G.R. No. L-3422 - Hidalgo Enterprises, Inc. vs. Balandan

In 1970, Luis Balili acquired patents over 10 parcels (247,317 sq m) and claimed an untitled lot (1,929 sq m) in Naga, Cebu. Upon his death, his nephew Romeo became executor and engaged brokers to sell the estate.
In 2007–2008, the Cebu Provincial Government appraised the property at ₱610/sq m but entered a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) for eleven parcels at ₱400/sq m despite authorization for only ten. Payments were made without a proper appropriation; later surveys revealed large portions submerged, timberland, and mangroves.

In 2009, DENR and OMB surveys confirmed submerged and timberland areas. Complaints led to OMB resolutions finding probable cause for violations of RA 3019 § 3(e) and (g) and technical malversation (RPC Art. 220). Informations were filed July 19, 2012 as SB-12-CRM-0175 to 0177.
On July 24, 2012, the Sandiganbayan issued three Hold Departure Orders (HDOs) against Garcia; she posted bail and filed motions for reconsideration with both the OMB and the Sandiganbayan. The Sandiganbayan denied the motion to lift HDOs on January 2, 2013.

On March 11, 2013, Garcia petitioned for certiorari to annul the Sandiganbayan’s January 2, 2013 Resolution and the July 24, 2012 HDOs.
She argued the Sandiganbayan lacked authority to issue HDOs, violated her right to travel, and acted prematurely while her OMB motion for reconsideration was pending.

Did the Sandiganbayan have the power to issue Hold Departure Orders absent an express statutory grant or inclusion in Supreme Court/DOJ circulars?

Did the HDOs unlawfully curtail Garcia’s constitutional right to travel without a valid legal basis?

Were the HDOs void for being issued before final determination of probable cause by the Ombudsman and while a motion for reconsideration was pending?