I. Impeachment II. Ombudsman III. Sandiganbayan IV. Ill-Gotten Wealth
I. Impeachment
Impeachment has been defined as ―a criminal proceeding against a public officer, before a quasi-judicial political court, instituted by written accusation called ‗articles of impeachment.‘‖ (Agpalo, 2005)
Its purpose is to protect the people from official delinquencies or malfeasances. It is primarily intended for the protection of the State, not for the punishment of the offender. The penalties attached to impeachment are merely incidental to the primary intention of protecting the people as a body politic. (De Leon, 2008) Grounds (Sec. 2, Art. XI, Constitution) 1. culpable violation of the Constitution 2. treason
3. bribery
4. graft and corruption
14 4
5. other high crimes 6. betrayal of public trust
The acts which are impeachable grounds must be committed in the performance of the official‘s public office. (Agpalo, 2005)
No impeachment proceedings shall be initiated against the same official more than once within a period of one year. (Sec. 3, Art. XI, Constitution)
o ―Having concluded that the initiation takes place by the act of filing of the impeachment complaint and referral to the House Committee on Justice, the initial action taken thereon, the meaning of Section 3 (5) of Article XI becomes clear.
Once an impeachment complaint has been initiated in the foregoing manner, another may not be filed against the same official within a one year period following Article XI, Section 3(5) of the Constitution.‖
[Francisco, Jr. v. House of Representatives, (2003)]
II. Ombudsman
(Agpalo, 2005)
Disciplinary Power Over Public Officers
The Office of the Ombudsman has disciplinary authority over all elective and appointive officials of the government and its subdivisions, instrumentalities and agencies, including Members of the Cabinet, local government, government-owned or controlled corporations and their subsidiaries. (Sec. 21, RA 6770)
The disciplinary power of the Ombudsman is not exclusive but is shared with other disciplinary authorities of the government.
The disciplinary power of the Ombudsman over elective officials is concurrent with the power vested in the officials specified in the Local Government Code of 1991. [Hagad v. Dozo-Dadole, (1995)]
Exceptions to Ombudsman’s Disciplinary Power
The Ombudsman has no disciplinary power over the following (Sec. 21, RA 6770):
1. Officials who may be removed only by impeachment
2. Members of Congress 3. Members of the Judiciary
However, the Office of the Ombudsman has the power to investigate any serious misconduct in office committed by officials removable by impeachment, for the purpose of filing a verified complaint for impeachment, if warranted. (Sec. 22, RA 6770)
Power to Preventively Suspend
The Ombudsman or his Deputy may preventively suspend any officer or employee under his authority pending an investigation, if in his judgment the evidence of guilt is strong, and (a) the charge against such officer or employee
involves dishonesty, oppression or grave
misconduct or neglect in the performance of duty;
(b) the charges would warrant removal from the service; or
(c) the respondent's continued stay in office may prejudice the case filed against him.
(Sec. 24, RA 6770)
The preventive suspension shall continue until the case is terminated by the Office of the Ombudsman but not more than six (6) months, without pay, except when the delay in the disposition of the case by the Office of the Ombudsman is due to the fault, negligence or petition of the respondent, in which case the period of such delay shall not be counted in computing the period of suspension herein provided. (Sec. 24, RA 6770)
Prior notice and hearing is not required before suspension may be meted out. Suspension is not a punishment or penalty but only a preventive measure to prevent the respondent from using his position or office to influence or intimidate prospective witnesses or tamper with the records which may be vital in the prosecution of the case against them.
(1) Judicial Review in Administrative Proceedings
Decisions or resolutions of the Ombudsman in administrative cases absolving the respondent of the charge or imposing upon him the penalty of public censure or reprimand, suspension of not more than one month, or a fine equivalent to one month salary, is final and unappealable.
(Agpalo, 2005)
Appeals from decisions of the Office of the Ombudsman in administrative disciplinary cases should be taken to the Court of Appeals under the provisions of Rule 43. [Fabian v.
Ombudsman, (1998)]
(2) Judicial Review in Penal Proceedings
In all other cases, the decision shall become final after the expiration of 10 days from receipt thereof by the respondent, unless a motion for reconsideration or a petition for review is file with the CA pursuant to Rule 43 of the Rules of Court.
(Agpalo, 2005)
III. Sandiganbayan
Exclusive Original Jurisdiction over (a) violations of R.A. No. 3019 and No. 1379
(b) crimes committed by public officers and employees embraced in Title VIII of the Revised Penal Code
(c) other offenses or felonies (whether simple or complexed with other crimes) committed by public officers and employees in relation to their office, where the penalty prescribed by law is higher than prision correccional or
14 5
imprisonment for six (6) years, or a fine of P6,000; and
(d) Civil and criminal cases filed pursuant to and in connection with Executive Orders No. 1,2, 14, and 14-a issued in 1986
In the absence of any allegation that the offense charged was necessarily connected with the discharge of the duties or functions of a public officer, the ordinary court, not the Sandiganbayan, has jurisdiction to hear and decide the case.
What is controlling is not whether the phrase
"committed in relation to public office" appears in the Information. What determines the jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan is the specific factual allegation in the Information that would indicate close intimacy between the discharge of the accused's official duties and the commission of the offense charged in order to qualify the crime is having been committed in relation to public office. The relation between the crime and the office must be direct and not accidental, that is, the relation has to be such that, in the legal sense, the offense cannot exist without the office.
Officials and private individuals subject to its jurisdiction
Under Section 4(a, b) of PD No. 1606, as amended, the Sandiganbayan shall exercise exclusive original jurisdiction over the cases mentioned in (a), (b), and (c) above where one or more of the accused are officials occupying the following positions in the government, whether in a permanent, acting or interim capacity at the time of the commission of the offense:
(a) Officials of the executive branch occupying the positions of regional director and higher, otherwise classified as Grade '27' and higher, of the Compensation and Position Classification Act of 1989 (R.A. No.
6758), specifically including:
1) Provincial governors, vice-governors, members of the sangguniang panlalawigan, and provincial treasurers, assessors, engineers, and other provincial department heads;
2) City mayors, vice-mayors, members of the sangguniang panlungsod, city treasurers, assessors, engineers, and other city department heads;
3) Officials of the diplomatic service occupying the position of consul and higher;
4) Philippine army and air force colonels, naval captains, and all officers of higher rank;
5) Officers of the Philippine National Police while occupying the position of provincial director and those holding the rank of senior superintendent or higher;
6) City and provincial prosecutors and their assistants, and officials and
prosecutors in the Office of the Ombudsman and special prosecutor;
b) Presidents, directors or trustees, or managers of government-owned or controlled corporations, state universities or educational institutions or foundations;
(c) Members of Congress and officials thereof classified as Grade "27" and up under the Compensation and Position Classification Act of 1989;
(d) Members of the judiciary without prejudice to the provisions of the Constitution;
(e) Chairmen and members of Constitutional Commissions, without prejudice to the provisions of the Constitution; and
(f) All other national and local officials classified as Grade "27" and higher under the Compensation and Position Classificafion Act of 1989.
In case private individuals are charged as co-principals, accomplices or accessories with the public officers or employees, including those employed in government-owned or -controlled corporations, they shall be tried jointly with said public officers and employees in the proper courts which shall exercise exclusive jurisdiction over them.
Exclusive Appellate Jurisdiction
The Sandiganbayan shall exercise exclusive appellate jurisdiction over final judgments, resolutions or orders of regional trial courts whether in the exercise of their own original jurisdiction or of their appellate jurisdiction.
IV. Ill-Gotten Wealth
Ill-gotten wealth means any asset, property, business enterprise or material possession of any person acquired by himself directly or indirectly through dummies, nominees, agents, subordinates and/or business associates by any combination or series of the following means or similar schemes:
(1) through misappropriation, conversion, misuse, or malversation of public funds or raids on the public treasury;
(2) by receiving, directly or indirectly, any commission, gift, share, percentage, kickbacks or any other form of pecuniary benefit from any person and/or entity in connection with any government contract or project or by reason of the office or position of the public officer concerned;
(3) by the illegal or fraudulent conveyance or disposition of assets belonging to the National Government or any of its subdivisions, agencies or instrumentalities or government-owned or controlled corporations and their subsidiaries,
(4) by obtaining, receiving or accepting directly or indirectly any shares of stock, equity or any other form of interest or participation including the promise of future employment in any business enterprise or undertaking;
14 6
(5) by establishing agricultural, industrial or commercial monopolies or other combinations and/or implementation of decrees and orders intended to benefit particular persons or special interests, or (6) by taking undue advantage of official
position, authority, relationship, connection or influence to unjustly enrich himself or themselves at the expense and to the damage and prejudice of the Filipino people and the Republic of the Philippines. (Sec. 1, RA 7080)
Section 2 of Republic Act No. 7080 punishes the crime of plunder. It provides that any public officer who, by himself or in connivance with members of his family, relatives by affinity or consanguinity, business associates, subordinates or other person, amasses, accumulates or acquires ill-gotten wealth through a combination or series of overt or criminal acts in the aggregate amount or total value of at least seventy-five million pesos (P75,000,000.00), shall be guilty of plunder and shall be punished by life imprisonment with perpetual absolute disqualification from holding any public office.
Any person who participated with the said officer in the commission of plunder shall likewise be punished. The court shall declare any and all ill-gotten wealth and their interests and other incomes and assets including the properties and shares of stocks derived from the deposit or investment thereof forfeited in favor of the State. (Agpalo, 2005)