G.R. No. 101476 - Export Processing Zone Authority vs. Commission on Human Rights

On August 12, 2005, Juanito Victor C. Remulla (Remulla) filed a criminal complaint before the Office of the Ombudsman (Ombudsman) against Erineo S. Maliksi (Maliksi), then governor of Cavite, alleging violation of Section 3(e) of Republic Act No. 3019 (Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act). The complaint stemmed from Maliksi’s alleged purchase of medical supplies from Allied Medical Laboratories Corporation in November 2002 without public bidding, giving unwarranted benefit to the supplier.
Maliksi filed his counter-affidavit on December 15, 2005.

After approximately nine (9) years, on August 27, 2014, the Ombudsman found probable cause against Maliksi for the violation.
Maliksi filed a motion for reconsideration alleging lack of probable cause and violation of his right to a speedy disposition of his case; the motion was denied on October 22, 2014.
In November 2014, the Ombudsman filed an information against Maliksi before the Sandiganbayan.

Maliksi filed a Motion to Dismiss dated November 20, 2014, claiming the Ombudsman’s finding of probable cause was null and void due to violation of his right to speedy disposition, citing undue prejudice from the nine-year delay.
The Sandiganbayan, in a February 2, 2015 Resolution, dismissed the case on grounds that Maliksi's right to speedy disposition was violated because of the inordinate delay largely caused by unacceptable procedural delays in routing and transmission of records. The Sandiganbayan ruled that it was the Ombudsman’s duty, not the accused’s, to expedite the case resolution.
The Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP) filed a Motion for Partial Reconsideration on February 12, 2015, asserting that the delay was neither whimsical nor capricious and that Maliksi never complained of the delay. This motion was denied on March 20, 2015.

Remulla filed a petition for certiorari before the Supreme Court challenging the dismissal by the Sandiganbayan, alleging grave abuse of discretion.
Maliksi contended that Remulla lacked legal standing as only the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) or OSP can bring or defend cases for the People and claimed a violation of his right against double jeopardy, since dismissal on speedy disposition grounds equates to acquittal.
The Ombudsman, through the OSP, argued the need for a definitive ruling on the concept of inordinate delay and claimed that the accused’s knowledge of the case and failure to assert the right to speedy disposition should be considered.

Whether the Sandiganbayan committed grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction in dismissing the criminal case against respondent Erineo S. Maliksi on the ground of violation of his right to a speedy disposition of case.

Whether a private complainant like Juanito Victor C. Remulla has legal standing to file a petition for certiorari in a criminal case dismissal for violation of speedy disposition.

Whether the accused must assert or follow up his right to a speedy disposition of the case to invoke dismissal on such ground.