Case Summary (G.R. No. 197571)
Dispute over Orbital Slots and Interim Satellite Project
In December 1996 de Guzman advised Landbank’s Lapuz of the two-slot assignment and sought participation in an US$ 11 million loan for an interim satellite. Undersecretary Lichauco responded that only slot 161°E was properly available, since the planned migration of a Russian “Gorizont” satellite to 153°E had failed. She clarified that DOTC would grant PASI a single slot for both interim and eventual launch projects.
Civil Suit and Graft Complaint Against Lichauco
After Lichauco issued a December 1997 Notice of Offer for slot 153°E (which PASI claimed it did not authorize), PASI filed on January 23, 1998 a civil suit in the RTC to enjoin and annul the award and claim damages. On February 23, 1998 it lodged a graft complaint against Lichauco under RA 3019 Section 3(e) before the Ombudsman, alleging manifest partiality, bad faith, gross negligence, and undue injury.
Evaluation and Dismissal by the Ombudsman
The Ombudsman’s EPIB found a prejudicial question because the civil case and the graft complaint involved similar issues whose resolution would determine whether the criminal action could proceed. Acting on that finding, then-Ombudsman Desierto dismissed the complaint on April 24, 1998. PASI’s motion for reconsideration was denied on July 17, 1998.
Civil Case Proceedings and Reinstatement
The RTC denied Lichauco’s motion to dismiss the civil suit. The Court of Appeals, however, dismissed the case on February 21, 2000. On May 3, 2006, the Supreme Court reinstated the civil action, finding the dismissal improper.
Issue: Existence and Effect of a Prejudicial Question
A prejudicial question arises when a prior civil action involves issues similar or intimately related to those in a subsequent criminal prosecution and its resolution determines whether the criminal action may proceed (Rule 111, Sec. 7, Rules on Criminal Procedure). PASI conceded similarity but argued that civil liability does not dictate criminal guilt.
Analysis of Civil vs. Criminal Elements
RA 3019 Section 3(e) requires (1) a public officer acting in official duty, (2) manifest partiality/bad faith/gross negligence, and (3) undue injury or unwarranted advantage. PASI’s civil suit seeks to enjoin and nullify the slot award and recover damages. If the civil court upholds the award as within Lichauco’s authority, it eliminates the wrongdoing element and the basis for damages, thus directly affecting criminal liability.
Applicability of Procedural Rules a
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. 197571)
Factual Background
- On June 6, 1994, a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) was executed between a consortium of private telecommunications carriers and the Department of Transportation and Communications (DOTC) for the launching, ownership, operation and management of a Philippine satellite by a Filipino-owned or controlled entity.
- Pursuant to Article IV of the MOU, the consortium organized Philippine Agila Satellite, Inc. (PASI).
- By letter dated June 28, 1996, PASI President Rodrigo A. Silverio requested DOTC Secretary Amado S. Lagdameo, Jr. to confirm the assignment of orbital slots 161°E and 153°E for PASI’s AGILA satellites.
- Secretary Lagdameo confirmed that assignment by letter of July 3, 1996.
- Relying on that confirmation, PASI obtained loans, increased its capital, negotiated with partners, and paid US$ 3.5 million to Aerospatiale for its satellite.
- On December 3, 1996, PASI President Michael de Guzman informed Landbank President Jesli Lapuz of the slot assignments and sought an US$ 11 million club loan for an interim satellite.
- Undersecretary Josefina T. Lichauco, in a December 5, 1996 letter, clarified:
• Only one slot (161°E) could be made available to PASI because the planned migration of the Russian “Gorizont” interim satellite to 153°E had failed in time for the APEC Summit;
• The 153°E slot was no longer assignable to PASI;
• Use of the name “Agila” by PASI as a corporate alias or trademark was false, since “Agila I” had been coined by the President for the Mabuhay satellite at 144°E;
• The DOTC would support PASI’s venture but only one orbital slot would be granted for both interim and eventual satellites, subject to contract. - In December 1997, Lichauco issued a Notice of Offer for several slots including 153°E.
Procedural History
- January 23, 1998: PASI filed a civil complaint in the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Mandaluyong City for injunction against award of 153°E, declaration of nullity of the award to an undisclosed bidder, and damages.
- February 23, 1998: PASI filed a criminal complaint with the Office of the Ombudsman against Secretary Lic