Case Digest (G.R. No. 160421)
Facts:
In Reynaldo V. Tuanda, et al. v. The Honorable Sandiganbayan, Bartolome Binaohan and Delia Estrellanes (G.R. No. 110544, October 17, 1995), petitioners Reynaldo V. Tuanda (Mayor), Herminigildo Faburada (former Vice-Mayor), Santos A. Villanueva (incumbent Sangguniang Bayan member) and other municipal officials of Jimalalud, Negros Oriental sought certiorari and prohibition under Rule 65 of the Revised Rules of Court to set aside the Sandiganbayan’s resolution of February 17, 1992 and its orders of August 19, 1992 and May 13, 1993 in Criminal Case No. 16936 (“People v. Tuanda, et al.”). Private respondents Bartolome Binaohan and Delia Estrellanes had been designated sectoral representatives in February 1989 by the Department of Local Government but petitioners questioned the appointments before the Office of the President and later filed Civil Case No. 9955 in the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Dumaguete City to declare such designations void for non-compliance with Section 146(2),Case Digest (G.R. No. 160421)
Facts:
- Background of Designations and Administrative Proceedings
- On February 9, 1989, Secretary Luis T. Santos of the Department of Local Government designated Delia Estrellanes and Bartolome Binaohan as industrial and agricultural labor sectoral representatives, respectively, in the Sangguniang Bayan of Jimalalud, Negros Oriental. They took their oaths on February 16 and 17, 1989.
- Petitioners (Mayor Reynaldo Tuanda, former Vice-Mayor Hermenigildo Faburada, and incumbent Sangguniang Bayan members) filed an undated petition for review and recall of those designations with the Office of the President. On March 20, 1989, the petition was denied and petitioners were ordered to recognize the sectoral representatives.
- Civil and Criminal Case Proceedings
- On May 4, 1990, Estrellanes and Binaohan filed a mandamus petition (R.T.C. Negros Oriental, Branch 35, SCA No. 9661) for recognition as Sangguniang Bayan members, dismissed July 23, 1991.
- On June 20, 1991, petitioners filed Civil Case No. 9955 (R.T.C. Dumaguete City) to nullify the sectoral designations. On January 16, 1992, the trial court declared the appointments void for failure to comply with Section 146(2), B.P. Blg. 337. Appeal to the Court of Appeals (CA-G.R. CV No. 36769) was pending.
- On July 21, 1991, an information (Criminal Case No. 16936) was filed before the Sandiganbayan charging petitioners under Section 3(e) of R.A. No. 3019 for allegedly refusing to pay P95,350.00 and P108,900.00 in salaries and per diems of the sectoral representatives.
- Motions for Suspension of Criminal Proceedings
- On September 9, 1991, petitioners moved to suspend the criminal proceedings on the ground that the validity of appointments was a prejudicial question pending in Civil Case No. 9955.
- On February 17, 1992, the Sandiganbayan denied the motion, ruling that private respondents enjoyed presumption of regularity and, even if designations were later voided, were de facto officers entitled to compensation for services rendered.
- Petitioners’ motion for reconsideration was denied on August 19, 1992. An extended resolution was not issued; orders setting arraignment for January 1993 (later June 30, 1993) were promulgated on May 13, 1993.
Issues:
- Whether the legality or validity of private respondents’ designations as sectoral representatives, pending before the Court of Appeals (CA-G.R. CV No. 36769), constitutes a prejudicial question justifying suspension of the Sandiganbayan’s criminal proceedings under Rule 65.
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)