information
in court unless the Secretary of Justice/ Chief State Prosecutor/Regional State
Pending the resolution of the appeal/petition for review, the accused may
I move before the court for the suspension of the proceedings, to hold in abeyance
the issuance of a warrant of arrest and the deferment of his arraignment.
I ficer had done in the performance ofhis duties and to substitute the judgment of the
former for that of the latter. The power of control implies the right of the President
J
"
f
Ji-
ii!'
#:t
c_'Y
(and naturally of his/her alter ego) to interfere in the exercise of such discretion as
I
'~';:
::~~; may be vested by law in the officers of the national government, as well as act in
:--~~ : lieu of such officers (Noblejas v. Sales, 67 SCRA 47).
I 3. The DOJ Order allows the filing of an Information in court after the consumma-
tion of the preliminary investigation even if the accused can still exercise the right
to seek review of the prosecutor's recommendation with the Secretary of Justice
4. There is nothing in Crespo v. Mogul, 151 SCRA 462 [1987] which bars the DOJ
I from taking cognizance of an appeal, by way of a petition for review, by an ac-
cused in a criminal case from an unfavorable ruling of the investigating prosecutor.
It merely advised the DOJ to, "as far as practicable, refrain from entertaining a
I petition for review or appeal from the action of the prosecutor, when the Complaint
or Information has already been filed in Court (Marcelo v. Court ofAppeals, 235
SCRA 39 [1994J). Reiterated in the case of Community Rural Bank of Guimba v,
I Talavera, 455 SCRA 34 [2005}).
5. Petitioners were not barred from appealing from the resolution holding that only
I homicide was committed, considering that their complaint was for murder. By
holding that only homicide was committed, the Provincial prosecutor's Office of
I - ~"
bias in favor of the accused (Dimatulac v. Villon, 297 SCRA 679).
I. (de Ocampo v. Secretary ofJustice, G. R. No. 147932, Jan. 25, 2006 citing Memo.
'"':;-
i:ti,~:
Circular No. 58, citing Dee v. CA, 238 SCRA 254).
I
- ~~~_:
;L'~'_ -
-
I PART XI. MISCELLA1~OUS MATTERS
I To ensure that those accused of criminal offenses will not evade prosecution and
punishment by leaving abroad during the pendency of criminal proceedings, trial
I prosecutors are directed, pursuant to DOJ Circular No. 38 dated 15 August 1990, to
move for the issuance by the court of a Hold Departure Order (HDO) (please refer to
NPS Sample Format "C" onp. 294 ofthis Manual) against the accused and for the
I I Bureau of Immigration to implement the same in the following cases;
I 2. Crimes against public order (e.g. rebellion, sedition, etc.) defined and penalized
in the Revised Penal Code;
I 5. Violations of Sees, 3601 to 3603, inclusive, and Secs. 3605 to 3610, inclusive of
the Tariff and Customs;
II 6. Bank frauds and frauds against public treasury and other crimes involving eco-
nomic sabotage.
In cases where the accused has jumped bail and fled to another country, the trial
I prosecutor shall immediately report (please refer to NPS Sample Format "D-l " on
p. 296 this Manual) to the Chief State ProsecutorlRegional State/Provincial/City
I Prosecutor who shall, with the approval of the Secretary of Justice (please refer to
NPS Sample Format "D-2" on p. 297 ofthis Manual), make appropriate representa-
tions with the Department of Foreign Affairs for the cancellation of the accused's
I passport and other travel documents so as to make the accused an undocumented alien
in the host country and thereby made subject to deportation and is being considered
as a fugitive from justice.
I
I
J 168 Revised Manual for Prosecutors
J
-
In addition to DOl Circular No. 26 dated July 3, 2008 (please refer to Appendix
"G" on p. 313 ofthis Manual), the following guidelines shall also be observed in the
investigation and prosecution of cases against public officers and employees pursuant
I
' X~ to OMB-DOJ Circular No. 95-001, series of 1995, to wit:
.':','":
It
1. Preliminary investigation and prosecution of offenses committed by public
officers and employees in relation to their office, whether cognizable by the
Sandiganbayan or the regular courts and whether filed with the Office of the
Ombudsman or with the office of the Provincial/City Prosecutor shall be under
,
',
:'::;'-:
-~
otherwise, offenses which are not in relation to office and cognizable by the regu-
lar courts shall be investigated and prosecuted by the Office of the Provincial/City
Prosecutor which shall rule thereon with finality.
I The court shall notify the trial prosecutor of the filing of an application for the
grant of probation filed by a defendant after conviction and sentencing but before
I
J Revised Manual for Prosecutors 169
I',: e-
----
I B. RELEASE OF APPLICANT FOR PROBATION
I Pending resolution of the application for probation, the accused may be re-
leased on temporary liberty under his bail filed in the criminal case. In case no
I bail was filed or if the defendant is not capable of:filingone, the court may release
the defendant on recognizance to the custody of a responsible member of the
community who shall guarantee his appearance whenever required by the court
I (Sec. 5, ibid.).
I
in the following instances:
r
I
1. ifthe defendant fails to comply with any of the following criteria for the grant
of probation: I
}
a. the offender is in need of correctional treatment that can be provided most l
i
I effectively by his commitment to an institution; or
b. there is undue risk that during the period of probation, the offender will
I PD 968).
3. if the application is filed after an appeal from the conviction is perfected (Sec.
I 4, ibid.) or,
I b. convicted of an offense against the security of the state under the Revised
Penal Code, to wit:
~~~
7. Art. 120 (Corresponding with hostile country);
I:~·./';"
:~0~!
9. Art. 122 (Piracy in general and mutiny on the high seas);
I I·
:;,~{~;.i
",·'c
..
ije,-,-
:~,,,,. ,~
10. Art. 123 (Qualified piracy)
If
: ...' ':.-
c. who has been previously convicted by final judgment of an offense pun,
ishable by imprisonment of not less than one (1) month and one (1) day
I··" and/or a fine of not more than Two Hundred Pesos (php200.00);
d. who has once been on probation under Presidential Decree No. 968 (Sec.
I I'-. _:.~
,'-',''>
9, PD 968).
1 The defendant may be admitted to bail pending such hearing. In such a case,
the provisions regarding release on bail of persons charged with a crime shall be
I· V.
applicable to the defendant (Sec 15, ibid., as amended by PD 1257)
I A. INQUEST PROCEEDINGS
The presence of the child during the inquest proceedings shall not be re-
I quired unless his statement is found wanting in material or substantial details
and it is considered necessary to have him further examined, in which event
the inquest prosecutor shall:
I
I Revised Manual for Prosecutors 171
1
-
,* a. give the case first priority;
, b.'
c.
have the proceedings conducted as far as practicable in the Provincial/
City Prosecutor's Office during regular office hours;
conduct the examination of the child in the presence and with the as-
~
d. ensure against undue and sensationalized publicity, especially where the
charge involves a crime against chastity (please refer to Appendix "H"
on Guidefor Media Practitioners on the Reportage ofChildren s Cases
on p. 316 ofthis Manual);
I I
I• e. see to it that the child is not subjected to any form of harassment or
undue influence from any party, particularly in cases where the alleged
I offender is the child's parents, guardian, custodian, or one who has of-
I
ficial, moral, sociai or financial ascendancy over the child;
f. take down the name, address, age and date of birth of the child, as well
·
; as the name and address of the child's parents, guardian or custodian,
I
;
g. not to countenance the withdrawal/dismissal of the case in the course
of the inquest proceedings unless made with the express conformity or
consent of the child and the latter's parent/s, guardian, custodian or au-
I
I
thorized representative. In case of conflict, the child's wish or decision
shall prevail.
I
I
2. If the Child is the Suspect
I The inquest prosecutor shall determine the age of the child on the basis
of:
I a. documentary proof such as, but not limited to, birth certificates, baptismal
I If the child is fifteen (15) years of age or under, the complaint shall be
dismissed immediately.
I
J 172 Revised Manual for Prosecutors
J
~::,
Ifct
"~
''':.-
I
::~-~·~'
;,,~,
If the child is over fifteen (15) but under eighteen (18) years of age,
~~;
the inquest prosecutor shall determine whether or not the former acted with
discernment in committing the act complained of and ifhe finds that the chiid
therein the dismissal of the case and the immediate release of the child
from custody;
1:.,- 2. submit the same to the Provincial/City Prosecutor or the Chief of the
I:~::'-: Inquest Division, as the case may be, for aopropriate action; and,
r'·:'
[ -.
I
~:,:;..- ,
3. pending approval/disapproval of his recommendation, cause the child
to be placed under the custody of the DSWD or other authorized person
or entity;
I Ifthe inquest prosecutor finds that the child acted with discernment,
he shall proceed in accordance with the rules and procedure established
I·
,..-.}:'
City Prosecutor during regular office hours;
b. see to it that the child is accompanied and assisted by the parents, guard-
I:
,<y~
ian, custodian and/or authorized representative;
I e. take care that the child is not subjected to any form ofcoercion, harassment
or undue influence from any party wielding parental, custodial, official,
I moral, social or financial ascendancy over the child;
f. in no case employ any form of deceit or false promises during the investi-
I gation process; and,
I B. PRELlMINARY INVESTIGATIONS
• When the child, the parent or guardian does not agree to diversion;
I • When diversion is not appropriate for the child, after considering the .assess-
I •
ment and recommendation of the social worker; and
When the child fails to comply with the terms and conditions of the contract
Upon serving the subpoena and the affidavit of complaint, the prosecutor
I shall notify the Public Attorneys Office (PAO) of such service as well as personal
information and place of detention of the child (Sec. 33, chapter 3. RA 9344).
I a. conduct the examination of the child in the presence and with the
assistance of his/her parentis, guardian, custodian and/or authorized
I d. make sure that the name, address, age and date of birth of the child,
as well as the name and address of the parentis, guardian or custo-
dian are dilly reflected in the record of the case.
b. see to it that the fundamental rights of the child are fully protected
and safeguarded;
c. take care that any party wielding parental, custodial, official, moral,
social or financial ascendancy over the child does not subject the
latter to any form of coercion, harassment or undue influence;
e. make sure that the name, address, age and date of birth of the child,
as well as the name and address of the parent/s, guardian or custo-
dian are duly reflected in the record of the case.
The child shall be placed under the protective custody of the Social Welfare
and Development or other accredited NGOs pending inquest and/or preliminary
investigation proceedings.
I
VI. PROCEDURE INVOLVING VICTIMS OF TRAFFICKING IN PERSONS
I AND VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN Al'!D THEIR CHILDREN
The procedures for conducting the inquest proceedings and preliminary inves-
I tigations prescribed in this Manual shall be applied in cases involving trafficking
in persons and violence against women and their children. In addition, the follow-
ing performance standards for prosecution services developed by the DOJ and the
I NCRFW shall be observed:
I A. PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION
The prosecutor shall make sure that the complainant is informed of the
I rights under RA 9208 and RA 9262, the legal procedures on preliminary in-
vestigation, the crimes charged and the benefits under the witness protection
program for trafficking cases and victims' compensation program.
I
GUIDELJNES:
I 1. The complainant is informed that she can request for a female pros-
ecutor or a prosecutor she is comfortable with and if so requested, the
I complainant is provided with one.
I 6. The prosecutor shall refer the complainant for medical and neuro-
psychological examination for possible health problems (e.g. malnu-
I trition, STD, signs of rape, bruising, broken bones, critical illness,
, 176
post-traumatic stress disorders).
J-
7. All case-related documentation are properly obtained, reviewed and
keptconiidential.
-t;
li~;,
8. The facilities used during the interview should be safe to ensure con-
fidentiality:
i~
~~,_0r::
b.
c.
The interview rooms are secured, i.e. locked to ensure privacy.
I"X'
"~:· chairs, a table, and documentation equipment such as a com-
,~(~'
puter, a recorder or a typewriter.
"-,,-
~I'
'::{'-
9, The prosecutor shall not allow the media to gain access to any infor-
mation regarding the victim/ survivor. (An adult victim, however,
I
~~ ~~~·~ : ~ may choose to speak with the media, preferably with the assistance of
-~':
,"'.
,'.
her counsel.) The prosecutor does not disclose the name and personal
circumstances of both parties or any other information that might
reveal their identity to the media or the public, or take any action that
I ~.I>' -
might compromise their privacy.
"
I
13. The preliminary investigation should be terminated and resolved in
the earliest possible time.
I TO CHECK
The prosecutor, as far as practicable, should check the conduct of the sur-
, tors conduct the necessary surveillance for sex trafficking cases. e.g. in massage
parlors, bar strips, modeling studios, escort services).
l.~
~ ·· ,~,· : ·
.>'.•
-'~t--:
..
C. PROSECUTION GUIDELINES:
3. As far as practicable, the trial of the case should be handled by one and
the same prosecutor.
B. COVERAGE
Only petitions for certiorari under Rule 65 of the Revised Rules of Court
which are to be filed before the Supreme Court or the Court of Appeals may be
acted upon by the Office of the Chief State Prosecutor.
The petition shall be filed with the Supreme Court or the Court ofAppeals not
later than sixty (60) days from notice of the judgment order/resolution. In case
a motion for reconsideration or new trial is timely filed, whether such motion
is required or not, the sixty (60) day period shall be counted from notice of the
denial of said motions.
;'-' '' I. Draft a petition clearly stating the facts of the case, and the law and juris-
1'~~~:.-,,-
I"
{iii}::':
~,
prudence applicable in support thereof. The petition shall contain a verified
statement of the date when notice of the judgment, order or resolution subject
thereof was received, when a motion for reconsideration, if any, was filed and
when notice of the denial thereof was received.
I_.t":.'
'~
..,~,,>-h
'-'
I ,,'. "
1 .;'~i<
c·· ...." -
The certified true copy must be accompanied by a certification accom-
plished by the proper clerk of court or by his duly authorized representative
1:/ or by the proper officer of the court, tribunal, board commission or office
involved, or by his duly authorized representative.
,",',
.-;(';
NOTE: Certification by the parties themselves, their counsel, or any
I -,\:-'
)"-:-
---,',.' .
.other person shall not be allowed.
I "
,
: ::.'t(
,''','' Certification under oath must be appended to the draft petition stating that
the requesting prosecutor has not commenced any other action or proceeding
involving the same issued in the Supreme Court, the Court ofAppeals, or any
I other tribunal or agency.
•
" case record, trial brief outlining proceedings of case, documentary evidence
''''
certified copies of decision to be elevated.
'7."
, ',-'"., 2. Forward the draft petition to the Office of the Chief State Prosecutor for
evaluation within fifteen (15) days from receipt of the assailed decision or
I ,.'"
order/judgment, with a request that the same be endorsed to the Office of the
Solicitor General.
1. If the Chief State Prosecutor finds no merit in the request to file a petition for
I certiorari, he denies the request and informs the head of office of the request-
ing trial prosecutor of such denial.
I:
I,,,,; Revised Manual for Prosecutors 179
I
"
'~ ::'~'-:,
. (fj;-
~_:;;,
-~: ..
I
2. If he finds merit in the petition, he shall endorse the draft petition together
I with the attachments within ten (10) days from receipt of the draft petition, to
the Office of the Solicitor General for appropriate action.
1. EVIDENCE REQUIRED
I a For the first and second modes of violation of Sec. 77 (Cutting, gathering
and/or collecting timber or other forest products without license), the fol-
I lowing pieces of evidence are crucial:
• Inventory and tally sheet, stand and stock table of timber or forest
I products destroyed and the corresponding forest charges to be used as
basis in imposing penalty;
J
180 Revised Manual for Prosecutors
J
• Damaged forest land due to indiscriminate setting on fire of forest
land' by the violator;
I
ments, equipment and tools such as power saws, hand saws, bolos and
digging tools such as shovels, grub hoes, rakes, etc.;
• Fallen trees, logs, lumber, flitches and other woody parts of damaged
1
"'~1:';~ vegetation; and
~,{:";'-
7/::-::
-'i~;'\;~~-:
I;
:I~F "f e- ,: .
c. For violation of Sec. 80 (Pasturing livestock), the following are required:
'-
1 Z':'::: .
~-;- --
• Implements and instruments used in the survey of the area involved;
"lifi5,'~'. • Survey report and sketch plan of the surveyed area by the investigat-
ing officer;
.~?'~-
I forest land
I 2. POINTERS
I ruling of the Supreme Court in PP vs. Martin S. Simon (OR No. 93028, July
29, 1994; 234 SCRA 555), such circumstance of recidivism or reiteracion
should be alleged.
I The prosecutor should also consider the outcome of the administrative
adjudication proceedings for violation of Sec. 77 in determining probable
I cause. The prosecutor may request for additional evidence obtained during
administrative adjudication proceedings.
I
I
I
, 182 Revised Manuai for Prosecutors
J
B. TOXIC SUBSTANCES AND HAZARDOUS WASTE ACT (RA 6969)
1. EVIDENCE REQUIRED
1. EVIDENCE REQUIRED
1. EVIDENCE REQUIRED
1. POINTER
1. POINTER'
F
;,;:~ ·
:}:~'- The applicable procedures in criminal prosecution for violation of RA
j~"
9003 is Rule XIX (Administrative and Enforcement Procedures) ofDAO No.
2001-34 (IRR ofRA 9003).
1"<~
G. WILDLIFE CONSERVATION AND PROTECTION ACT (RA9147)
1. EVIDENCE REQUIRED
-:-"F;~:'
I,·
--_.~(-
a. Useful pieces of evidence in the prosecution of violators of Sec. 27, par-
ticularly the killing of wildlife:
I
·~~-
'--~
• Certificate from the DENR or Protected Areas and Wildlife Bureau
(PAWB) that the animal is a wildlife; and
b. On inflicting injury:
d. Trading of wildlife:
I
_
--
:'-.>!;
e. Transporting of wildlife:
_
1
-
1 a-.
", t/"'
?;.-
----
I
• Certification from the DENR as to the classification of the concerned
I •
wildlife; and
Certification from the DENR that no corresponding permit was given
to the violator for the concerned activity.
I f. Maltreating and/or inflicting other injuries not covered by the preceding
paragraph:
I • Certification from the DENR as to the classification of the concerned
I •
wildlife; and
Affidavit of a witness who saw the act of maltreatment or in:llicting
injury to the wildlife.
I • Certification from the DENR or PAWB that the place where the con-
cerned act is done is within a critical habitat in accordance with RA
7586 or the NIPAS Act or designated as such in accordance with Sec.
I 23 ofRA 9147.
I • Certification from the DENR that no permit was given to the violator
for the concerned activity.
I k. Gathering or destroying of active nests, nest trees, host plants, and the
like:
I
;
186 Revised Manual for Prosecutors
I
;
• Certification from the DENR that no permit was given to the violator
for the concerned activity.
H. CHAlNSAWACT (RA9175)
1. EVIDENCE REQUIRED
• Chain saw;
• Deed of Sale, Sales Invoice, Official Receipt, Deed of Assignment,
and other pertinent documents;
• Invalid or expired Certificate of Registration;
• Affidavit of the apprehending/investigating officer.
• Chain saw;
• Import documents;
• Certification from the DENR Registering Office that the importer or
manufacturer has no permit;
• Affidavit of apprehending/investigating officer.
• Prosecutors should be made aware that there is also an administrative
adjudication aspect, following DAO No. 97-32.
1. EVIDENCE REQUIRED
I
-
.
·W
J
B. DUTIES OF THE PROSECUTOR
1. Upon receipt of the complaint filed by the Avll.C pursuant to Sec. 7 (4) of the
AMLA, the prosecutor shall conduct the requisite preliminary investigation;
IR~:::~
· · ' ·~ that a money laundering offense has been committed, recommend for the fil-
ing of an Information before the Regional Trial Coun;
?~"--
f~t 3. Once the filing of an Information in court has been approved by the head of
Ijt:.~ L
!~:,:;:.-.
office, prepare for the trial for the money laundering offense in close coordi-
nation with the AMLC official who file the complaint.
11- ?~-
4. During the trial of the case, prove by evidence beyond reasonable doubt all
elements of every money laundering offense under Sec. 4 of the AMLA,
,,;.
',:.',-''''-'',' need be established by proof beyond reasonable doubt since the elements of
the offense of money laundering are separate and distinct from the elements
I ::
~:-::<
of the felony or offense constituting the unlawful activity. (Rule 6.7, ibid).
" ,c.
r-
... ,-
"'
I
' :,"
(- .
I
~-
<,.
- ie,.,
i~~:':i"~~;,
t,~-
I
~i
','1(;
",:2~:
~al~:
Revised Manual for Prosecutors 189
',~
' ..
- - - - - - - - -
I
I
I
I
I
I
,I
;I
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I
I
I
J 190 Revised Manual for Prosecutors
J
I
I~:r
;~~
t:
I ~:'
--~
Special Section on
II Prosecuting Human Rights Violations
I
I
II
II
II
I
I
I
I
I >.;;
I,
¥f Revised Manual for Prosecutors 191
l
'~{-,
.
'-'>"..'
" '~~""
sc,
I
Special Section on
I Prosecuting Human Rights Violations
and Providing.Available Remedies Therefor
I
1. IN GENERAL
I A. STRUCTURE
I The first part of this section will identify the particular human rights violation
in focus, then proceed to outline how the Public Prosecutor can deal with it using
available remedies in substantive and procedural criminal law.
I The second part of this section will identify generic remedies available under
substantive law that may be resorted to and employed in the process 'of seeking
I redress to human rights violations. However, since these provisions are few and
perform only a largely compensatory function, we have to tum to the larger field
of substantive and procedural criminal law to be able to fully address the conse-
I quences of the violation and provide the victim with the full coterie of remedies
designed to vindicate the rights violated.
I B. SUMMATIVE CHECKLIST
1. STEP ONE. How do you know that a human rights violation has been com-
I mitted?
I • If the violator is an agent of the State, then the Bill of Rights is more
applicable, because the limitations set forth therein are addressed to
I the exercise of governmental powers and prerogatives.
,
basic characteristics of human rights is that they are of such fundamental
character that anyone can readily acknowledge their inherence in every
• They involve a wanton violation ofthe integrity ofthe human person :s-
body.
It
--:~~r"~:;_-
contend with the lifelong agony of not knowing what became of their
loved ones, and not even having the opportunity to give them a decent
buriaL This kind of suffering adds an entirely new layer of evil to
I;{: what would otherwise be a plain case ofdeprivation oflife and liberty.
Deliberately withholding information regarding the whereabouts of
a person invoiuntarily disappeared makes the loss of a loved one as-
I~, sume an entirely different dimension.
.
',:,
~;
I:
.~'"
relatives of the dead should have the opportunity to bury their dead
I with dignity. When a wrongful act deprives a human person of what is
I':· due him! her according to the minimum standards inherently ingrained
in everyone's sense of humanity, then there is an assault against fun-
.. :,' damental human rights.
I
I···
,
1 ~1.'
Revised Manual for Prosecutors 193
, .<."
~<
,l
I
2. STEP TWO. How do you prove that there has been a human rights viola-
tion?
*I
l
sustained immediately prior to, or contemporaneous with, the point of
death)
• Psychiatric and psychological evaluations (for mental, emotional, and
i psychological trauma on the part of the victim and his! her relatives)
• Affidavits of witnesses (focusing on the circumstances that would qualify
I an act as a human rights violation, as discussed above)
I • avail of the right of visitation of, and conference with, counsel that
is granted to every detainee or person under. custodial investigation.
Torture or other forms of persecution can speedily be discovered and
I •
addressed through this means.
utilize inquest proceedings so that violations of human rights can
already be disclosed early on.
I • bring to the attention of the court actual knowledge, or well-founded
suspicion of torture or other forms of human rights violations. The
courts, under Administrative Matter No. MTJ 90-4001 have the posi-
I tive duty to "proceed with caution" during trial whenever allegations
of violations of the fundamental rights of the accused are brought to
I •
their attention.
gather information through the usual channels of inquiry, taking into
account whether or not information being sought is:
i
i
'I
I~
,
~.
194 Revised Manual for Prosecutors
1. open to public access, or
2. privileged, or
3. withheld from the public by reason of national security, etc.
1. proper parties,
2. required allegations, and
3. remedies prayed for
For example:
In these cases, the paramount remedy is to seek redress for the violation
that has already been committed. This can be done through:
I themselves. However, this does not mean that these violations cannot
be prosecuted; they can and should be prosecuted, only they have to
be couched in existing criminal law terms, provided all their elements
I are obtaining.
I For example:
I and expulsion
I ecutors and where human rights violations are recognized at the outset,
acknowledged accordingly in the Information, and equated when possible
to existing aggravating circumstances.
I
, 196 Revised Manuai for Prosecutors
For example:
I
"~~: conflict or hostilities can be considered aggravated when "commit-
:fl'",
~~ . ";:., ted on the occasion of a calamity or misfortune".
I,-,
;~M • "Liquidations" and other "salvagings" on account of political perse-
cution, which often lead to extralegal killings, should be considered
.:.:~i-:-_' clearly as products of "evident premeditation" because the plan
-~."d&~:."- and mode of such attacks are almost always contemplated ahead of
1 _t~_'::
f,,'
""~'--": •
time.
If torture is conducted with the victim's hands and feet tied (or
'·,:~: where the victim is physically restrained in any manner), or where
I ~t
":i~~
the victim was forcibly drugged, and if such torture is conducted by
numerous people in succession or simultaneously, would aggravate
the felony by "taking advantage of superior strength" and "with
means employed to weaken the defense".
• The prevalent practice of "salvagings" conducted in a swift manner,
under circumstances where the victim will be caught unaware and
unable to defend him! herself, is evidentiary of "alevosia".
,f~J_~_)_ • Murder involving physical and psychological torture (e.g., forcing
I : ,~ the victim to ingest human excreta, torturing the victim while naked,
-.~-~, .. electrocution of the genitalia) can rightfully be classified as aggra-
'-"
'."::.o.
vated by "ignominy" and! or "cruelty".
J - ,ie,
.~.' -
The ideal, of course, is for "violation of human rights" to somehow find
"'·':,'·, its way to the exclusive list of aggravating circumstances in the Revised
I;;:· ,.::'
':",-"
Penal Code. However, while such proposition still awalts legislative adop-
tion, it has been shown that there are ways by which the prosecutor can
interject human rights violations in the consideration of the nature of the
'- An Information that is complete and correct in substance and in form will
not be invalidated simply because it supplied other information apart from
1 t that usually seen in such processes. It is a vindication ofhuman rights vio-
lations where they are acknowledged and recognized in the Information,
I for then the courts can be better apprised of the exact quality of evil that
attended the commission of the felony, beyond its essential elements.
1-
"I
'"
'-',' ~
"":
Revised Manual for Prosecutors 197
--------- - -
I
, Consider the following:
I "That onor about the 8th day ofApril, 2008, in the Municipality
of Donsol, Sorsogon, Philippines, and within the jurisdic-
"CONTRARY TO LAW.
iI "Donsol, Sorsogon, Philippines, April 8, 2008."
,I While the above Information recites all the essential elements of murder, it
also went further to allege other facts that clearly paint the accurate picture
II of the felony - that is, through the violation of the fundamental human right
not to be subjected to torture and other cruel, inhuman, and degrading treat-
ment. In those cases where the judge is given enough latitude to pronounce
II the proper penalty to be imposed (as in the case of the application of the
Indeterminate Sentence Law), these facts can and should be given adequate
consideration.
I A. BACKGROUND
,I Definition
I III, Sec. 12, pars. 2. 3 and 4; Art. III, Sec. 19, pars. 1 and 2).
1. Unconstitutionality
The first thing that a prosecutor must bear in mind is that torture is un-
constitutional. Article ill, Sec. 12 (2), of the 1987 Constitution provides that
"no torture, force, violence, threat, intimidation, or any other means, which
vitiate the free will shall be used against [a person under investigation]. Secret
detention places, solitary, incommunicado, or other similar forms of detention
are prohibited.
Also, Article ill, Sec. 19, of the 1987 Constitution provides that "the
employment ofphysical, psychological, or degrading punishment against any
prisoner or detainee or the use of substandard or inadequate penal facilities
under subhuman conditions shall be dealt with by law."
a. Legal basis.
Under the Revised Penal Code, the prosecutor may proceed against
perpetrators of torture directly. The most parallel provision related to
torture is Maltreatment of Prisoners. A victim, if tortured while under
custody of public officers as a prisoner, can file a criminal action under
Article 235, which punishes a public officer who maltreats a prisoner
either for the purpose of extracting a confession or who oversteps the
bounds of his/her authority over a prisoner on his/her custody either by
inflicting punishments not prescribed by regulations or by inflicting pre-
scribed punishments but in a cruel or humiliating manner. For cases of
torture committed against persons under investigation, this is the most
direct remedy.
I •
prisoner under his charge, or
I
i
prisoner under his charge, through:
I tions;
I
I
cruel and humiliating manner;
J
, 200 Revised Manual for Prosecutors
b. Serious. Less Serious, or Slight Physical Injuries (Art. 263, 265, and 266,
Revised Penal Code)
• Offender is a man:
• Offender had carnal knowledge of a woman;
• Such act is accomplished under any of the following circum-
stances:
2. Object rape
I •
him of his liberty;
The act of kidnapping or detention is illegal;
• The crime is committed without the attendance of any of the
I circumstances enumerated under Kidnapping and Serious illegal
Detention.
I authority of law or the right to do so, or in other words, that the re-
straint shall not be made under authority of law or in the exercise of
any lawful right.
, 204
ofmurder, or by that of parricide or infanticide.
J
.,,' j. Murder (Art. 248, Revised Penal Code) or Homicide (Art. 249, Revised
d '" Penal Code)
I 'N-
_~i:?" 1. If the victim actually dies as a result of the torture, then an action
for murder or for homicide may be brought before, the courts by the
I
;~~ heirs of the deceased assisted by the Prosecutors or Public Attorneys,
:',ict alleging the following elements:
f1-·:;- *:.::'.-.
::;;:;
•
•
•
A person was killed;
Accused killed him;
The killing was attended by any of the following qualifying cir-
cumstances:
•
't -,
I~
o In consideration of a price, reward or promise;
o By means of inundation, fire, poison, explosion, shipwreck,
-"'':,'',;.
":,':'."-
srranding of a vessel, derailment or assault upon a railroad, fall
0 ,, - of an airship, by means ofmotorvehicies, or with the use of any
1 ::,'::-,'
":A-,-
-c.•
'!'.;.
o
other means involving great waste and ruin;
On occasion ofany ofthe calamities enumerated in the preceding
"C paragraph, or of an earthquake, eruption of a volcano, destruc-
I -"-.
-.;"
o
tive cyclone, epidemic, or any other public calamity;
With evident premeditation;
I ,.-~ .
o With cruelty, by deliberately and inhumanly augmenting the
suffering of the victim, or outraging or scoffing at his person or
corpse.
1'
, ."
In all these cases, however, the prosecution of torture takes a more circuitous
route, not to mention the fact that it would be harder to meet the quantum of
evidence required to sustain a conviction on all grounds taken individually. It
f would, however, be better to institute these actions in vindication of the rights
of the victim rather than allow the act of torture to go unpunished and not to
pursue it in lieu of the "main" action in the case (e.g., the victim is charged with
I the crime of theft but was tortured while in detention - chances are the defense
will just concentrate on proving Innocence of the accused in the crime of theft
I
,I ~\\r:.
-,..... Revised Manual for Prosecutors 205
I.
'~
I
I 4. Prosecution under the Human Security Act (RA 9372)
I Under the Human Security Act, the following acts shall not be employed dur-
ing the investigation/ interrogation of a person detained for the crime ofterrorism
I or conspiracy to commit terrorism:
• Threat
I •
•
Intimidation
Coercion
• Acts which wI71 inflict any form ofphysical pain or torment, or mental,
I moral, or psychological pressure, or which shall vitiate the detained
person's free-will
I If the above acts were shown to have been committed, the evidence obtained
from said detained person resulting from such threat, intimidation, or coercion, or
I I More importantly, the person or persons proven to have committed the above
acts will be penalized under Sec. 25 of the Human Security Act in this wise:
I imprisonment.
Since the act of torture, as discussed above, may take the form or include
I punishable acts like illegal or arbitrary detention; unjust imprisonment or deten-
tion; or the infliction of various physical, emotional, or psychological injuries,
I then torture as a consequence can be made a ground for a claim under the Victim
Compensation Act (RA 7309), as well as an independent action for damages
J
under Article 32 of the Civil Code, particularly on the ground of violation of the
freedom against cruel and unusual punishment and the freedom from arbitrary or
illegal detention. '
Under the 1987 Constitution (Article III, Sec. 12 (3), one of the most
paramount procedural rule that the prosecutor should remember is that any
confession or admission obtained from a person under investigation through
torture shall be inadmissible in evidence against him. This principle of the
Constitution partakes of a Rule of Exclusion that, in contemplation of the
Rules of Court (particularly the Rules on Evidence).
The prosecutor must be prudent enough to confer with the client in con-
fidence and in a manner and within an atmosphere that would inspire trust so
that the possibility of such confession or admission being obtained through
torture can be -eIiminated with certainty, Oftentimes, the case of the prosecu-
tion can rise and fall with the admission into evidence of the defendant's
admission or confession, It is therefore imperative that torture be ruled out in
such cases to avoid a miscarriage ofjustice,
,,~,,~~~~'
I :.: ....
,.."-:,-
'-,.-,-.,<
, i...,:
arrest and the propriety of keeping an accused under detention also has the
responsibility of seeing to it that the process of arrest and custodial investiga-
tion (which commences immediately at the point of arrest) is not vitiated by
l ~'--:
.'7'-
;~~"
acts oftorture and other forms ofmaltreatment. The Prosecutor must ascertain
this by posing questions to the accused under such circumstances as to render
"r:·
"f/p
the query effective; it cannot be undertaken in a manner that would defeat the
I intention of the law (e.g, in the presence of arresting officers from which an
accused claiming torture can reasonably fear retaliation).
I~,-':
recommendation tinding lack of probable cause, on the ground that a confes-
sion extracted through torture or acts tantamount to it is inadmissible in evi-
dence. This is without prejudice to the institution ofproper actions to proceed
against the perpetrators of torture.
What if torture, up until the point where the case goes to trial, remains
undetected? Or if torture has been resorted to only at that point most
proximate to the trial date where the accused is set to testify and must
therefore be intimidated?
What does "extra caution" entail? This would entail the judge's taking
an active role in the ascertainment of the veracity of the claim of torture
or in the assurance that statements given in open court were not the result
of torture, even if no claim to that effect was raised. Whenever an admis-
sion or confession is introduced in evidence, the judge should personally
satisfy himselfthat such were voluntarily given and not extracted through
force or intimidation.
In the 1964 criminal case of People v. Castro, the Supreme Court im-
posed upon judges and prosecutors, to whom persons accused are brought
for swearing to the truth of their statements, the obligation to adopt the
practice of having confessants physically and thoroughly examined by
independent and qualified doctors before administering the oath, even if it
is not requested by the accused.
It is therefore the duty of the judge to examine the candor of the ac-
cused and look for tell-tale signs of torture even if no allegation of such
was made. In addition, the judge must not confine himlherselfwith mere
physical manifestations evidencing or indicating the possibility of tor-
ture.
In Chaw Yaw Shun, the Supreme Court acknowledged that the mere
absence of external injury in the confessor's body does not destroy or
rule out any claim of maltreatment bv the use of other scientific modes or
forms of torture. Vigilance, therefore, should be exercised by the judge in
ascertaining that torture was notcommitted, whether or not such commis-
sion resuited in physical injuries that are easily detected.
A. BACKGROUND
I enforced disappearance?
'I
Ii
1. Availment ofgeneric remedies for human rights violations
I b.
~. right not to be subjected to unlawful or arbitrary detention.
I 2. Criminal actions
,I a. Actions under the Revised Penal Code can be brought against persons
responsible for enforced disappearances. Depending on the satisfaction
1. Rationale
The first and most pragmatic step in dealing with a case of enforced
disappearance is information-gathering. A defining characteristic of enforced
disappearance is the sudden abduction of a person (either under the guise
of an ostensibly lawful arrest or through machinations designed to carry out
the abduction without witnesses and with impunity) under circumstances that
would incapacitate that person's family or loved ones from knowing where to
look for him! her afterwards. The incapacity can be brought about by factors
such as the deliberate assumption of anonymity ofhisl her abductors (through
removal of identifying nameplatesl insignias of home units, etc.), deliberate
non-disclosure of his! her detention place, or the cutting off of all means of
communication to and from the abducted person.
I the necessary action and avail of the necessary remedy more effectively.
I opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without
interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through
any media and regardless of frontiers" (UN. GAOR 217 A (IIl), 10 December
I
The Constitution also provides: "The right ofthe people to information on
matters of public concern shall be recognized. Access to official records and
to documents and papers pertaining to official acts, transactions, or decisions,
I and any limitation thereto can only be imposed by direct legal prescription.
"
J
3. Right to information; limitations thereto
b. such disclosure would put the life and safety of an individual in imminent
danger;
I
I 5. it would disclose information the premature disclosure of which
I would:
I
!i
• in the case of a department, office or agency which regulates cur-
rencies, securities, commodities, or financial institutions, be likely
to lead to significant financial speculation in currencies, securities,
or commodities, or significantly endanger the stability of any
I financial institution; or
I i
where the department, office or agency has already disclosed to
the public the content or nature of its proposed action, or where
the department, office or agency is required by law to make such
i I disclosure on its own initiative prior to taking final official action
on such proposal.
I -Notice that under letter (a) (i) in the quoted portion of the Implementing
Rules above, the invocation of national defense and security can be used to
defeat the right to information. Experience has it that this ground has been
I used to deny access to official police and military records that could have
been helpful in the location of disappeared persons.
I According to the rule itself, the writ of habeas data is a remedy avail-
able to any person whose right to privacy in life, liberty or security is
violated or threatened by an unlawful act or omission of a public official
I or employee, or of a private individual or entity engaged in the gathering,
collecting or storing of data or information regarding the person, family,
~
, 214 Revised Manual for Prosecutors
to protect the rights ofpersons. What, in general terms, is the utility of the
writ of habeas data?
2. By whom filed
The petition for a Writ of Habeas Data can both be a preventive and a
curative remedy:
• collateral relatives, or
I
• any member of the community (in this particular order)
I o Such persons can seek information regarding the status of the
disappeared person, where he or she may have been detained,
I or information about him or her in the official records that may
shed light on the reason for the abduction and eventual disap-
pearance.
I o For purposes of filing a petition for issuance of the Writ of
I The petition for a Writ of Habeas Data should contain the following
allegations and jurisdictional information:
I e. The reliefs prayed for, which may include the updating, rectification,
suppression or destruction of the database or information or files kept
by the respondent. In case of threats, the relief may include a prayer
The power of the Writ to aid in the quest of families and loved ones
I in searching for disappeared persons can be seen when it is ordered to be
answered.
court. ~-
I
,
, 216 Revised Manual for Prosecutors
The filing of the return represents an opportunity for the family and
loved ones of a disappeared person to scrutinize public records in the
custody 'of State officials that may lead to the surfacing of the victim or
the disclosure of the probable reason for the disappearance (invariably,
such reason may relate to confidential information regarding membership
in a terrorist group, involvement in seditious or rebellious activities, or
identification with groups who have committed past crimes or atrocities).
To this end, the return cannot simply contain a general denial of the
allegations in the petition. It shall state:
To emphasize the urgency with which the Writ of Habeas Data should
be granted in meritorious cases, the rules provide that dilatory motions
shall be prohibited and that the nature of the hearing on the petition shall
be summary.
I
,
I in protecting his or her right to life, liberty, and security, or that of his or
her loved ones, then the court shall render judgment granting any of the
following reliefs:
I RESPONSE
1. Rationale
I More often than not, however, the gathering of information is not the
final step in the long and arduous process of locating a loved one who has
I been disappeared involuntarily. It would be an ideal situation where resort to
the right to information under the plenary grant of constitutional entitlement
would already yield positive results that would lead to the reunification of a
I disappeared person with his or her family.
I outright harassment.
I
.J'
However, in cases where such information-gathering mechanisms pro-
vided by law failed to assist in the achievement of the ultimate objective of
the ongoing 'Search, more drastic measures should be employed. For example,
information may have been disclosed by the officials concerned, but such
information wiil remain just that if official response or action cannot be had
on the basis thereof. The location ofthe detention facility where a disappeared
person is being held may have been disclosed via Habeas Data, but such in-
formation will remain useless if officials concerned will continue to refuse to
release the victim on some ground.
2. Availing of the Rule on the Writ ofHabeas Corpus (Rules of Court, Rule
102)
The Rules of Court provide fora special proceeding known as the Writ
of Habeas Corpus. Habeas Corpus is a high prerogative writ, a remedy
which seeks not so much to obtain an adverse adjudication against another
as to ask the courts to initiate an inquisition on behalf of the State.
1. Application for the writ shall be by petition signed and verified either
by the party for whose relief it is intended, or by some person on his
behalf, and shall set forth:
I
b. The officer or name of the person by whom he is so imprisoned
I 1. After the hearing on the petition, the court shall order the immediate
release from coniinement of the person subject of the writ if it was
I determined that the ground for the deprivation of his or her liberty is
not meritorious.
I the writ shall not be allowed; or if the jurisdiction appears after the
writ is allowed, the person shall not be discharged by reason of any
informality or defect in the process, judgment,.or order.
However, this presupposes that the family and loved ones of the
I disappeared person have already pinpointed the disappeared person's
whereabouts, whether serendipitously, by asking around, or by availing
•
I Corpus may nonetheless be filed out of the desperate need to locate the
I
~
disappeared person, and on the faint hope that compelling State officials
to explain themselves before the courts would yield some positive result.
I
The next section is dedicated to this new remedy to complement the Writ
I of Habeas Corpus.
3. Availing ofthe Rule on the Writ of'Amparo (A.il1. No. 07-9-12-SC, October
I 24,2007)
I or security.
J
d. Provided in all cases that the filing of a petition by the aggrieved party
suspends the right of all other authorized parties to file similar peti-
tions. '
I I~ 1;;:;:
a, , The personal circumstances of the petitioner;
I~~¥
~?-_ for the threat, act or omission, or, if the name is unknown or uncertain,
the respondent may be described by an assumed appellation;
I I"~i c. The right to life, liberty and security of the aggrieved party violated
_.;"
or threatened with violation by an unlawful act or omission of the
I I"~.'i' respondent, and how such threat or violation is committed with the
attendant circumstances detailed in supporting affidavits;
·~,"·i
I f. The relief prayed for. The petition may include a general prayer for
other just and equitable reliefs.
I I broader in scope.
,
"
es-
.it:..
I
~
In sum, the respondent in an amparo proceeding is given a heavier burden
not only to justify the continued detention of a disappeared person under cus-
tody if such were the case, but also to undertake positive measures to locate
the Whereabouts ofthe victim in case the respondent does not have him or her
I under custody.
I
i
In short, the respondent cannot simply deny that he or she has the disap-
peared person under custody; he or she also has to prove to the satisfaction
of the court that all reasonable means have been employed to ascertain that
•I
"
the victim is indeed not under custody not only by the particular unit or outfit
to which he or she is attached, but also by others to which inquiry may be
addressed using usual channels and networks of communication.
Under the rule, the return to be filed in response to a petition for a Writ of
Amparo must state the following:
I a. The lawful defenses to show that the respondent did not violate or
'.
threaten with violation the right to life, liberty and security of the ag-
grieved party, through any act or omission;
•I
u. to recover and preserve evidence related to the death or disappear-
ance of the person identified in the petition which may aid in the
prosecution of the person or persons responsible;
iii. to identify witnesses and obtain statements from them concerning
the death or disappearance;
1'1. to determine the cause, manner, location and time of death or
disappearance as well as any pattern or practice that may have
I brought about the death or disappearance;
v. to identify and apprehend the person or persons involved in the
The court, justice or judge, upon motion or motu proprio, may order
that the petitioner or the aggrieved party and any member of the im-
mediate family be protected in:
1. Inspection Order
a. The court, justice or judge, upon verified motion and after due
hearing, may order any person in possession or control of a desig-
nated land or other property, to permit entry for the purpose of:
1. inspecting,
11. measunng,
1l1. surveying, or
iv. photographing the property or any relevant object or operation
thereon.
I IV. The order shall expire five (5) days after the date of its issu-
ance, unless extended for justifiable reasons.
II 2. Production Order
I a. The court, justice or judge, upon verified motion and after due
hearing, may order any person in possession, custody or control
of any designated documents, papers, books, accounts, letters,
I photographs, objects or tangible things, or objects in digitized or
electronic form, which constitute or contain evidence relevant to
the petition or the return, to:
I I. produce and
11. permit their inspection, copying or photographing by or on
I behalf of the movant.
I
"
4. Witness Protection Order
b. The court, justice or judge may also refer the witnesses to:
I
'~
''z
1/t
.'4<,-
IV. PROSECUTING CASES OF EXTRA-LEGAL KILLING
lr :~'"
:,!-,~
A. BACKGROUND
I:,
"{
Perhaps the most abhorrent crime is that which places in jeopardy the most
sacred thing thar a person values - his or her life. There are enough bodies of
laws under criminal law that deal with such crimes. However, there is a need
to recognize that another species of killings occupy a niche of their own. These
are killings induced by the victim's political affiliations or political beliefs and
):
actuations, and involve the employment of summary or arbitrary methods of
·~f~
execution.
I:·
E'
'.', ..-.';'"
-,.-. In the Philippines, the problem was first given full recognition and assumed
the full gravity that it deserves during the National Consultative Summit organized
I
.'-'. -.
by the Supreme Court last 2007. It was later on highlighted in the Report made by
United Nations Special Rapporteur in Enforced Disappearances and Extra-legal
I; Killings Philip Alston. Prof. Alston paid a personal visit to the Philippines last
2007 and conducted investigations and inquiries personally to later on present a
report before the United Nations on the existence of an alarming number of cases
The National Consultative Summit itself was impelled by the recent spate of
I widespread killings and summary executions ofmembers ofprogressive political
groups, mostly in the countryside, and journalists widely identified as being criti-
cal of incumbent national and local officials.
I These killings are distinct in that they are committed with violation of various
human rights - they muzzle political opposition, and thereby violate a person's
I right to free speech and free expression; they are committed in a summary and
arbitrary manner, thereby violating a person's right to be accorded due process
I
,~ .. '
Revised Manual for Prosecutors 227
or treatment that is neither commensurate to whatever transgression has been
committed nor sanctioned by the criminal justice system of the country.
The defining characteristic of extra-legal killings is the fact that they are
committed in a summary, arbitrary, and sometime surreptitious manner to en-
sure impunity. Oftentimes, cases of extra-legal killings arise out of prior cases
of enforced disappearances - the persons abducted and from whom nothing was
ever heard again turn up in some lonely lot, lifeless and bearing signs of physical
maltreatment and abuse. It is therefore not easy to deal with such cases, because
there are instances where the fact of extra-legal killing will be recognized too late
and only after the ghastly murder has been committed. How, then; can the Public
Prosecutor be in the best position to confront an issue as complex as extra-legal
killing?
The remedy of the Writ ofAmparo is broad and encompasses not only the
compulsion of State officials to divulge information leading to the surfacing of a
disappeared person as discussed in the preceding section, but also the provision
of whatever protective remedy may be warranted, available, and equitable under
the law. Indeed, the literal meaning of the origin of the word "amparo" (i.e.,
amparar in Spanish, meaning "to protect") evinces its central function in the legal
scheme of procedural law - the protection of persons whose right to life, liberty,
or security is violated or threatened with violation.
The availment ofthe remedy ofthe Writ ofAmparo under the case of enforced
disappearance. would focus more on compelling State officials to divulge what-
ever information is within their power to acquire pertinent to the whereabouts of
the disappeared person. Under the case of extra-legal killing, however, amparo
may be availed of as a protective remedy.
Remember that amparo may be availed of even if the violation of the right to
life, liberty, or security, is only a threat. The procedural requirements for filing
the petition for the writ are the same as the one discussed in the previous section.
However, as a protective remedy, amparo can be used to compel a State official
or private individual to defend him/herself from the allegation that he or she is
committing acts constituting a threat to the right to life, liberty, or security of the
petitioner. During the hearing of the petition, the respondent can be compelled to
divulge whether the petitioner is being subjected to surveillance or investigation,
in which case the ground therefor can be scrutinized by the court for legality
and validity. Another scenario would be that the respondent can be compelled
to declare for the record that there exists no legal ground for the petitioner to be
subjected to any kind of apprehension, arrest, or interrogation because he or she
does not appear upon official records to be suspected of any wrongdoing.
i;
_~J':.
-,_~::l:;o
tain the condition and whereabouts of a disappeared person. In the process, one of
the unfortunate information that may be unearthed is the fact that the disappeared
>;-;-
person has been the victim of extra-legal killing.
I:
.-:/ D. AVAILMENT OFGENERIC REMEDIES FORHUMANRIGHTSVIOLA-
TIONS
I When the extra-legal killing has been attended by violation of any of the civil
and political rights and liberties enumerated in Article 32 of the Civil Code (e.g.,
I the right not to be subjected to illegal or arbitrary detention, or cruel and unusual
punishment), an action for damages may be maintained. As explained in Part II of
this Manual, this is without prejudice to the claiming of damages of the kind that
I is deemed instituted with every criminal action, supposing the act complained of
also amounts to a punishable felony (which extra-legal killing undoubtedly is).
I In addition, since the Victim Compensation Act expressly recognizes the right
of compensation should a violent crime be committed which resulted in death,
Ii~-
- --~--------
then the heirs ofthe victim can also file a claim before the Board of Claims of the
Department of Justice.
I ;
E. PROSECUTION UNDER THE HlJMAJ.~ SECURITY ACT
The Human Security Act, as already explained eariier, provides that, "any
person or persons who use threat, intimidation, or coercion, or who in:tlictphysi-
cal pain or torment, or mental, moral, or psychological pressure, which shall
vitiate the free-will of a charged or suspected person under investigation and
interrogation for the crime of terrorism or the crime of conspiracy to commit
terrorism shall be guilty of an offense and shall suffer the penalty of twelve (12)
years and one day to twenty (20) years of imprisonment. When death or serious
permanent disability of said detained person occurs as a consequence of the use
of such threat, intimidation, or coercion, or as a consequence of the in:tliction on
him of such physical pain or torment, or as a consequence ofthe infliction on him
of such mental, moral, or psychological pressure, the penalty shall be twelve (12)
years and one day to twenty (20) years of imprisonment."
This is relevant when the victim is arrested for being a suspected terrorist
or co-conspirator in a terrorist plot and then subjected to physical maltreatment
which resulted in death. A killing under these circumstances also qualifies as an
extra-legal killing because there is a political dimension to the prior arrest of the
person, but the person was later on subjected to a death that was not sanctioned by
the law, thereby qualifying the killing as extra-legal. Whoever is responsible for
the physical maltreatment thatresuited in the extra-legal killing may be prosecuted
directly under the Human Security Act provisions, with the penalties imposable
as quoted above,
F. ClUMINALACTIONS
Extra-legal killings are given a niche of their own because of their human
rights dimensions. However, in the eyes of criminal law, extra-legal killings,
despite their political underpinnings, despite their summary and arbitrary uature,
and despite the perceived involvement of State officials and agencies by way of
direct commission or indirect acquiescence by silence, are still takings of the life
of another. Under the Revised Penal Code, extra-legal killings qualify as either
murder or homicide (Article 248 and 249, respectively), and the circumstances
under which the killing was effected may warrant the contemplation ofthe aggra-
vatingcircumstances of taking advantage ofpublic position, lack ofprovocation,
noctumity, being committed by a band, evident premeditation, taking advantage
of superior strength, or treachery! aievosia.
A. BACKGROUND
'..
"I .. ~.
The liberty of abode and of freedom of movement is one- of the fundamental
"':.-
,":c'tI rights guaranteed by the Constitution. It is provided therein that "the liberty of
·~; abode and of changing the same within the limits prescribed by law shall not be
_L
·-t'.- impaired except upon lawful order of the court. Neither shall the right to travel be
~-- impaired except in the interest ofnational security, public safety, or public health,
I
and physiology.
I change the same voluntarily. In the constitutional provision just quoted, the only
restriction to every person's constitutionally protected liberty of movement are
issues of national security, public safety, or public health; and even then, such
I to arbitrarily order the transfer of its citizens from one place to another without
regard of resulting economic consequences like the loss of a job, occupation, or
real property. Lastly, a person's life and culture is almost always inextricably
I tied to one's place of residence. Therefore, any act of the State which arbitrarily
impairs the right of abode and movement can result in unduly uprooting a citizen
from the place to which he/ she has cultural ties.
I How can certain acts violate the right of abode and freedom of movement?
The practice of "harnletting", or the saturation of a local village or area by State
'I officials for strategic military or police objectives and the forcible evacuation of
its people to other locations is one such act violative of the right of abode and
freedom of movement. As these rights are infused with a heavy public policy
I dimension, caution should be taken in the commission of acts that may impinge
on them; and if violations have been committed against them, they should be
proceededagainstaccordingl~
I
'I Revised Manual for Prosecutors 231
,J
!.
I I
B. GUIDELINES IN THE DELIMITATION OF THE RIGHT OF ABODE
I I the paramount guideline in the conduct of any official act that would have the
effect of delimiting the people's right to abode and freedom of movement: that
there must be a law authorizing the same. The Court asseverated in this wise:
I the eviction of undesirable aliens after a hearing from the Islands. Act
No. 519 of the Philippine Commission and Sec. 733 of the Revised
Ordinances of the City of Manila provide for the conviction and pun-
I ishment by a court ofjustice ofany person who is a common prostitute.
Act No. 899 authorizes the return of any citizen ofthe United States,
who may have been convicted ofvagrancy, to the homeland. New York
I and other States have statutes providing for the commitment to the
House of Refuge of women convicted of being common prostitutes.
Always a law! Even when the health authorities compel vaccination,
I or establish a quarantine, or place a leprous person in the Culion leper
colony, it is done pursuant to some law or order. But one can search
I in vain for any law, order, or regulation, which even hints at the right
of the Mayor of the City of Manila or the chief of police of that city
to force citizens of the Philippine Islands - and these women despite
I their being in a sense lepers of society are nevertheless not chattels but
Philippine citizens protected by the same constitutional guaranties as
are other citizens - to change their domicile from Manila to another
I violations
I
(1) Article 32 of the Civil Code, as discussed earlier in this manual, expressly
recognizes that the violation of the right to abode and freedom of move-
ment is an act that would warrant compensation by way of moral and
exemplary 'damages.
(2) This is without prejudice to whatever civil action for damages may be
maintained as a consequence of the criminal act to which the violation
would amount.
,Y;·',
I
~'<'
'}:".
:.1i:
2. Criminal action for Expulsion (Art. 127, Revised Penal Code)
I
·, ~'t;~;'" a. The felony of expulsion as punished in the Revised Penal Code has the
~:,
~r
following elements:
\;-.
i
1. Offender is a public officer or employee;
2. He either expels any person from the Philippines; or compels a person
to change residence;
3. Offender is not authorized to do so by law.
f 3. Criminal action for Grave Coercion (Art. 286, Revised Penal Code)
I (1) When the perpetrator of an act violative of the right of abode and freedom
of movement is not a public officer, such act would qualify as grave co-
ercion punishable by the Revised Penal Code. The elements of the felony
I are:
I authority of law or the right to do so, or in other words, that the re-
straint shall not be made under authority of law or in the exercise of
any lawful right.
I VI. GENERIC REMEDIES FOR HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATIONS
I A. PRESENT CONTEXT
I Currently, human rights violations are not given particular and direct treat-
ment under the law. As it were, the multifarious ways by which a person's human
rights may be violated are addressed by way of distinct criminal actions that may
I be instituted whenever particular acts fall within the ambit of the law punishing
such. Their generic character means that these remedies may be availed of in
J
,'~
~-
Revised Manual for Prosecutors 233
- -- ---
,
I
I almost all acts amounting to a violation of human rights, including the particular
,
cases of human rights violations given treatment in this. However, two remedies,
one under the general civil law on damages and the other as provided in special
law, stand out as among the instances where the violation of human rights is
treated as a wrongful act warranting redress.
~
B. ACTION FOR DAMAGES UNDER THE CIVIL CODE (ARTICLE 32)
I without prejudice to the filing of, a criminal action in cases where the viola-
tion would also qualify as a criminally punishable act.
~
2. By whom filed.
Any person whose civil and political rights and liberties as enumerated
I
Any public officer or employee or any private individual.
I- • That the person bringing suit has the right to enjoy, under the law, civil
I-
and! or political rights and! or liberties.
• That the person being sued has a duty under the law to respect the exercise
I- •
of such civil and! or political rights and! or liberties.
That, despite this duty, the person being sued directly or indirectly ob-
structed, defeated, violated, or in any manner of impeded or impaired
I
• That the civil and! or political rights and! or liberties obstructed, defeated,
violated, or in any manner impeded or impaired falls under the enumera-
,
I 234
tion in Article 32 of the Civil Code:
1. Legal basis
I b. The funds to be used for the satisfaction of awards brought under this law
shall be sourced from whatever amount may be appropriated by Congress
from the funds ofthe National Treasury, the amount of five pesos set aside
I I from each filing fee in every civil case filed in court, 1% ofnet earnings of
PAGCOR and 1% oftb.e proceeds of the sale of military camps in Metro
Manila. (Title L Sec. 1 (e), IRR ofRA 7309).
I • By whom filed;
I '0 any person who was unjustly accused, convicted and imprisoned but
subsequently released by virtue of a judgment of acquittal;
I I o any person who was unjustly detained and released without being
charged;
I o rape; or
o offenses committed with malice which resulted in death or serious
I physical and/or psychological injuries, permanent incapacity or
disability, insanity, abortion, serious trauma; or
C committed with torture, cruelty or barbarity.
I o The heir of a person entitled to any award under this Act who died or
was incapacitated.
I • Procedure for filing claims (Title III, Sec. 2, IRR ofRA 7309)
I
I
o In case of a person who was unjustly accused, convicted and impris-
oned but subsequently released by virtue of a judgment of acquittal,
he must provide the following:
II
!
,J
? a certified true copy ofthe judgment of acquittal;
? certified true copies of the commitment order and release from
confinement by the jail warden or prison authority concerned.
I
~;'
? certified true copy of the final judgment.
I~
the following:
I' including but not limited to the certified true copy of the report to
the police or a doctor's/psychiatrist's certificate, if necessary.
i,:--~
'O~~
'.
o If claimant is an heir, he shall also submit the following:
I
.-.;--
?
»
doctor's certificate of incapacity;
Marriage certificate if claimant is the spouse;
Birth certificate/s if claimant is a child/children; or,
• Procedure for processing ofclaims (Title Ill, Sec 3, IRR ofRA 7309)
I o After the claim has been docketed and given a claim number, it shall
I o The investigator shall submit his report to the Evaluator within five
days from assignment. The Evaluator shall submit his recommenda-
I tion to the Board within ten days from the submission of the investi-
gator's report;
I o The Board shall resolve the claim within thirty working days after the
o Within 6 months from the date the victim suffered damage or injury.
o For all other cases, the maximum amount of compensation that may be
granted by the Board of Claims shall not exceed PlO,OOO.OO pesos or
the amount necessary to reimburse the claimant the expeuses incurred
for hospitalization, medical treatment, loss of wage, loss of support or
other expenses directly related to injury, whichever is lower.
Special Section on
Prosecuting Violations of the
National Internal Revenue Code (NIRC)
and Related Laws
I I
i
I. POINTERS IN THE PROSECUTION OF TAX CASES
I!
1. The prosecutor shall interview tax investigators and witnesses to gain an overall
understanding ofthe nature ofthe dispute, the facts giving rise to and surrounding
I the dispute.
2. The prosecutor shall acquire additional information from witnesses which may
I not have been related to him by the investigator. (Goldstein, Trial Technique, p.
226)
I, 3. The prosecutor shall find out whether the witness (informant, asset, etc.) has any
interest on the outcome of the action; and
I 4. The prosecutor shall endeavor to find out other circumstances that may affect the
~
competency and credibility of the witnesses. (Elliot, The Work of the Advocate,
p.6.)
J
5. The prosecutor shall determine, as far as practicable, what laws and jurisprudence
II
are applicable in the case and how they are applicable to the set of facts as relayed
by the investigator and witnesses.
I 6. The prosecutor shall create a theory of the case which is defined as the framework
for the presentation of the facts and law, (Trial Preparation, David Broad, p.
I 8. The prosecutor shall prepare the trial brief pursuant to DOJ Department Circular
No. 47, s. 2000.
I 9. In organizing the exhibits, the prosecutor shall, if possible, put them in a clear
book. The original should be on one side and the photocopy on the other.
I
J
I 240 Revised Manual for Prosecutors
I J
II. INSTITUTION OF CRIMINAL CASES
The initiation ora criminal action involving violations of the National Internal
Revenue Code (NIRC) and other laws enforced by the Bureau of Internal Revenue
(BIR) must bear the authority/approval of the Commissioner of Internal Revenue.
~i~':
,~~,
I"
All criminal actions wherein the amount of taxes and fees involved is One Million
-~-~ pesos (Php I ,000,000.00) or more shall be filed before the Court ofTax Appeals (CTA)
i
, j';
The prosecution of violations of the National Internal Revenue Code (NIRC)
or related laws may be conducted by the duly deputized legal officers of the BIR.
under the direct control and supervision of the public prosecutor,
I
7.0' B.Bail
t The recommended bail shall be in accordance with the DOJ Bail Bond
Guide.
I C. Pre-trial
I I The parties may not be allowed to compromise the criminal liability or submit
the case to mediation, arbitration or other mode of alternative dispute resolution.
A. Sec. 254. Attempt to Evade or Defeat Tax. - Any person who willfully attempts
I in any manner to evade or defeat any tax imposed under this Code or the pay-
ment thereof shall, in addition to other penalties provided by law, upon conviction
thereof, be punished by a fine not less than Thirty thousand pesos (p30,OOO) but
I not more than One hundred thousand pesos (plOO,OOO) and suffer imprisonment
of not less than two (2) years but not more four (4) years: Provided, that the
I conviction or acquittal obtained under this section shall not be a bar to the filing
of a civil suit for the collection of taxes.
Ik:
i_
I Ti
2. Tax evasion connotes the integration of three factors:
I a. The end to be achieved, i.e., the payment ofless than that known by the
taxpayer to be legally due, or the non-payment of tax when it is shown
I business
c. General Information Sheet showing the identity of the corporate officers
as enumerated in Sec. 253 (d):
I c.l. partner
c.2. president
c.3. general manager
I cA. branch manager
c.5. treasurer
c.6. officer-in-charge
I c.7. employees responsible for the violation
d. Tax Return of the taxpayer
e. BIR registration (Integrated Tax System [ITS]/RDO certiiication) to show
I that the person is a registered taxpayer
f. Deeds of Conveyance & Certificate Authorizing Registration (in case of
I n. Fraudulent Scheme:
n.l. In case of ONETT, 2 or more Deeds of Conveyance
l
J 242 Revised Manual for Prosecutors
J I
-L
n.Z, Using dummy/ies
nJ. Using fake Certificate Authorizing Registration (CAR) to commit
taxevasion
o. Badges ofFraud:
0.1. intentional and substantial understatement of taxable income as
shown in the returns, financial statements, balance sheet, or deeds
of conveyance showing receipt of income (underdeclaration of in-
come);
0.2. intentional and substantial overstatement (over-claiming) of deduc-
tions or exemptions as shown in returns, financial statements, bal-
ance sheets, invoices;
I
·'"~·· 0.3. any act or recurrence of the foregoing or similar circumstances
'7:' (Vztug, citing Collector vs. Reyes)
:_1~
0.4, recurrence of failure to perform legal obligation, i.e., obligation to
f file return, pay tax, withhold tax, remit tax, supply correct and ac-
curate information, refund excess taxes withheld on compensation
0.5. making it appear that one has filed a return or actually filing a return
and subsequently withdraws the same after securing the official
1-
,~\};'
receiving seal or stamp
0.6. securing or use of multiple or different TINs
I, -,.:;
0.7. in case ofONETT, price/consideration in the deed inconsistent with
return or the CAR, use of falsified CAR to transfer property
~' ,-< 0.8. other schemes to prove intent to evade tax
I"'~
0.9. Computation showing substantial under-declaration or substantial
overstatement as stated in:
I' Sec. 248. Civil Penalties. - (B) In case of willful neglect to file
the return within the period prescribed by this Code or by rules and
;':::.
regulations, or in case a false or fraudulent return is willfully made,
~{
i
I
B. Sec. 255. Failure to FiIeReturn, SupplyCorrect andAccurateInformation,
Pay Tax Withheld and Remit Tax and Refund Excess Taxes Withheld on
Compensation. - Any person required under this Code or by rules and regulations
I promulgated thereunder to pay any tax make a return, keep any record, or supply
correct and accurate information, who willfully fails to pay such tax, make such
return, keep such record, or supply correct and accurate information, or withhold
I less than Ten thousand pesos (PIO,OOO) and suffer imprisonment of not less than
one (l) year but not more than ten (10) years.
-I Any person who attempts to make it appear for any reason that he or another
has in fact filed a return or statement, or actually files a return or statement and
subsequently withdraws the same return or statement after securing the official
receiving seal or stamp of receipt of internal revenue office wherein the same
was actually filed shall, upon conviction thereof, be punished by a fine of not less
I than Ten thousand pesos (PIO,OOO) but not more than Twenty thousand pesos
(P20,OOO) and suffer imprisonment ofnot less than one (1) year but not more than
three (3) years.
, 244
c.S. treasurer
J
c.6. officer-in-charge
c.7. employees responsible for the violate
d. Tax Return of the taxpayer
e. BIR registration (Integrated Tax System [ITS]/RDO certification) to show
that the person is a registered taxpayer
f. Deeds ofconveyance & Certificate ofAuthorizing Registration (in case of
One-Time Transaction [ONETT])
g. Contracts
h. Mayor's permit to show that business is in operation
1. DTI registration (if sole proprietorship)
]. DT! or SEC records to show existence of business operation
"Or; k. Proof of income received or documents to show source of income
I '~'-
~-.
~;;-
1. Any other documents showing participation! involvement ofother persons
in the commission of the offense
:Z"i m. Notice of Informal Conference
1 _~,-
[1"
n.
o.
Preliminary Assessment Notice (PAN)
Formal Letter of Demand & Final Assessment Notice (FAN)
I.:~-
'~~, p. Pro-forma Protest, if there's any
,
q. Certification from Collection and Enforcement Division (CED) of no
i; ."
r.
s.
payment
Tax Return
Third Party Information (certification) to show income
1. Other proof that income is received
i u.
v.
First! Second! Final request for presentation of books of accounts i ac-
counting records
RDO Certification of no return filed
I
>:-'_c
w.
x,
Certificate of creditable withholding tax
Certification from government agencies and/or private entities to show
mcome
I y.
z.
Financial statements
Alpha List from district, Withholding Tax Division or Large Taxpayer
Service
I aa. Computation of tax liability
•I Failure to Remit
, is accountable for public funds or property, shall appropriate the same or shall
I
I I
take or misappropriate or shall consent, through abandonment or negligence,
I I shall permit any other person to take such public funds, or property, wholly or
parrially, or shall otherwise be guilty of the misappropriation or malversation
of such funds or property xxx xxx xxx"
I a. The provisions of Art. 217 shall apply to:
I o Sees. 58 and 81
I (8) Willfully attempts in any manner to evade or defeat any tax im-
posed under this Code, or knowingly uses fake or falsified revenue official
I I
246 Revised Manual for Prosecutors
I :1
receipts, Letters ofAuthority, certificates authorizing registration, Tax Credit
Certificates. Tax Debit Memoranda and other accountable farms shall, upon
conviction for each act or omission, be punished by a fine not less than Fifty
thousand pesos (p50,000) but not more than One hundred thousand pesos
(plOO,OOO) and suffer imprisonment of not less than two (2) years but not
· "
"I
B:'
more than six (6) years.
~,
Articles of Partnership (in case of a corporation)
b. Corporate documents showing signature/participation in the conduct of
:.~;;E{;
business
c. General Information Sheet showing the identity of the corporate officers
I -~~:
.;y
: .-~~,.
as enumerated in Sec. 253 (d):
~.1. partner
c.2. president
"
,'
I.,',""
\'
c.3. general manager
cA. branch manager
c.S. treasurer manager
c.6. officer-in-charge
c.7. employees responsible for the violation
,~ d. Tax Return of the taxpayer
e. BIR registration (Integrated Tax System (ITS) iRDO certification) to show
-~"'~-
that the person isa registered taxpayer
I ,"r._
f Deeds of Conveyance & Certificate Authorizing Registration (in case of
One-Time Transaction [ONETT])
g. Contracts
I h. Mayor's permit to show that business is in operation
1. DTI registration (if single proprietorship)
J. DTI or SEC records to show existence of business / operation
I k. Proof of income received or documents to show sources of income
1. Any other documents showing participation! involvement ofother persons
,.
~>
Revised Manual for Prosecutors 247
---- - - - - - - - - -- ----------------- - - -
I
q. Tax Debit Memoranda and other accountable forms
I r, Certification from district, region, ITS as to authenticity of tax forms
s. Register of Deeds documents
t, Deeds of Conveyance
I u. Contracts
v, Other documents to show that there was a fraudulent scheme adopted to
produce or use a falsified CAR or other forms.
I 3. Revised Penal C ode Provtsion on Falsification in relation to Sec. 257 (B)
I ments.- The penalty ofprision correctional in its medium and maximum peri-
ods and a fine of not more than 5,000 pesos shall be imposed upon:
"
Ifthe one who used the falsified document is the same person
who falsified it, the crime is only falsification and the use of the
same is not a separate crime.
D. Sec. 258. Unlawful Pursuit of Business. - Any person who carries on any busi-
ness for which an annual registration fee is imposed without paying the tax (fee)
as required by law shall, upon conviction for each act or oruission, be punished by
a fine of not less than Five thousand pesos (PS,OOO.OO) but not more than Twenty
thousand pesos (p20,OOO) and suffer imprisonment ofnot less than six (6) months
but not more than two (2) years; Provided, that in the case of a person engaged in
the business of distilling, rectifying, repacking, compounding or manufacturing
any article subject to excise tax, he shall, upon conviction for each act or oruission,
be punished by confinement of not less than Thirty thousand pesos (P30,OOO) but
not more than Fifty thousand pesos (P50,OOO) and suffer imprisonment ofnot less
than two (2) years but not more than four (4) years.
I c.6. treasurer
'1
:'~
"1J.
;;
,,c"
,::.:
I c.7. officer-in-charge
c.8. employees responsible for the violation
d. Deeds of Conveyance & Certification Authorizing Registration (in case of
-"\
·i'
;"
-~
I E. Sec. 267. Declaration under Penalties of Perjury. - Any declaration, return and
other statement required under this Code, shall in lieu of an oath, contain a writ-
I ten statement that they are made under the penalties of perjury. Any person who
willfully files a declaration, return or statement containing information which is
not true and correct as to every material matter shall, upon conviction, be subject
I to the penalties prescribed for perjury under the Revised Penal Code.
I Code, which, in lieu of an oath, contains a written statement that they are
made under the penalties of perjury;
b. Any person, natural or juridical, willfully files a declaration, return or
I statement containing information which is not true and correct; and
c. Such untrue or incorrect statement!s is!are a material matter/s
- --
j
b.2. president
bJ. general manager
bA. treasurer
I
s.s, branch manager
b.6. treasurer
b.7. officer-in-charge
I
·~<.·· b.8. employees responsible for the violation
.-d;'
~.", c. Deeds of Conveyance & Certi:ficationAuthorizing Registration (in case of
..."
One Time Transaction [ONETT])
I I;~ d. Contracts
~~( e. DTI registration (if sole proprietorship)
,,·
»rr
~,;:.g~ f.
o
Tax Return
I..•"'-.
~-: ".
h.
I-
Proof of income
Certificate from district, region, ITS
Financial Statements
It r:
F. Sec. 236 (J), last pan- Securing More Than One TIN
J
Ji,,":",
I
-::;;Jl
1
I
·~ b. Sec. 255. Failure to File Return, Supply Correct and Accurate
c.
~,~:
Information, Pay Tax, Withhold and Remit Tax and Refund Excess
Taxes Withheld on Compensation. - "Any person required under this
ii!' Code or by rules and regulations promulgated thereunder to pay any tax,
( :;':: make a return, keep any record, or supply correct and accurate informa-
tion, who willfully fails to pay such tax, make a such return, keep such
I.::.-
punished xxx"
I ",,-.. -
Reports, or Using Falsified or Fake Accountable Forms
c.2. Willfully attempts in any manner to evade or defeat any tax imposed
I xxx'
I a. Aznar vs. eTA (GR No. L-20569, 23 August 1974,58 SCRA 519)
I a.1. While this is not a criminal case, the Supreme Court (SC) had an
opportunity to discuss what constitutes fraudulent intent. The
petitioner was questioning the assessment of deficiency tax and
I Aznar who committed mistakes in his report of his income but also
the respondent Commissioner of Internal Revenue who committed
mistakes in his use of the inventory method to determine the peti-
I tioner's tax liability. The mistakes committed by the Commissioner
,"-'-.' -.
of Internal Revenue which also involve very substantial amounts
I
~ - - -
,
------_._-
'
l
~,
I were also repeated yearly, and yet we cannot presume therefrom the
q.
I I
ing methods utilized for determination of tax liabilities. The pre-
decessor of the petitioner undoubtedly filed his income tax returns
I
I I
for the years 1946 to 1951 and those tax returns were prepared for
him by his accountant and employees. It also appears that petitioner I:
in his lifetime and during the investigation ofhis tax liabilities coop-
erated readily with the B.I.R. and there is no indication in the record
I I of any act of bad faith committed by him.
I I
done or resoned to in order to induce another to give up some legal
right. Negligence, whether slight or gross, is not equivalent to the
fraud with intent to evade the tax contemplated by the law. It
must amount to intentional wrong-doing with the sole object of
I avoiding the tax. It necessarily follows that a mere mistake can-
not be considered as fraudulent intent, and if both petitioner and
I I
underscoring supplied.)
I I
b.1. This is a criminal case for filing a fraudulent tax return, failure to
render a true and complete return and engaging in business without
first paying the annual fixed or privilege tax. However, the case did
I not discuss the guilt or innocence of the accused, but tackled the
authority of the prosecutor and the jurisdiction of the court.
II
I I
J
254 Revised Manual for Prosecutors
II J
L
b.2. The following are the relevant pronouncements of the SC on intent
and willfulness:
a filed fraudulent returns with intent to evade and defeat a part or all of
the tax." An assessment ofa deficiency is not necessary to a criminal
prosecution for willful attempt to defeat and evade the income tax.
'i A crime is complete when the violator has knowingly and willfully
filed a fraudulent return with intent to evade and defeat the tax. The
perpetration of the crime is grounded upon knowledge on the
I part of the taxpayer that he has made an inaccurate return, and
the government's failure to discover the error and promptly to as-
sess has no connections with the commission of the crime." (Citing
I
" ....
Merten's Law ofFederal Income Taxation, Vol. ll), Sec. 55A.05, p.
21. [Underscoring and emphasis suppliedj)
I c. CIR vs. Javier (GR No. 78953, 31 July 1991, 199 SCRA 824)
I c.I. Again, this is not acriminal case. The controversy basically revolves
around the assessment of deficiency tax and imposition ofsurcharge.
The taxpayer was the recipient of some money from abroad which
I he presumed to be a gift but the amount was actually erroneously
remirted to his account. In his income tax return, the taxpayer put
a footnote stating the above and the fact that the amount is now
I subject to litigation.
c.2. The SC cited the ruling in the Aznar case as regards fraud and
I held: "In the case at bar, there was no actual and intentional fraud
through willful and deliberate misleading of the government agency
I
I d. CIR vs. CA (GR No. 119322,04 June 1996,257 SeRA 200)
I -d.l. A criminal case was filed against Fortune Tobacco ("Fortune") for
alleged fraudulent tax evasion for supposed non-payment of the cor-
rect amount of income tax, ad valorem tax and value-added tax for
I the year 1992. The fraudulent scheme allegedly adopted by Fortune
consisted ofmaking fictitious and simulated sales of Fortune's ciga-
I
; 256 Revised Manual for Prosecutors
I
final determination of what is supposed to be the correct taxes, the
taxpayer should not be placed in the crucible of criminal prosecu-
tion:" (Underscoring and emphasis supplied.)
a Pascual and Dragon vs. CIR (C.I.A. Case No. 3045, 29 December
1986)
"To our mind, there was willful neglect to file the corporate in-
come tax returns required by law on the part of petitioners because,
as borne out by the records, both petitioners Mariano P. Pascual and
Renato P. Dragon did not file separate individual income tax returns
for 1968 reporting their respective share of the profits realized by
them in said year from their real estate transactions. (p. 28, Bureau
of Internal Revenue records.) If petitioners did not even bother to
report their share of the profits derived by them from their buying
and selling transactions, why should they take the trouble of filing
corporate income tax return for their partnership? But assuming that
for the year 1968 petitioners were not yet aware that they are taxable
as an unregistered partnership subject to corporate income tax, they
could at least have filed their separate individual income tax returns
for this year. Ii seems clear therefore that there was intentional
wrongdoing with the object of avoiding the tax on the part of
petitioners." (Emphasis and underscoring supplied.)
b. Sevilla, Son. Ruben Tzu, Ben Tzu and Jerry Tzu vs. CIR (C.I.A. Case No.
6211,04 October 2004)
b.l. This is likewise not a criminal case and is actually a suit questioning
the assessment of deficiency capital gains tax. Deeds ofAssignment
of shares were compared with capital gains tax returns.
I ultimately led to a lower capital gains tax due. In other words, when
petitioners intentionally overstated the cost of acquisition of
the said shares in their capitai gains tax returns, they willfully
I of the cost of acquisition in the capital gains tax returns filed with
the Bureau ofIntemal Revenue." (Emphasis and underscoring sup-
plied.)
I c. People vs. Mallari (C.T.A. Crim. Case Nos. A-I & A-2, 04 September
2006)
I c.l. This is a criminal case for failure to pay deficiency income tax and
value added tax.
I c.2. According to the CTA:
I "The Supreme Court had ruled that the word willful in a stat-
ute means 'not merely voluntary but with a bad purpose; in other
words, corruptly' and that a voluntary act is a free, intelligent, and
I intentional act.
I December 7, 2000 32) which were proven to have been sent by reg-
istered mail (Exhibit "Y'); that he received the Warrant of Distraint
and Levy (Exhibit "K") and the Demand Letter (Exhibit "D") de-
I manding payment of the deficiency taxes stated in the assessment
notices; and the fact that he admitted that he ignored the demand
for payment ofthe deficiency taxes, there is no other conclusion that
I can be drawn except that the accused-appellant willfully did not
pay his deficiency tax liabilities. Furthermore, accused-appellant's
I
refusal to pay his deficiency tax liabilities to the government. He
resorted to bribery instead of fulfilling his legal obligation of paying
.1:. '
his deficiency taxes." (Emphasis and underscoring supplied.)
I
~; a. People vs. Imelda Marcos (Crim. Case Nos. Q-91-24382-83, 91-24388-
'<
89, and 91-24392, 20 April 2007)
f
' ' -:
a.I. Several criminal cases were filed against respondent for:
I~
• Failure to give a written notice of death:
• Failure to pay estate taxes;
I
• Failure to file income and estate tax returns
a.2. The court took judicial notice of the fact that the Marcoses were
forcibly evicted from the country and brought to Hawaii in 1986,
I' leaving most of their personal and real properties under the posses-
sion and control of the government.
',
I ->
,'-.:-.-
a.3.The RTC held:
.'I
Likewise, even though she wanted to do so, their sudden departure
from the country prevented the accused from bringing her personal
record and documents with which she could assess or determine
her income for the year 1985 to prepare her income tax rerum...
Consequently, failing on the part of the prosecution to substanti-
ate through competent evidence that accused Mrs. Imelda Marcos
willfully, unlawfully and feloniously neglected to file and pay [an]
I income tax return for [the] year 1985, she could not be held crimi-
nally liable.
I The Court finds merit in the argument that the failure on the part
of the accused to file the estate tax return and to pay the estate tax
is not willful. Although accused may have failed to comply with
I what is required by law, accused should be exempted from criminal
liability as she was prevented to do so due to an insuperable cause
I
,:
made by no less than the government, i.e., as early as February 1986,
accused and her family were forcibly placed on exile in Honolulu,
I
~::
-------------------------- . ----
I
Hawaii until November 1991, when they returned to the country; the
I that accused would pay the tax due on the estate of her late husband
during the alleged time under which she was made to pay when she
had no records in her possession and control with which she could
I assess the gross value of the late president at the time of his death
and the deductions allowed from the gross estate to determine the
estate tax liability.
I On the whole, underscoring the finding ofthe Court that accused's
failure to comply with her tax obligation was due to causes beyond
I her control, there is no doubt that the element of "willfulness" for
crimes involving the violation of the National Internal Revenue
Code, as alleged in the Information in these five (5) criminal com-
I plaints, is lacking. In short, the prosecution's evidence did not pass
the test of moral certainty that there was "willful disobedience" on
f
I
I
I the part of the accused with the intention to evade and defeat the
tax." (Underscoring supplied.) I
f
I C. Challenges in Proving Intent and Willfulness in Tax Cases
I
I
I 260 Revised Manual for Prosecutors
!I
;
D. Proof of Willfulness in U.S. Jurisprudence
1,
1. Proof of Willfulness - Failure to File Returns [US Criminal Tax Manual
10.04{5] {aJ]'
d. Thus, willfulness can be shown by such factors as: the background of the
defendant; the filing of returns in prior years, United States v. Briscoe,
65 F3d 576, 588 (7th Cir. 1995); United States v. Hauert, 40 F3d 197,
199 (7th Cir: 1994); United States v. Birkenstock, 823 F2d 1026, 1028
(7th Cir: 1987); United States v. Bohrer. 807 F2d 159, 161 (10th Cir.
1986) United States v. Shivers, 788 F2d 1046, 1048 (5th Cir. 1986); that
the defendant was a college graduate with accounting knowledge; that
the defendant was familiar with books and records and operated a busi-
ness, United States v. Segal, 867 F2d 1173, 1179 (8th Cir. 1989); that the
defendant earned a large gross income, Bohrer. 807 F2d at 161. See also
United States v. Macl.eod, 436 F2d947, 949 (8th Cir: 1971) United States
v. Ostendorff, 371 F2d 729, 731 (4th Cir: 1967).
e. Evidence that a defendant had filed returns in other years when he claimed
refunds while there was a substantial tax due for the years he failed to
file is relevant evidence and more than enough to establish willfulness.
Garguilo, 554 F2d at 62.
a. In the leading case of Spies v. United States, 317 Us. 492, 499 (1943), the
Supreme Court, "by way of illustration and not by way oflimitation," set
forth the following as examples of conduct from which willfulness may
be inferred:
I United States v. Kim, 884 F2d 189, 192 (5th Cir. 1989) (evi-
dence of willfulness was sufficient where taxpayer failed to report
I
"
I mation.
United States v. Samara, 643 F2d 701, 703 (lOth Cir. 1981)
I (taxpayer kept receipt books for cash received but did not supply
them to accountant, thus concealing cash receipts); see also United
States v. Guidry, 199 F3d 1150,1157 (10thCir.l999); United States
I v. Brimberry, 961 F2d 1286, 1290 (7th Cir 1992); United States
v. Chesson, 933 F2d 298, 305 (5th Cir: 1991); United States v.
Michaud, 860 F2d 495,500 (I st Cir. 1988); United States v. Meyer,
I 808 F2d 1304, 1306 (8th Cir. 1987); United States v. Ashfield, 735
F2d 101, 107 (3d Cir. 1984); United States v. Conforte, 624 F2d
869 (9th Cir 1980); United States v. Scher, 476 F2d 319 (7th Cir.
I 1973).
I b.3. Taxpayer who relies on others to keep his records and prepare his
tax returns may not withhold information from those persons rela-
tive to taxable events and then escape criminal responsibility for the
I
II 262
I
i Revised Manual for Prosecutors
il
I
UnitedStatesv. Simonelli, 237 F3d 19,30 (lstCir. 2001); United
States v. O'Keefe, 825 F2d 314, 318 (11th Cir. 1987); United States
v. Garavaglia, 566 F2d 1056 (6th Cir: 1977).
United States v. Chesson, 933 F2d 298, 304 (5th Cin 1991);
United States v. Frederickson, 846 F2d 517, 520-21 (8th Cir: 1988)
(taxpayer falsely stated that she did not receive income from other
employees who worked in her massage parlor and that she deposited
i{ most of her income in the bank); United States v. Walsh, 627 F2d
t 88 (7th Cir: 1980); United States ". Tager, 481 F2d 97, 100 (lOth
Cir. 1973); United States v. Callanan; 450 F2d 145, 150 (4th Cir.
i: 1971); United States v. Jett, 352 F2d 179, 182 (6th Cir. 1965); see
also United States v. Klausner, 80 F3d 55, 63 (2dCir. 1996); United
States v. Pistante, 453 F2d 412 (9th Cir. 1971); United States v.
b.5. Keeping a double set of books. United States v. Daniels, 617 F2d
i
»
United States v. Walker, 896 F2d 295, 300 (8th Cir: 1990) (tax-
payers hid records and assets in an attempt to conceal them from
I ,~.
the IRS). See United States v. Chesson, 933 F2d 298, 304-05 (5th
Cir: 1991) (taxpayer altered and destroyed invoices after undergoing
a civil audit for underreporting income); United States v. Pistante,
j 453 F2d 412 (9th Cir. 1971); United Stares v. Holovachka. 314 F2d
345, 357 (7th Cir. 1963); Gariepy v. United States, 189 F2d 459,
463 (6th Cir. 1951).
I
-r
b.7. Making or using false documents, false entries in books and records,
false invoices, and the like.
I UnitedStatesv. Wilson, 118F3d 228,236 (4th Cir. 1997); United
States v. Chesson, 933 F2d 298, 304 (5th Cir. 1991); United States
I v. Walker, 896 F2d 295, 298 (8th Cir: 1990) (defendants submitted
false invoices to their family company so that the company would
I
II
:
Revised Manual for Prosecutors 263
I
b.S. Destruction of invoices to customers. United States v. Garavaglia, 566 F2d
1056, 1059 (6th Cir. 1977).
United States v. Daniel, 956 F2d 540 (6th Cir. 1992); United States v.
Peterson, 338 F2d 595,597 (7th Cir. 1964); United States v. Woodner; 317
F2d 649,651 (2d Cir. 1963); Banks v. United States, 204 F2d 666,672 (8th
Cir. 1953), vacated and remanded, 348 u.s.
905 (1955), reaff''d, 223 F2d
884 (8th Cir. 1955).
I
I
United States v. Daniel, 956 F2d 540 (6th Cir. 1992) (defendant used
cash extensively, immediately converted checks to cash, and paid employ-
a
I
ees and insurance policies in cash); United States v. Holovachka, 314 F2d
345,358 (7th Cir. 1963); Schuermann v. United States, 174F2d 397, 398
(8th Cir. 1949).
I b.ll. Spending large amounts of cash which could not be reconciled with the
amount of income reported.
I United States v. Simonelli, 237 F3d 19,30 (1st Cir. 2001); United States
v. Olbres, 61 F3d 967,971 (1st Cir. 1995); United States v. Kim, 884 F2d
I b.12. Use of bank accounts held under fictitious names. United States v. Ratner,
464 F2d 101, 105 (9th Cir. 1972); Elwert v. United States, 231 F2d 928
(9th Cir. 1956); cf United States v. White, 417 F2d 89,92 (2d Cir. 1969).
I b.l S, Checks cashed and the currency deposited in an out-of-town bank account.
I Slutsky, 487 F2d 832. 834 (2d Cir: 1973); United States v. Waller, 468 F2d
327,329 (5th Cir. 1972).
'I
I
I 264 Revised Manual for Prosecutors
II
b.15. Repetitious omissions ofitems of income, e.g., income from various sources
not reported.
United States v. Walker, 896 F2d 295,299 (8th Cir. 1990) (over a two-
year period taxpayer failed to report interest· income totaling $20,476);
UnitedStatesv. Tager: 479 F2d 120,122 (10th Cir. 1973); Sherwin v. United
- States, 320 F2d 137, 141 (9th Cir. 1963).
I
-"r' b.16. Prior and subseauent similar acts reasonably close to the prosecution
years.
I United States v. Middleton, 246 F3d 825, 836-837 (6th Cir. 2001);
Matthews v. United States, 407 F2d 1371, 1381 (5th Cir. 1969); United
I States v. Johnson, 386 F2d 630 (3d Cir. 1967); United States v. Magnus,
365 F2d 1007 (2d Cir. 1966); United States v. Alker, 260 F2d 135 (3d Cir.
b.17. Alias used on gambling trip -- relevant to an intent to evade taxes. United
b.18. The defendant's attitude toward the reporting and payment of taxes gener-
I ally.
United States v. Hogan, 861 F2d 312 (1st Cir: 1988); United States v.
I Stein, 437 F2d 775 (7th Cir. 1971); United States v. O'Connor, 433 F2d
752,754 (lst Cir: 1970); United States v. Taylor: 305 F2d 183,185 (4th Cir.
1962);
I b.l9. Background and experience of defendant. General educational background
I (willfulness inferred from the fact that each defendant had a college degree,
one in economics and the other in business).
I
-r..:.
I b.20. Offer to bribe government agent. Barcott v. United States, 169 F2d 929,
b.21. Use 'of false names and surreptitious reliance on the use of cash. United
I States v. Walsh, 627 F2d 88, 92 (7th Cir: 1980); United States v. Holladay,
566F2d 1018.1020 (5th Cir. 1978).
I b.22. Backdating documents, such as receipts, contracts, and the like, to gain a
tax advantage. United States v. Drape, 668 F2d 22 (lst Cir. 1982); United
States v. Crum, 529 F2d 1380 (9th Clr. 1976); United States v. 0 'Keefe, 825
I F2d 314 (lith Cir. 1987).
b.23. Illegal sources of income. United States v. Palmer, 809 F2d 1504,1505-06
I (lith Cir: 1987) (sale of narcotics).
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
. ,,
I
I
I
I ,
'i
:1
V. TEMPLATES OF TRIAL BRIEFS
[ ] Caption
[] Information Sheet (names, addresses and telephone numbers of the investigators, parties,
court)
[] Issues
[] Stipulations
[J Admissions
[] Elements
[] Evidence:
I [] Evidence:
I [] Source of evidence:
II [ ] Such person willfully attempts in any manner to evade or defeat any tax imposed
under the NIRC or the payment thereof
,I [ ] Evidence:
I [] Source of evidence:
[ ] Facts to be proven:
I [] Evidence:
I [] Source of evidence:
[ ] Facts to be proven:
I [] Evidence:
I [] Source of evidence:
I I [] Facts to be proven:
[] Evidence:
I [] Source of evidence:
I [] Witnesses
[] Witness name:
I I
I
I
;
268 Revised Manual for Prosecutors
I
,
[] Personal background: _
j.
I~ [] Outline of testimony:
I
~
,
i [] Comment:
I [] Witness name:
I
~
[] Personal background: ~_ _
I [J Outline of testimony: _
I
I [J Comment: _
I [] Witness name: _
I [] Personal background: _
[ ] Outline of testimony: _
I
I
[] Comment: _
I
I
I
-II
r
Revised Manual for Prosecutors 269
---- ---- --- ----
f
I
[ ] Documentary exhibits
I [ ] SEC Certificate ofRegistration, Articles of Incorporation & By-Laws or Articles of
Partnership (in case of a corporation)
I [] Corporate documents showing signature/participation in the conduct of business
I [] General Information sheet showing the identity ofthe corporate officers as enumer-
ated in Sec. 253 (d)
I [] BIR registration (Integrated Tax System [ITS]/RDO certification) to show that the
person is a registered taxpayer
[]
I []
Proof of income received or documents to show source of income
[ ] Using a dummy/ies
I [] Using fake Certificate Authorizing Registration (CAR) to commit Tax
I Evasion
I
~ 270 Revised Manual for Prosecutors
I
I
I [] Badges ofFraud:
I
B'_
[ ]
showing receipt of income (underdeclaration of income);
making it appear that one has filed a return or actually filing a return and
I subsequently withdraws the same after securing the official receiving seal
or stamp;
I ment;
I
I
I
I
I
,I
J Revised Manual for Prosecutors 271
I
I- ],,
[ ] Other important points to consider:
I
I
I
I B. SEC. 255. FAILURE TO FILE RETURN, SUPPLY CORRECT AND
ACCURATE INFORMATION, PAY TAXWITHHOLD AND REMIT TAX
I
[ ] Caption
I
[ ] Information Sheet (names, addresses and telephone numbers of the investigators, parties,
I court)
I
I [ ] Theory of the Case for the Prosecution
I
[ ] Theory of the Case for the Defense
I
I [ ] Issues
I -j
I
[] Stipulations ,i
I J
I 1
1
I i
j
1
,
~J
I
~j
j
272 Revised Manual for Prosecutors
,
J
I
[] Admissions
-';"'
Ii [J Elements
I :'.
" [] A person is required under the Tax Code, or by rules and regulations, to pay any tax,
make a return, keep any record, or supply correct and accurate information
i .[] Evidence: _
l' [ ]
[ ]
Source of evidence:
i
,,""
[ ] Evidence:
------------------------
•I
~ [ ]
[ ]
Source of evidence:
Such person willfully fails to make such return, keep such record, or supply such
correct and accurate information, or withhold or remit taxes withheld, or refund
excess taxes withheld on compensation
_
I [ ] Evidence: _
[ ] Source of evidence:
---------------------
I [ ] As a result, such person failed to pay the correct tax
I [ ] Evidence: _
I [ ] Source of evidence: _
I [] Evidence:
[] Source of evidence:
I [ ] Facts to be proven:
I [] Evidence:
-il
r- Revised Manual for Prosecutors 273
I-
I
[ ] Source of evidence:
"
•.
.~~~":
i,,
p
',~
u
.:':10
[] Facts to be proven:
J
I [ ] Evidence: >j
:tf
[] Source of evidence:
I [ ] Witnesses
':'
~'
"
I [] Witness name:
j
I [] Personal background:
[] Outline of testimony:
I
I
I
I [] Comment:
I [ ] Witness name:
[]
I Personal background:
[ ] Outline of testimony:
I
I
I [] Comment:
[] Witness name:
I [ ] Personal background:
I [] Outline of testimony:
I
I,
I
274 Revised Manual for Prosecutors
11
I
- I'
i []
[] Comment:
Documentary exhibits
-'--------------------
I [] General Information sheet showing the identity ofthe corporate officers as enumer-
ated in Sec. 253 (d)
[1 BIR regisrration (Integrated Tax System [ITS]/RDO certification) to show that the
[J Contracts
I c 1
l " Mayor's Permit
[]
I Proof of income received or documents to show source of income
I [] Tax Return
:1
I
[J First/Second / Final Request for Presentation of books of accounts / accounting
I records
I [J Financial Statements
Alpha List from district, Withholding Tax Division or Large Taxpayer Service
I
I [] Other important points to consider:
I
I
I C. SEC. 257 (B)(8) - KNOWINGLY USES FAKE CERTIFICATE AUTHORIZING
REGISTRATION
I [] Caption
I
[] Information Sheet (names, addresses and telephone numbers of the investigators, parties,
I court)
I
[ ] Theory of the Case for the Prosecution
I
•
il
i
276 Revised Manual for Prosecutors
II
1
I
I
,I; [ ]
[]
Theory of the Case for the Defense
Issues
"'c:.
I ~::
-',:,
I
~··
1,.c.:
-:,.
Ii [ ] Stipulations
1 ::'
I [] Admissions
i
i [J Elements
I [J Evidence:
I [ ] Source of evidence:
I
I [ ] He knowingly uses fake or falsified revenue official receipts, Letters ofAuthority,
certificates authorizing registration, Tax Credit Certificates, Tax Debit Memoranda
I and other accountable forms
[] Evidence:
I
[ ] Source of evidence:
I
I [J Probable proof of opponent
[J Facts to be proven: _
I [ ] Evidence:
I ~
Revised Manual for Prosecutors 277
I
j';
I 'If":,:
::'}~;t-::·"
[] Source of evidence:
I ,
[] Facts to be proven:
I
I [] Evidence:
I [] Source of evidence:
I [] Facts to be proven:
I [] Evidence:
I [ ] Source of evidence:
I [] Witnesses
I [] Witness name:
I [] Personal background:
I [ ] Outline of testimony:
I
I [ ] Comment:
I [ ] Witness name:
I [ ] Personal background:
I
I
I,
278 Revised Manual for Prosecutors
I
I " ,
I [] Outline of testimony:
I, -,
I
,
[ ] Comment:
r
~,
[J Personal background:
I [ ] Outline of testimony:
I
;:
I
[] Comment:
I
I [ ] Documentary exhibits
I [ ] BIR registration (Integrated Tax System [ITS]/RDO certification) to show that the
person is a registered taxpayer
I
I~ Revised Manual for Prosecutors 279
I
---- ----
'I'
-,/,,.,,'. ,'"
I (] Contracts
..;~-
I [ ] Mayor's Permit
[]
I []
Letter ofAuthority
I [] -Deeds of Conveyance
[] Contracts
I [] Other documents to show that there was a fraudulent scheme adopted to produce or
I
•.......'..'.•.
I:~.··
I.,.i
[] Other important points to consider:
! Ii
j
1'>;_.-
D. SEC. 258. UNLAWFUL PURSUIT OF BUSINESS
[ ] Caption
I
I [ ] Information Sheet (names, addresses and telephone numbers of the investigators, parties,
court)
I
II [] Theory of the Case' for the Prosecution
I
I [ ] Issues
I
[ ] Stipulations
I
I I
,
[] Admissions
I
I
I
~ Revised Manual for Prosecutors 281
Is
."W-
I -P:,.!.:
[ ] Elements
I [ ] A person, natural or juridical, carries on any business for which annual registration
fee is imposed
I [] Evidence:
I [ ] Source of evidence:
I
[ ] Such person did not pay the required annual registration fee
I [] Evidence:
I [ ] Source of evidence:
I [ ] Facts to be proven:
I []
[]
Evidence:
Source of evidence:
I [ ] Facts to be proven:
I [ ] Evidence:
[ ] Source of evidence:
I
[ ] Facts to be proven:
I [] Evidence:
I [ ] Source of evidence:
I
I
I. 282 Revised Manual for Prosecutors
•
I
L
I-.
i
~
. , [ ] Witnesses
[] Witness nallle: _
I [ ] Outline of testimony: _
I
I [] Comment:
j [] Witness name:
I [] Personal background:
I [] Outline of testimony:
I
I [ ] Comment:
I
[J Witness name:
I
I .
[J Personal background:
I
[ ] Outline of testimony:
I I
I
I
~ Revised Manual for Prosecutors 283
I
~t;
,:;,.,
~~~~~~~~~- .. _ •.. _ .. - ----- - .. ~
I
,
~~
.
.\ -
"-,
I,
~
I I
';f:.
E. SEC. 267. DECLARATION UNDER PENALTIES OF PERJURY
i [] Caption
i
}.
[] Information Sheet (names, addresses and telephone numbers of the investigators, parties,
court)
I
I
I [ ] Theory of the Case for the Prosecution
I
[ ] Issues
I
I
I [ ] Stipulations
I
:1
i
Revised Manuai for Prosecutors 285
I
I
[] Outline of testimony:
1
I I
[] Comment:
I
[] Witness name:
I
I [] Personal background:
I [] Outline of testimony:
I [] Comment:
I [] Documentary exhibits
I [] General Information sheet showing the identity of the corporate officers as enumer-
ated in Sec. 253 (d)
I [] Contracts
[ ] TaxRetnrn
I [ ] Proof of income
I [] Financial Statements
-I
[ ] Third Party Information
j
i.
I [ ] Other important points to consider:
i
I
I F. SEC. 236 (J) - SECURING MORE TIIAJ.~ ONE TIN
I [ ] Caption
I [ ] lnformation Sheet (names, addresses and telephone numbers of the investigators, parties,
court)
I
I [] Theory of the Case for the Prosecution
I
I [ ] Theory of the Case for the Defense
I [ ] Issues
I
I
I
II, Revised Manual for Prosecutors 289
il
I
[ ] Stipulations
I
I [ ] Admissions
I
I [] Elements
I [] Evidence:
I [] Source of evidence:
I [ ] Evidence:
I [ ] Source of evidence:
I [ ] Evidence:
,
J
I [ ] Source of evidence: j
1j
I [] Probable proof of opponent _J
'I
~
~
[] Facts to be proven: _
I [ ] Evidence: 1
I
)-,
I
il, 290
[ ] Source of evidence:
-----------------
Revised Manual for Prosecutors
I
il
I
I
~.
[] Facts to be proven:
I
I [ ] Evidence:
I [ ] Source of evidence:
[] Facts to be proven:
I [ ] Evidence:
I { ] Source of evidence:
I [ ] Witnesses
[] Witness name:
I [ ] Personal background:
I
[] Outline of testimony:
I
I
I [ ] Comment:
I [] Witness name:
I [ ] Personal background:
I [] Outline of testimony:
I
I [] Comment:
I
I{
Revised Manual for Prosecutors 291
II
,..
I [ ] Witness name:
F
I
I
[) Personal background:
I
[] Outline of testimony:
I
I
I [ ) Comment:
I [ ] Documentary exhibits
I [] RDO Certification to show that taxpayer is a registered with the BIR with the TIN
assigned
I
I [] Applicable laws and jurisprudence
I
I [ ] Other important points to consider:
I
I
I
I'I
I
292 Revised Manual for Prosecutors
I Ii
! f
I
I
I
SAMPLE FORMATS
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
:1
II
i
Revised Manual for Prosecutors 293
I
I NPS Sample Format "C", s. 2008
I
People of the Philippines,
I Plaintiff,
- versus -
Crim, Case No.
For: Violation of Sec. 360 I
_
I 2. In order not to frustrate the ends of justice, as when the accused seeks refuge in another
country to escape prosecution and there enjoy the fruits of his crime, it is imperative
I that a hold-departure order be issued directing the Commissioner of the Bureau of
Immigration to prevent the former from leaving the country during the pendency of the
instant case.
I 3. The instant motion is tiled pursuant to Department of Justice Circular No. 38 dated
August 15, 1990 which directs prosecutors to move for the issuance of a hold-departure
I order in specific cases, including violations of the Tariff and Customs Code. It is not
intended to delay the proceedings or infringe upon the accused's right to travel but for
the reasons stated above.
I
I
'I 294 Revised Manual for Prosecutors
~I
I
i WHEREFORE, it is respectfully prayed of this Honorable Court that the instant motion
be granted and that a ho1d-departure order be issued in the above-entitled case directing the
I ~;
-:;';'
(place/Date)
Private Prosecutor
I (Address)
I Prosecutor shall submit the foregoing motion for the consideration of this Honorable Court.
I EXPLAi~ATION
Due to the distance and lack of persounel to effect personal service, the foregoing Motion
I is being served upon the adverse parties via registered mail.
I
II
i
Revised Manual for Prosecutors 295
II
,
I NPS Sample Format "D-l", s. 2008
I MEMORANDUM
I Date:
I RECOMMEDING APPROVAL:
APPROVED:
I Secretary
I Encls.: As stated.
I
,;
I NPS Sample Format "D-2", s. 2008
I Department of Justice
NATIONAL PROSECUTION SERVICE
I
i
e.
(Date)
I Dear Secretary ,
I This request is with the approvai of the Secretary of Justice, as per attached
Memorandum.
I
Chief StateiRegional State!
I Provincial/City Prosecutor
I Attachment: As stated.
I
~ Revised Manual for Prosecutors 297
~
, I-
",'
- ... /"
1
:',
,
I
I
,I
I
I
,
I
i
i
I
I
,I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-I
,
)
298 Revised Manual for Prosecutors
I ~~
I
I
i
I ,
APPENDICES
I
I
,I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
,I Revised Manual for Prosecutors
, j 299
II ,
I Appendix "A"
I Republika ng Pilipinas
KAGAWARAN NG KATARUNGAN
Department ofJustice
I Manila
DEPARTMENT CmCULARNO. 39
I TO: ALL PROSECUTORS IN THE NATIONAL PROSECUTION SERVICE
In the interest of the service and pursuant to existing laws, Sec. 3 of the New Rules on
I Inquest, which provides for the termination of inquest proceedings within the period prescribed
in Article 125 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended, shall not be applicable when the persons
arrested without the benefit of a warrant of arrest issued by the court are children, as defined under
I Republic Act No. 9344, otherwise known as the "Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act of 2006" who
shall be treated as follows:
I 1. In cases of warrantless arrest involving a child in conflict with the law (CICL) who is
above fifteen (15) but below eighteen (18) years of age, and within eight (8) hours from
such arrest, the law enforcement officer concerned shall turn over custody of the child
I to the Local Social Welfare Development Officer (LSWDO) for the determination by
the latter of the presence or absence of discernment of the child (Rule 25. 1st Pan, IRR
ofRA 9344).
I I 2. The policy behind the juvenile justice system is, as much as possible, to prevent the
I CICL from being brought within the ambit of the judicial system; a fact which is entirely
opposite to the policy underlying Article 125 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended.
I 2.1. Hence, the turning over of the custody of the child to the LSWDO and the latter's
custody of the child, shall not be considered a detention; for which reason, in all
cases of warrantless arrest involving CICL, Article 125 of the Revised Penal Code
I shall not be applicable.
3. Cases erroneously filed by the law enforcement officer directly with the prosecution
I for inquest investigation shall be dismissed without prejudice to the refilling of the
same, if so warranted:
I a. Where the offense charged is punishable by imprisonment of not more than sis
(6) years, the prosecutor shall direct the law enforcement officer to turn over the
•
I 300 Revised Manual for Prosecutors
I
!
r
I custody of the CICL to the LSWDO for the required diversion of or intervention
proceeding as the case maybe.
i
'ffj.
parents, the complaint maybe refiled, but shall undergo the regular preliminary
investigation.
i
certifying that the child acted with discernment, the prosecutor shall direct the law
enforcement officer to tum over custody of the CICL to the LSWDO for the latter
to determine whether or not the CICL acted with discernment.
I b.l , The case may b revived for inquest proceeding should the child be found to
have acted with discernment
I 4. Within twenty four (24) hours from receipt of the LSWDO's finding of discernment,
the law enforcement officer concerned shall bring the child to the prosecutor for inquest
proceedings. The LSWDO shall accompany the child to provide the needed assistance
I to himlher.
I 5. The CICL subject of the inquest proceedings may avail of his right to Formal prelimi-
nary investigation, duly assisted by counselor in the latter's absence, by his! her parent,
or guardian or the LSWDO or representative form the Barangay Council for the protec-
I 6. Where the child acted without discernment, the LSWDO shall notify the law enforce-
ment officer and the offended party or the complainant (in case ofvictirnless crimes), of
such finding. TheLSWDO shall release or cause the release of the child from custody,
I if within five (5) days from such notice, the offended party or the complainant does
not contest the finding of absence of discernment of the child. Upon the filing by the
offended party or complainant with the LSWDO of the notice to contest the latter's
I finding, the child shall continue to be under the custody of the LSWDO or any other
authorized agency in whose custody the child has been delivered.
I 7. Within fifteen (IS) days from receipt of the finding of absence of discernment, the of-
fended party or complainant may file an action or appeal with the prosecutor question-
I ing the finding of the LSWDO. However, in cases punishable by reclusion perpetua,
life imprisonment or death, the finding by the LSWDO of lack of discernment shall be
the subject of an automatic appeal to the investigating prosecutor and it shall be the
~
, Revised Manual for Prosecutors 301
II duty of the law enforcers to forward/transmit the records ofthe case to the investigating
I prosecutor.
8. In cases where automatic appeal does not apply, and the LSWDO's finding of absence
I of discernment is not contested within the fifteen (15) day period, the law enforcement
officer shall dismiss the case, and the LSWDO shall release or cause the release of the
child from custody, but shall subject the child to an intervention program. j'
I
I
9. Upon receipt of the offended party's or the complainant's appeal from the LSWDO's
finding of absence of discernment ofthe child, the prosecutor shall conduct hislher own
assessment on the child's discernment or absence, thereof.
9.1 For purposes of such assessment, the prosecutor shall require the law enforcement
I
I officer to forward the records of the case to him/her; and conduct cl arificatory
hearing so the latter could personally examine the CICL.
II If the prosecutor deems it necessary, he/she may, at his/her own discretion,
and to aid himlher in hislher assessment, require the LSWDO to forward to him!
I her a copyof the case study on the child, if any or the records of the LSWDO's J
I
examination on the child, supporting its finding of absence of discernment of the
child.
9.3 If the child acted without discernment, the prosecutor shall dismiss the case and
!
i
i
order the release of the child and the conduct of the intervention by tile LSWDO.
I 9.4. If the child acted with discernment, the prosecutor shall conduct the inquest pro-
ceedings without prejudice to the child's right to a preliminary investigation.
I This circular takes effect immediately.
I I Secretary
I
I
II
,
, 302 Revised Manual for Prosecutors
,
j
II
,
I'i"',
Appendix "R"
Republika ng Pilipinas
KAGAWARAN NG KATARUNGAN
Department ofJustice
I Manila
I 26 June 2003
I In the interest of public service and pursuant to existing laws, effective upon issuance
hereof and until otherwise ordered, the dismissal of all cases, whether on inquest/preliminary
I investigation or on appeal, filed for violation ofRA 9165 and involving the maximum penalty of
life imprisonment to death, shall be subject to automatic review, as follows:
I 1. For cases dismissed by City and Provincial Prosecutors, by the Regional State Prosecutor
having jurisdiction over the Prosecution Office concerned; and
2. For cases dismissed by the Chief State Prosecutor, Regional State Prosecutors and City
I Prosecutors of cities in Metropolitan Manila, by the Secretary of Justice.
I The entire record of the case shall be elevated to the reviewing authority concerned within
three (3) days from issuance of the resolution dismissing the complaint or appeal, as applicable.
I The automatic review shall be summary in nature and shall be completed within thirty (30)
days from receipt of the case record.
I This Department Circular shall apply to covered cases which have been dismissed prior to
the issuance hereof if such dismissal has not yet attained finality as of the date of this Circular.
I This Department Circular amends or modifies all prior issuances inconsistent herewith.
I
J
Revised Man ual for Prosecutors 303
I
r
I
Appendix "C"
I Republika ng Pilipinas
'KAGAWA RAN NG KATARUNGAN
I Department ofJustice
Manila
I 28 August 1991
I In the interest of public service and for the efficient delivery of prosecutorial services, the
following appointed Regional State Prosecutors:
I
REGION I APOLINARlO G.EXEVEA
I San Fernando, La Union
-I
J
304 Revised Manual for Prosecutors
I'
:t' REGION IX WILFRIDO M. YU
I Zamboanga City
I
REGION X JESUS A. ZOZOBRADO
Cagayan de Oro City
i
REGION XI EMANUEL D. GALICIA
Davao City
{.
I 1. Implement within the region policies, plans, programs, memoranda, orders, circulars,
rules and regulations of the Department of justice relative to the National Prosecution
2. Exercise immediate administrative supervision over all provincial and city prosecutors
II and other prosecuting officers of provinces and cities within the region;
3. Investigate and/or prosecute, upon the directive of the Secretary of Justice, speci:fic
I criminal cases filed within the region.
4. Appoint personnel to positions in the first level and casual and seasonal employees as
I may be necessary; and exercise disciplinary actions over them in accordance with the
Civil Service Law; and approve transfer of subordinate personnel within the region
5. Approve requests for sick, vacation and maternity leaves of absence with or without
I pay, for a period not exceeding one year; for overtime services; for permission to teach,
exercise their profession or to engage in business outside of office hours in accordance
with standards and guidelines of the Civil Service Commission; for official travel
!I within the region for periods not exceeding thirty days; and for claims for benefits
under existing law (p.D. 1275 and E.O. 292);
I 6. Approve attendance of personnel in conference, seminars and non degree training and
programs within the region (E.O. 292);
I 7. Prepare the budget for the approval of the Secretary of Justice and administer the same
(p.D. 1275);
I
'.
,
Revised Manual for Prosecutors 305
I
I 8. Approve requisition for supplies, materials and equipments as well as books and
I periodicals, and other items for the region, in accordance with the approved supply
procurement programs (E.O. 292);
I 9. Negotiate and conclude contracts for services or for furnishing supplies, materials and
equipment for amounts not exceeding P50,000.00 for each quarter (p.D. 1275);
I 10. Monitor the submission of all reports required by the Department of Justice in rela-
tion to the operations and field activities of the prosecution offices within the region
(Department Order No. 150, s.1989);
I 11. Designate a prosecutor from another province or city within the region to investigate
and prosecute a case in instances where parties may question the partiality or bias of
I prosecutors of a particular provincial or city prosecution office;
I 12. Recommend to the Secretary of Justice the appointment and/or promotion of any pro-
vincial or city prosecutor or their assistants within the region;
I 13. Resolve with finality appeals from resolutions of dismissal of provincial/city pros-
ecutors and their assistants within the region, provided that the case is one where the
offense charged falls within the jurisdiction of Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal
I Trial Courts, and Municipal Circuit Trial Courts or is punishable with imprisonment of
not exceeding four (4) years and two (2) months, or a fine not more than four thousand
pesos, or both such fine and imprisonment;
I 14. Investigate administrative complaints against fiscals and other prosecuting of-
ficers within the region and submit his recommendation thereon to the Secretary of
I Justice who shall, after review thereof, submit the appropriate recommendation to the
Office of the President: Provided, that where the Secretary of Justice finds insufficient
grounds for the filing of charges he may render a decision of dismissal thereof. (P.D.
I 1275);
I 16. Coordinate with the regionai offices of the other departments and bureaus/agencies
under the Department of Justice and with local governments, the police and military
I units in the region (p.D. 1275); and
17. Perform such other duties and functions as may be provided by law or further delegated
I head of agency or other proper authorities concerned (E.O. 292).
I In the meantime that the Office of the Regional State Prosecutor is without a complement
of support staff personnel, the Regional State Prosecutor is hereby authorized to detail with his
office such number of personnel that may be needed from adjacent Provincial/City Prosecution
I
I
Offices so that it may be able to deliver and perform its functions as herein provided in this Order.
I Likewise, until it shall have a budget of its own, the office supplies and equipment requirements
of the Regional State Prosecution Office shall be provided for by the central office upon proper
requisition of the Regional State Prosecutor.
I This Order takes effect immediately and shall remain in force until further orders.
I Copy furnished:
All concerned.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
:1 307
Revised Manual for Prosecutors
----------- --- - - - ------~~--
I Appendix "D"
I Republika ng Pilipinas
KAGAWARAN NG KATARUNGAN
I Department ofJustice
Manila
I SUBJECT: Amending Department Order No. 318, Series ofl991, by specifying the instances
where a Regional State Prosecutor can designate anActing City or Provincial Prosecutor
I In the interest of public service for the efficient delivery of prosecutorial services and pur-
suant to existing laws, paragraph 11 ofDepartment Order No. 318, Series 1991 is hereby amended
to read as follows:
I "Designate a prosecutor from another province or city within the region
or a state prosecutor in the Regional State Prosecution Office, as Acting City or
I Provincial Prosecutor, to investigate and prosecute a case in instances where parties
may question the partiality or bias of prosecutors of a particular provincial or city
prosecution office or where the city ofprovincial prosecutor voluntarily inhibits
I himself by reason ofrelationship to any of the parties within the sixth civil degree
of consanguinity or affinity."
,
I This Order takes effect immediately and shall remain in force until further orders.
I
(Sgd.) EDUARDO G. MONTENEGRO
I Acting Secretary
I Copy furnished:
All concerned.
I
I
I 308 Revised Manual for Prosecutors
il
i
. \
I Appendix "E"
I Republika ng Pilipinas
KAGAWARAN NG KATARUNGAN.
I I Department ofJustice
Manila
I May 11,2000
I Service.
It has come to the attention of this Office that decision in several cases wherein the penalty
II of death had been imposed by the trial court were modified by the Supreme Court and lowered to
reclusion perpetua due to the failure of the prosecutors to allege in the informations or complaints
the attendance of special and other qualifying circumstances.
I Thus, in the case ofPeople vs. Ramos, 296 seRA 559, where the prosecutor failed to allege
in the information the relationship of the victim under 18 years of age with the offender who was
I her father, the Supreme Court "call (ed) the attention of the members of the prosecution service
and peace officers charged with the preparation of informations and complaints, that the attendant
circumstances provided by Republic Act No. 9659 must be specifically alleged in an information
I for rape in order that they may properly qualify the crime to the penalty specially prescribed by
the law." See also the cases of People vs. Gallo, G.R. 124736, Sept. 29, 1999, citing People vs,
It has also been observed that prosecutors have been negligent in failing not only
I tion of the aggravating circumstances in the information or complaint will therefore serve as
a reminder to the trial prosecutor in his presentation of evidence.
continued, next page >
I
i
Revised Manual for Prosecutors 309
II
I
For strict campliance.
I
I (Sgd.) ARTEMIO G. TUQUERO
Secretary .
I Copy furnished:
All concerned.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I-II 310
Revised Manual for Prosecutors
i
I Appendix "F"
I Republika ng Pilipinas
KAGAWARAJ.'l NG KATARUNGAN
I Department ofJustice
Manila
I May 3, 2000
I In the interest of the service and for the purpose ofpromoting efficient and effective admin-
istration ofjustice, the preparation of a trial guide is henceforth required in the prosecution of all
The prosecutor assigned to prosecute the case shall prepare the trial guide. The trial guide,
I as accomplished, shall be made a permanent part of the prosecution's records of the case. Its
preparation shall be in accordance with the attached matrix.
I Regional, Provincial and City Prosecutors, and their assistants, and the State Prosecutors in
the Office of the Chief State Prosecutor are enjoined to strictly comply with this Circular.
I This Circular takes effect immediately and shall remain in force until revoked.
I
I (Sgd.) ARTEMIO G. TUQUERO
Secretary
I
,I
I
I
II. Revised Manual for Prosecutors 311
J
I
TRIAL GUIDE
I
A. The Case
I I. A brief statement oftbe facts oftbe case.
I. The names of prosecution witnesses and the synopsis of the facts to be testified by each.
I II. A list of exhibits to be presented and marked in court.
,I III. A list of aggravating, mitigating, qualifying or other circumstances that are present in the
case.
II. The names of probable defense. Witnesses and synopsis of the facts to be testified by each.
I •
I
I
I
I 312 Revised Manuai for Prosecutors
11
I-
I
Appendix "G"
t Republika ng Pilipinas
KAGAWARAN NG KATARUNGAN .
Department ofJustice
I Manila
I 1. The DOJ is not precluded from conducting any investigation of cases involving
violations of penal laws, even if the same involves public officers and/or employ-
ees. - Sec. 13 Article XI of the constitution, Sec. 15 of the Ombudsman Act of 1989
I and Sec. 4 of the Sandiganbayan Law, as amended, do not grant to the Honorable
Ombudsman exclusive jurisdiction to investigate offenses committed by the public of-
ficers or employees. The authority of the Ombudsman to investigate offenses involving
I public officers or employees is concurrent with other government investigating agen-
cies such as provincial, city and state prosecutors.
I to prosecute offenders under Chapter I, Title Ill, Book IV ofthe 1987 Administrative
Code, as well as its responsibility for the investigation and prosecution of all cases
involving violations of penal laws under Sec. 1 ofPD. I27S-which authorities are fur-
I ther confirmed by Sees. 2 and 4 Rule 112 ofthe Revised Rules on Criminal Procedure.
Hence, the power to investigate or conduct preliminary investigation on charges against
I
I public officers or employees may be exercised by provincial or city prosecutors or their
3. The authority to investigate charges of illegal acts or omissions on the part of pub-
I lic officials is a shared or concurrent authority on the part ofthe Ombudsman and
this Department- The authority of the Ombudsman to investigate any illegal act or
omission of any public official is not an exclusive authority but rather a shared or con-
I current authority in respect of the offense charged. The case of Sanchez V. Demetriou,
227 SCRA 627. citing Aguinaldo v. Domagas, GR No. 98452, September 26, 1991
and Deloso v. Domingo, 191 SCRA 545 (1990), even held that the "non- involvement
I ofthe office ofthe Ombudsman [in the present case1 does not have any adverse legal
consequences upon the authority ofthe [panel of! prosecutors tofile and prosecute the
information and amended information ".
I 4. DOJ-OMB Joint Circular No. 95-001 is merely an internal agreement between
the Ombudsman and this Department> Considering that the Department's authority
I is based on Chapter I, Title III. Book IV of the 1987 Administrative Code. Sec. 1 of
PD 1275, as confirmed by Sees. 2 and 4, Rule 112 ofthe Revised Rules on Criminal
I Procedure, there ·is not even a need to delegate the conduct of the preliminary inves-
tigation to this Department considering that it has the jurisdiction to do so in the first
place. The fact that all prosecutors are in effect deputized Ombudsman prosecutors.
5. The Ombudsman may, in the exercise of its primary jurisdiction, take over at any
I stage ouly in cases falling within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan.-
The Ombudsman, in the exercise of its primary jurisdiction over cases cognizable by
the Sandiganbayan, may take over, at any stage, from any investigating agency of the
I government, the investigation such cases.
For proper guidance of all concerned, and in order to prevent any undue delay caused
I by issues of jurisdiction between this Department and the Ombudsman, it is thereby clarified
pursuant to existing jurisprudence, laws, rules and regulations, that all prosecutors have legal
I cognizable by the Sandiganbayan in the exercise of its original jurisdiction Sec. 4 (a), (b), and
(c) ofRA 7975, as amended, the ombudsman may take over at any stage of the investigation, in
line with its primary jurisdiction under the last sentence Sec. 15 (1) ofRA 6670 conformably with
I ruling in Honasan vs. Department ofJustice (DOJ) Panel ofInvestigating Prosecutors.
InAccordance with Sec. 4, Rule 112 ofthe Revised Rules on Criminal Procedure, all resolu-
I tions on preliminary investigation for cases involving offenses cognizable by the Sandiganbayan
in the exercise of its original jurisdiction, shall within five (5) days from the issuance thereof,
be forwarded together with the case records to the Ombudsman or his deputy. In such cases, no
I I
•
,I 314 Revised Manual for Prosecutors
II
,
I complaint or information maybe filed or dismissed by an investigating prosecutor without
Existing guidelines; procedure and issuance intended to preserve and enhance the joint and
I mutual coordination between the office of the Ombudsman and the Department of Justice shall
remain effective and consistent with this Circular and applicable jurisprudence, laws, rules and
regulations.
I This Circular takes effect immediately, and shall remain in full force until further orders.
I
I (Sgd.) RAVLM. GONZALEZ
Secretary
I Copy furnished:
All concerned.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I Revised Manual for Prosecutors 315
I
,I Appendix "H"
1
I GUIDE FOR MEDIA PRACTITIONERS ON THE REPORTING AND
COVERAGE OF CASES INVOLVING CHILDREN
I Rationale
I of the people to information on matters of public concern shall be recognized. Access to official
records, and to documents, and papers pertaining to official acts, transactions or decisions, as well
as to government research data used as basis for policy development, shall be afforded the citizen,
As a cornerstone in a democratic society, Media provides the means for a free market
I of ideas. Access by media to information is given wide latitude most especially when it comes
to matters of governance, public and political affairs. However, it must be noted that the very
Constitutional provision recognizing the right to access to information likewise states that the right
I is not without limitations. Access to information is "subject to limitations as may be provided by
law". One such limitation is the access to information, and the publication thereof; on matters
pertaining to children.
I The challenge to media practitioners is to carry out their duty of informing the public ef- i
I fectively and at the same time being aware ofthe need to protect and enhance the rights ofthe child
without in any way compromising the freedom of expression or undermining their independence
as journalists. They are in the position to assess the efforts along this line and challenge everyone
:
I to comply with domestic laws and international commitments on the rights of the child. !
•
This guide is intended to raise media awareness on issues concerning the rights of the child
I .and at the same time reinforce journalistic standards, through self- regulation, and contribute to
the protection and promotion of these rights. Existing laws passed protecting the child provides
for confidentiality. The confidentiality clauses are meant to protect the child's right to privacy and
I to prevent the child from trauma, social stigma, and further suffering arising from inappropriate
publicity or approaches to media coverage:
I With the passage of new laws relating to children, the Special Committee for the
Protection of Children saw the need to update the guidelines it formulated in 2000, consistent
with the provisions provided in the laws.
I Declaration of State Policy
I The 1987 Constitution declares that the State recognizes the sanctity of family life and shall
protect and strengthen the family as a basic institution. The natural and primary right and duty of
I parents in the rearing of the youth for civic efficiency and the development ofmoral character shall
receive the support of the Government.
I protect their physical, moral, spiritual, intellectual, and social well-being. It shall inculcate in the
youth patriotism, nationalism, and encourage involvement in public and civil affairs.
I The State, in the exercise of parens patriae, has the inherent duty to defend and care for
its citizens, children included, considering the special care they need vis-a-vis the right to press
freedom and the right to expression.
I Children need special safeguards and care due to their size, vulnerability and young age.
Every effort must be exerted to ensure that children are accorded special protection to enable them
I to grow and develop in an atmosphere of peace, dignity, tolerance, freedom, equality and solidar-
ity. The best interest of the child shall be the primordial and paramount concern of everyone.
I The United Nations has recognized that children need special care and protection. The
Convention on the Rights of the Child, to which the Philippines is a state party, recognizes that
I a child's rights need to be protected and enhanced, among these, the right to privacy, honor and
reputation either as a victim or in conflict with the law.
I There are groups of children who need special protection. Children as victims of abuse and
those who are in conflict with the law need to be shielded from inappropriate media coverage and
unwarranted publicity. Reporting of their cases should be done in a manner that would promote
I their best interest.
Legal Basis
I • Presidential Decree No. 603 (Child and Youth Welfare Code) provides for the destruction
I of the records of the case such as files of the National Bureau of Investigation, any police
department and any other government agency, after the charges have been dropped.
I • Republic Act No. 7610 (Special Protection of Children Against Child Abuse, Exploitation
and Discrimination Act) requires "strict confidentiality" on the identity of child abuse vic-
tims and to all records pertaining to the case.
I • Republic Act No. 8369 (Family Courts Act of 1997) provides that all hearings and.concili-
ation of the child and family cases shall be treated in a manner consistent with the promotion
I ofthe child's and family's dignity and worth, and shall respect their privacy at all stages of the
proceedings. It further provides for the confidentiality of all records of cases and the identity
of the parties involved therein unless necessary and with court authority.
I •
• Republic Act 9165 (Comprehensive Drugs Act of 2002) provides for the confidentiality .of
I records of children under both the voluntary and compulsory submission program or those
of children discharged after compliance with conditions of suspended sentence. It further
providerecords of probation and community service of the child.
I
~ Revised Manual for Prosecutors 317
I
j
I • Republic Act No, 9208 (Auti-Trafficking in Persons Act of 2003) provides for confidential-
I ity of proceedings at any stage of the investigation. It shall be unlawful to cause publicity of
any case of trafficked persons when prosecution or trial is conducted behind closed-doors.
I • Republic Act No. 9262 (Anti-Violence Against Women and Their Children Act of 2004)
provides that all records pertaining to cases ofviolence against women and their children shall
be confidential ... and the right to privacy of the victim shall be respected. Whoever publishes
I or causes to be published, in any format, the name, address, telephone number, school, busi-
ness address, employer, or other identifying information of a victim or an immediate family
member, without the latter's consent shall be liable to the contempt power of the court.
I • Republic Act No. 9344 (Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act of2006) mandates that all records
I and proceedings involving children in conflict with the law from initial contact until final
disposition of the case shall be considered privileged and coniidential.
The said laws/rule provides for penal sanctions for any violation of the abovementioned
I confidentiality provisions. .
I B. The child refers to a person below eighteen (18) years of age or one who is eighteen (18)
years of age or over but is unable to fully take care of or protect himself/herself from abuse,
I a. Child Victim - is a child who suffered from abuse, exploitation, neglect and discrimination
(e.g. sexual, physical, emotional, verbal, psychological, economic). The term includes
Children Involved in Armed Conflict (ClAC).
I b. Child in Conflict with the Law (CICL) - refers to a child who is alleged as, accused of, or
adjudged as, having committed an offense under Philippine laws
c. Child Witness - is any person who at the time of giving testimony is below the age of
I eighteen (18) years
I
I, 318 Revised Manual for Prosecutors
il
I Principles and Guide
I Principle 1
I Children have an absolute right to privacy. The highest ethical and professional stan-
dards in reporting and covering cases of children must be observed such that in all pub-
licity concerning children, the best interests of the child shall be the primary concern.
I Guide
I 1. In the best interest ofthe child, the identity ofa child victim of abuse, child witness, CIAC or
a CICL shall not be disclosed whether directly or indirectly. No information that would lead
to the identity of the child or any member of his/her family shall be published or broadcast.
I 2. Photographs, images, or video footage of the face or any distinguishing feature or informa-
tion of a child victim of abuse, child witness, CIAC or a child in conflict with the law
I including his or her family members shall not be taken, published, or shown to the public in
any manner.
I 3. Exception to this are missing children, children looking for their parents or relatives or any
other similar cases where revealing the identify, is for the best interest of the child.
I 4. The disclosure of any private or graphic detail of the case, including the medico-legal find-
ings, in public, is a violation of confidentiality provisions under the law.
I 5. The access. use or dissemination as well as the provision of records of a child shall be
subject to sanctions under existing laws. Records, materials and other evidence recovered or
I confiscated during rescue operations of child victims are considered confidential when they
form part of police, prosecution or court records.
I 6. In the best interest of the child, interview(s) ofa child victim of abuse, child witness, child
involved in armed conflict and a child in conflict with the law should be conducted only
I when the child interviewee is assisted by a psychologist or a social worker known to her or
him. In this case, the media practitioner should take into consideration the level of comfort
of the child when asking questions and the length of time spent in the interview. This is to
7. In reporting or covering cases on abuse and exploitation involving children, media practi-
I tioners are encouraged to discuss the issues surrounding the case rather than the personal
circumstances of the victim.
I
I
I il
I Revised Manual for Prosecutors 319
il
I Principle 2
I Guide
1. The use of sexualized images of children is a violation of the child's rights. Obscene or
I pornographic materials, videos, photographs and other related media should not be subjects
of circulation, publication or broadcast as it is a violation of the right of the child to dignity
and self-worth.
I 2. Crimes of violence by or against children must be reported factually and seriously without
3. There should be a conscious effort to avoid sensationalism and exploitation of the child in
I need of any assistance. The release of the child's identity to elicit financial support or aid for
the child's medical care is strongly discouraged.
I 4. The personal circumstance of the child which will tend to sensationalize the case must be
avoided. The child's life should not be treated as a movie.
I Principle 3
I Children have the right to be heard. Access to media by children should be encour-
aged.
I Guide
I 1. Whenever possible, give children access to media for them to be able to express their own
opinions without inducement of any kind, in any manner or procedure affecting them.
I 2. When the child is the source of crime-related news or information, his/her identity should be
protected at all times.
I Principle 4
I The mass media is a partner in the promotion of child rights and the prevention of
child delinquency, and is encouraged to relay consistent messages through a balanced
approach.
I
Journalistic activity which touches on the lives and welfare of children must be carried
I out with sensitivity and appreciation of the vulnerable situation of children, so that
children are not re-victimized or re-traumatized.
-rl
,.
320 Revised Manual for Prosecutors
I Guide
I 1. On media coverage 'of specific cases, the present as well as the long-term implications for
the child's recovery, rehabilitation and reintegration shall be taken into consideration by all
I those involved in deciding on and implementing the said approaches to media coverage.
2. It is the responsibility of the media to verify the status of an organization which purports to
I speak or represent the child, before any airing, broadcasting or publication in behalf of the
child. The organization must be duly accredited, registered or licensed by the Department of
Social Welfare and Development (DSWD) or by any appropriate government agency.
I 3. Media is urged to undertake investigative journalism and to report on violations of children's
rights, and other issues relating to children's safety, privacy, security, education, health and
I social welfare and all forms of exploitation and discrimination.
4. There are government agencies responsible for the care of children such as the Department
I of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD), or the local social welfare offices, Department
ofLabor and Employment (DOLE), Movie and Television Review and Classification Board
I (MTRCB), including private organizations or institutions which have adopted and are
implementing guidelines on dealing with child sensitive coverage, reportage, and access to
media. Media organizations are urged to develop their own internal policies and procedures
I aligned and consistent with these guidelines, including monitoring systems and protection
mechanisms on the engagement of children in any media program to ensure that children are
free from physical and psychological risks and that they are not exploited for commercial
I purposes.
I REFERENCES:
RA No. 8369, Sec. 12; RA No. 9165; RA No. 9208, Sec. 7; RA No. 9262, Sec. 44; RA No.
I 9344, Sec. 23; Supreme Court Rule on the Examination of Child Witnesses and the UN
Convention on the Rights of the Child.
I
I
I
I Revised Manual for Prosecutors 321
I
I
I
ADDITIONAL REFERENCE
1
!
I International Federation bf Journalists' Draft Guidelines and Principles for Reporting on Issues
,
Involving Children (Adopted at Recife, Brazil, 2nd May 1998)
I All journalists and media professionals have a duty to maintain the highest ethical and pro-
fessional standards and should promote within the industry the widest possible dissemina-
I tion of information about the International Convention on the Rights of the Child and its
implications for the exercise of independent journalism.
I Media organizations should regard violations of the rights of children and issues related to
children's safety, privacy, security, their education, health and social welfare and all forms
I of exploitation as important questions for investigation and public debate. Children have an
absolute right to privacy, the only exceptions being those explicitly set out in these guide-
lines.
I Journalistic activity which touches on the lives and welfare of children should always be
carried out with appreciation of the vulnerable situation of children. Journalists and media
I organizations shall strive to maintain the highest standards of ethical conduct in reporting
children's affairs and, in particular, they shall:
I Strive for standards of excellence in terms of accuracy and sensitivity when reporting on
issues involving children:
I • Avoid programming and publication of images which intrude upon the media space for
children with information which is damaging to them; ,
I • Avoid the use of stereotypes and sensational presentation to promote journalistic material
involving children;
l
I • Consider carefully the consequences of publication of any material concerning children
and shall minimize harm to children;
I • Guard against visually or otherwise identifying children unless it is demonstrably in the
public interest;
I Give children, when possible, the right of access to media to express their own opinions
without inducement of any kind;
I • Ensure independent verification of information provided by children and take special care
I
-I
;
322 Revised Manual for Prosecutors
I • Use fair, open and straight forward methods for obtaining pictures and whenever possible,
I obtain them with the knowledge and consent of children or a responsible adult, guardian
or care grver;
I Verify the credentials of any organization purporting to speak for or represent the interest
of children;
I • Not make payment to children for material involving the welfare of children or to parents
or guardians of children unless it is demonstrably in the interest of the child;
I Journalists should put to critical examination the reports submitted and the claims made by
I Media should not consider and report the conditions of children only as events but should
continuously report the process likely to lead or leading to the occurrences of these events.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~ Revised Manual for Prosecutors 323
,
II Appendix "1"
I VALIDATION SESSI0N PARTICIPAl~TS
I 1" VALIDATION SESSION
City Garden Suites, Mabini, Manila
I 6-7 March 2008
Region 1
I 1. ARSP Zenaida M. Ferrer - ORSP
2. CP Myra Sheiia M. Nalupta-Barna-OCP Batac City
I 3.
4.
CP Emmylou Rubang-Mangasar- OCP Candon City
Admin Officer V Elisa A. Daodao - OPP Benguet
Region II
I 6. SP II Ronnel B. Nicolas - ORSP, Tuguegarao City
I
!
I
7. PP Amador T. Arao - OPP Cagayan
8. 2nd APP Dinahlyn S. Gelacio - OPP Isabela
9. 1stACP Mercedes P. Banez - OCP Tuguegarao City
10. ACP Cherry Marie A. Madrid - OCP Santiago City
I
I 11. AdminAsst. II Jonalyn D. Tallod- ORSP
12. Admin Officer V Calixto P. Danao - OPP Cagayan
13. Admin Officer V Ernesto T. Paguirigan - OPP Isabela
I 14. Admin Officer V Conrado S. Gaffuy - OPP Nueva Viscaya
r
I Region ill
I
:
324 Revised Manual for Prosecutors
:1
!
I
.c"
:;::r 27. Admin Officer V Josephine A. Desembrana - OCP Lucena City
Region V
I
,
29. RSP Mary May B. De Leoz - ORSP
30. SP II Maria Visia O. Maldo - ORSP
I 31. SP II Joyce O. Guerrero - ORSP
32. PP Regina Coeli F. Gabito - OPP Sorsogon
33. CP Edmundo O. Legaspi - OCP Masbate City
I 34, lst APP Annalie T. Velarde - OPP Camarines Norte
35. Admin Officer V Fidelia T. Villaver - OCP Naga City
36. Admin Officer V Esther R. Mendoza - OPP Masbate
I 37. Admin Officer Leonardo C. Carido - OPP
38. Sr. Adm Asst. I Maria Rosario E. Sempuego - OPP Camarines Sur
I
I 2nd VALIDATION SESSIONS
Cebu Waterfront Hotel, Lahug, Cebu City
3-4 April 2008
I Region VI
I Region vn
i !I
i
I RegionVIll
I
I 3'" VALIDATION SESSION
Cherry Blossoms Hotel, Manila
12 June 2008
I
I
9. CP Ramon E. Rodrigo
10. IstACP AlvinA. Almora
11. Ms. Luzviminda D. Toledo
I OCP Las Piiias
I
..
I OCP Makati City
1
I 15. CP Feliciano A. Aspi
16. IstACP Romulo 1. Naiiola
I ;;:-
17. Ms. Isabelita V. Mejia
OCPManila
J
j
Revised Manual for Prosecutors 327
I
J
I OCP Pasig City
OCPRizal
I 41. PP Edgardo C. Bautista
42. APP Gloria M. De Guzman
I 43. Ms. Emily R. Trajano I
I OCP Quezon City
OCPSanJuan
I
4th VALIDATION SESSIONS
I Davao Waterfront Hotel, Davao City
26-27 Jnne 2008
I RegionL"X
-~ 328
4. PP Jeric S. Kagaoan - OPP Ipil, Zamboanga Sibugay
Region XII
I 16. RSP Maranao C. Danganan - ORSP
17. PP Emmanuel S. De Peralta - OPP Sultan Kudarat
I 18. ACP Renato P. Consebit - OCP Tacurong City
19. CP AI P. Calica - OCP Kidapawan City
20. Ist APP Felipe Vicente A. Velasco - OPP Sarangani Province
I Region XIII
I Region XIV
I
I
II I
Revised Manual for Prosecutors 329
I
I INTERAGENCY ROUNDTABLE DISCUSSIONS
I Supreme Court
I Ombudsman
I
Office ofthe Solicitor General
I 7. Sr. State Solicitor Luis F. Simon
I
8. Atty. Gloria Victoria Taruc
J
Commission on Elections
I 9. Dir. Ferdinand T. Rafanan
10. Dir, Josllyn P. Demesa
I
I Department of Environment and Natural Resources
I
-
~- ---- --
I
I
I
Public Attorneys' Office
I 35, Dep. Chief Pub. Atty. Macapangcat Mama
I Department of Justice
I
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I
I
II 332 Revised Manual for Prosecutors
II
I
I About This Manual
I I user-friendly guide and a "how-to" manual for those who are pressed for time in preparing
the various pleadings and communications required of prosecutors. it was written to
ensure that the administration of justice is equitably served.
I I Republic of the Philippines
National Prosecution Service
I Departmeflt of Justice
P. Faura. E'mita, Manila
!I
'I
I I
I
I
I This Revised Manual for Prosecutors with Special Sections on Human Rights and Tax Cases
was made possible with support provided by The Asia Foundation, Millennium Challenge
Corporation, U,S, Aqency for International Development, and the Asian Development
I Bank, The opinions expressed here are those of the authorts) and do not necessarily reflect
the views ofThe Asia Foundation, the Millennium Challenge Corporation, the U.S. Agency
for international Development, or the Asian Development Bank.
I
I
I
I