Case Digest (G.R. No. 230950-51)
Facts:
Elpidio Tagaan Magante v. Sandiganbayan (Third Division) and People of the Philippines, G.R. Nos. 230950-51, July 23, 2018, Supreme Court Third Division, Velasco Jr., J., writing for the Court.Petitioner Elpidio Tagaan Magante was one of ten persons implicated in complaints arising from a Commission on Audit report; following an Ombudsman process, two separate informations (for Falsification of Public Documents, SB-16-CRM-0773, and for Splitting of Contracts, SB-16-CRM-0774) were filed before the Sandiganbayan on October 7, 2016. The Office of the Ombudsman had a chain of proceedings before that: a Narrative Audit Report and a letter-complaint (dating to 2009) prompted a fact-finding exercise, a Final Evaluation Report was approved November 18, 2010, and the Public Assistance and Corruption Prevention Office (PACPO-OMB-Visayas) filed a formal complaint on January 7, 2011; the Ombudsman ordered respondents to file counter-affidavits on February 15, 2011 and received them in May 2011. The Ombudsman promulgated a Resolution finding probable cause on April 15, 2016.
Before the Sandiganbayan, Magante moved to dismiss the informations on grounds of inordinate delay in the preliminary investigation that violated his constitutional right to a speedy disposition of cases, arguing that the period from either April 21, 2009 (the COA-affidavit) or February 15, 2011 (order to file counter-affidavits) to the April 2016 Resolution was constitutionally excessive. The prosecution (People of the Philippines) opposed, explaining the timeline (including the November 2010 Final Evaluation Report and the January 7, 2011 formal complaint), asserting that the ten respondents and voluminous records justified the lapse and arguing petitioner had failed to seasonably assert the right.
The Sandiganbayan, Third Division, denied the Motion to Dismiss in a Resolution dated January 9, 2017, finding the cited precedents distinguishable and concluding petitioner waived the right by not asserting it sooner; a Motion for Reconsidera...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Did the Sandiganbayan commit grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction by denying petitioner Elpidio Tagaan Magante’s Motion to Dismiss without regard to his constitutional right to speedy disposition of cases under Article III, Section 16 of the 1987 Constitution and cont...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)