Title
Marantan vs. Department of Justice
Case
G.R. No. 206354
Decision Date
Mar 13, 2019
A shootout in Atimonan led to DOJ's preliminary investigation; Marantan challenged impartiality, but SC dismissed his petition as moot after trial court assumed jurisdiction.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 206354)

Background of the Incident

The Atimonan Encounter involved a shootout between personnel from the Philippine National Police (PNP) and armed individuals. Following the incident, then-President Benigno Simeon C. Aquino III ordered an investigation by the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI). Marantan expressed concerns over the impartiality of the DOJ following public statements made by Secretary De Lima, which he believed compromised his right to due process. Marantan sought to have the case referred to the Office of the Ombudsman instead of being investigated by the DOJ.

Preliminary Proceedings and Investigations

On March 11, 2013, the DOJ organized a panel of prosecutors to conduct a preliminary investigation into the incident. Subsequently, Marantan filed a motion requesting the DOJ to inhibit from the investigation due to alleged bias. Despite this, the panel proceeded with the investigation, which resulted in findings of probable cause against Marantan and others for multiple murder charges related to the incident.

Contentions of the Parties

Marantan contended that the DOJ exhibited bias through Secretary De Lima's public statements, effectively prejudging the case against him. He claimed that this impinged upon his constitutional rights to due process and equal protection under the law. The respondents argued that the petition should be dismissed due to Marantan’s failure to follow the proper hierarchy of courts and his lack of exhaustion of administrative remedies. They asserted that the preliminary investigation had already concluded, rendering Marantan’s petition moot.

Legal Principles Addressed

The central issues for determination included the applicability of judicial hierarchy and exhaustion of remedies, the alleged grave abuse of discretion by the DOJ and the Panel of Prosecutors, and whether the case became moot following the filing of the Information against Marantan. The Supreme Court emphasized that a petition for certiorari is permissible only under special circumstances that were not demonstrated by Marantan.

Findings of the Court

The Court found that the case did not warrant deviation from the established rules regarding judicial hierarchy and exhaustion of administrative remedies. Marantan's assertions of bias within the DOJ and the lack of an impartial tribunal were not substan

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.