G.R. No. 197475 - Montelibano vs. Yap

Mark Sensing Philippines, Inc. (MSPI) arranged for the importation of 255,870,000 pieces of finished bet slips and 205,200 rolls of finished thermal papers.
The shipment was brought from Australia to the Clark Special Economic Zone (CSEZ) and then released to the Philippine Charity Sweepstakes Office (PCSO) for its lotto operations in Luzon.
The importation occurred over a period from June 2005 to January 2007.

MSPI did not pay the duties or taxes due on the imported articles.
The Bureau of Customs (petitioner) initiated proceedings under its Run After The Smugglers (RATS) Program.
A criminal complaint was filed before the Department of Justice against various respondents including:

MSPI Chairman Peter Sherman
Managing Director Michael Whelan
Country Manager Atty. Ofelia B. Cajigal
Finance Manager and Corporate Secretary Teodoro B. Lingan
Licensed customs broker agents Erick B. Ariarte, Ricardo J. Ebuna, and Eugenio Pasco

The charges involved violations of Section 3601 (unlawful importation), in relation to Sections 2530 (specifically subsections (f) and (l)) and 101 (f) of the Tariff and Customs Code, as amended, and Republic Act No. 7916 (Special Economic Zone Act of 1995).

On March 25, 2008, State Prosecutor Rohaira Lao-Tamano found probable cause against the respondents and recommended the filing of an Information.
Respondents filed a petition for review before the Secretary of Justice during the pendency of the case.
The Information was filed on April 11, 2009 before the Court of Tax Appeals (CTA) with detailed allegations:

Unlawful importation and subsequent removal of the imported articles from CSEZ without paying duties and taxes amounting to approximately Php15,917,611.83.
The shipment was valued at approximately US$1,240,880.14.

Only respondents Cajigal and Lingan were served arrest warrants, after which they posted cash bail bonds.
By Resolution dated March 20, 2009, the Secretary of Justice reversed the State Prosecutor’s earlier resolution and directed the withdrawal of the Information.
Petitioner's motion for reconsideration was denied by Resolution of April 29, 2009, prompting the petitioner to elevate the case via certiorari before the Court of Appeals (docket CA GR SP No. 10-9431).
Concurrently, Prosecutor Lao-Tamano filed a Motion to Withdraw Information with the CTA, and respondents moved for the dismissal of the Information.
The CTA, by its Resolution dated September 3, 2009, granted the withdrawal and dismissed the Information.
A subsequent motion for reconsideration by the petitioner on September 22, 2009, was Noted Without Action by the CTA on October 14, 2009, given that an Entry of Judgment had already been issued.
The petitioner later elevated the case by filing a petition for certiorari, which was ultimately addressed on the basis of prosecutorial control and discretion.

Whether the prosecution of crimes, including those under special customs laws, falls exclusively within the ambit of the public prosecutor.
Whether the eventual control and supervision of the case by the public prosecutor precludes private interventions.

Whether the motion for reconsideration filed by the petitioner without the imprimatur of the public prosecutor should be given effect.
Whether the CTA's decision to note the motion without action constitutes grave abuse of discretion.

Whether a private complainant, not represented by the Office of the Solicitor General, may intervene effectively in the prosecution of criminal actions.
How the participation of a private complainant is limited in criminal and administrative proceedings.

Whether the withdrawal of the Information following the reversal of the State Prosecutor’s resolution was proper and procedurally correct.