Case Summary (G.R. No. 143047)
Applicable Law
The Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act (Republic Act No. 3019), Republic Act No. 7975, and Republic Act No. 8249 are critical to the determination of jurisdiction in this case.
Background of the Case
The petitioner, Ricardo S. Inding, was charged with violations of Section 3(e) of Republic Act No. 3019, alleging that he unlawfully faked buy-bust operations while functioning officially as a public officer, leading to unjust financial claims against the city government.
Jurisdictional Arguments
Inding filed an omnibus motion claiming that the Sandiganbayan lacked jurisdiction over him because he held a salary grade (SG) of 25, which is below the required SG of 27 as per the laws governing the jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan. He sought dismissal of the case or referral to the Regional Trial Court.
Sandiganbayan's Resolution
The Sandiganbayan denied Inding's motion on September 23, 1999, asserting that he qualified as a public officer under the provisions of the law that governed the Sandiganbayan's jurisdiction, stating that he was classified with an SG of 27 due to his position.
Supplemental Motion
Following the denial of his omnibus motion, Inding filed a supplemental motion referencing Republic Act No. 8294 and a Supreme Court ruling that clarified that jurisdiction should primarily depend on the rank and salary grade of public officials at the time of the offense.
Petitioner’s Claims
Inding contended that at the time of the offense, his position and salary grade did not fall within the jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan, as he only held an SG of 25. According to his interpretation, both Republic Acts No. 7975 and 8249 stipulated that only officials with an SG of 27 or higher fall under the Sandiganbayan's jurisdiction.
Respondents’ Position
The Office of the Special Prosecutor countered that the jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan includes members of the Sangguniang Panlungsod regardless of salary grade. They underscored that the law specifically listed these officials to be under the Sandiganbayan's jurisdiction, indicating a legislative intent that did not solely rely on salary grade.
The Court's Ruling on Jurisdiction
The Court ruled that the Sandiganbayan held jurisdiction over Inding's case because members of the Sangguniang Panlungsod were explicitly mentioned
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. 143047)
Background of the Case
- The case is an appeal for certiorari under Rule 65 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure.
- Petitioner Ricardo S. Inding, a member of the Sangguniang Panlungsod of Dapitan City, sought to nullify the Sandiganbayan's September 23, 1999 Resolution which denied his omnibus motion, as well as its April 25, 2000 Resolution denying his motion for reconsideration.
- Inding was charged with violating Section 3(e) of Republic Act No. 3019 (Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act) for allegedly falsifying buy-bust operations against drug users to claim reimbursement from the city government.
Legal Proceedings and Petitioner’s Arguments
- An Information was filed against Inding on January 27, 1999, alleging that he falsely claimed P 30,500.00 in reimbursements related to non-existent drug operations from January 3, 1997, to August 9, 1997.
- Inding filed an omnibus motion on June 2, 1999, arguing that the Sandiganbayan lacked jurisdiction over him due to his salary grade of 25, which, according to him, did not meet the requirement of salary grade 27 or higher for the Sandiganbayan's original jurisdiction.
- He contended that under Administrative Order No. 270 and Republic Act No. 7975, the proper venue for his case should be the Regional Trial Court (RTC) or Municipal Trial Court.
Respondents’ Position
- The Office of the Speci