Case Summary (G.R. No. 82585)
Petitioner
Luis D. Beltran (in two petitions) and Soliven, Roces, Agcaoili, Manzanas (in a joint petition) challenge various steps in the libel proceedings.
Respondent Authorities
– RTC Branch 35, Presiding Judge Ramon P. Makasiar
– Undersecretary Silvestre Bello III and Secretary of Justice Sedfrey Ordoñez
– City Fiscal of Manila (Luis C. Victor; then Jesus F. Guerrero)
– Executive Secretary Catalino Macaraig
– President Corazon C. Aquino
Key Dates
• March 30, 1988: DOJ denies motion for reconsideration, upholding the prima facie finding.
• April 7 & May 2 1988: Secretary of Justice and President affirm the prima facie determination.
• May 16 1988: Executive Secretary denies reconsideration.
• November 14 1988: Supreme Court decision rendered.
Applicable Law
1987 Philippine Constitution, particularly Article III, Section 2 (security against unreasonable searches and seizures; judge’s personal determination of probable cause). Supreme Court Circular No. 12 (June 30, 1987) on warrant issuance procedure.
Principal Issues
- Whether petitioners were denied due process in the preliminary investigation of libel complaints.
- Whether the Constitution requires a judge to personally examine complainant and witnesses before issuing an arrest warrant.
- Whether the President may initiate criminal proceedings by filing a complaint-affidavit.
Issue 1 – Due Process in Preliminary Investigation
Subsequent administrative rulings by the Secretary of Justice and by the President affirmed the existence of a prima facie case and disposed of available remedies, rendering the prematurity objection moot. Beltran’s procedural waiver—filing a “Motion to Declare Proceedings Closed” instead of submitting counter-affidavits—negates any claim of denial of due process, which demands only the opportunity, not the obligation, to file counter-affidavits.
Issue 2 – Constitutional Requirement for Warrants
Article III, Section 2 of the 1987 Constitution vests in the issuing judge the exclusive duty to satisfy himself of probable cause “personally.” This does not compel oral examination of the complainant or witnesses; the judge may rely on the fiscal’s report and supporting affidavits or, if unsatisfied, require further affidavits. This balanced procedure, intended to prevent overburdening judges, conforms with Supreme Court Circular No. 12. No grave abuse of discretion in issuing the challenged warrants is shown.
Issue 3 – Presidential Authority to File Complai
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. 82585)
Procedural History
- Three petitions (G.R. Nos. 82585, 82827, and 83979) were consolidated before the Supreme Court en banc, all decided on November 14, 1988.
- Petitioners: Maximo v. Soliven et al. (G.R. No. 82585); Luis D. Beltran (G.R. Nos. 82827 and 83979).
- Respondents: Judge Ramon P. Makasiar (RTC Branch 35, Manila), Undersecretary Silvestre Bello III (DOJ), Luis C. Victor (City Fiscal of Manila), President Corazon C. Aquino, and other executive officials.
- Relief sought: Writs of certiorari and prohibition to annul libel informations, to enjoin further proceedings and alleged jurisdictional abuses.
Factual Background
- Newspaper articles by petitioners were the subject of libel complaints filed with the Manila City Fiscal.
- The City Fiscal found a prima facie case; petitioners filed motions for reconsideration before Undersecretary Bello (upheld), before Secretary of Justice (denied on March 30 and April 7, 1988), and on appeal before the President through the Executive Secretary (affirmed May 2, 1988; motion denied May 16, 1988).
- Beltran claimed due process violation in the preliminary investigation, alleging the RTC judge issued an arrest warrant without personal examination of complainant or witnesses.
- Petitioners also challenged the President’s authority to initiate criminal proceedings by complaint-affidavit.
Issues Presented
- Whether petitioners were denied due process by the filing of libel informations while their prima facie findings were under administrative r