Title
Supreme Court
Turingan vs. Garfin
Case
G.R. No. 153284
Decision Date
Apr 17, 2007
Prosecutors challenged a court's dismissal of a case against Apolinar for non-remittance of SSS premiums, citing lack of jurisdiction due to Tolentino's unauthorized filing of the Information. Supreme Court upheld dismissal, ruling Tolentino lacked proper written authority.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 153284)

Factual Background

This matter arises from Criminal Case No. RTC 2001-0582 against Muriel C. Apolinar for violations of the Social Security Act of 1997 (RA 8282). The charges stem from her alleged failure to remit premiums for social security and employees’ compensation for her workers from January 1997 to December 1998, along with a failure to pay the associated penalties. The Information, filed by state prosecutor Tolentino, outlined that Apolinar, as a registered trimobile operator based in Naga City, unlawfully refused to remit contributions, which amounted to a combined total of two thousand two hundred fifty-six pesos (₱2,256.00) for premiums and two thousand forty-eight pesos and twenty-six centavos (₱2,048.26) for penalties.

Procedural History

Prior to her arraignment, Apolinar filed a motion to quash the Information, arguing that state prosecutor Tolentino lacked the proper authority to file such charges. In response, Tolentino asserted his designation as a special prosecutor for SSS cases in Region V, which he claimed provided him the requisite authority. However, on March 13, 2002, Judge Garfin dismissed the case for lack of jurisdiction, a decision Tolentino sought to reconsider but which was denied by another order dated April 12, 2002.

Issue of Authority

The critical issue in this petition is whether state prosecutor Tolentino had the authority to file the Information concerning the violations of RA 8282, given the absence of a written directive or approval from the provincial or city prosecutor. This issue parallels an earlier case, People v. Garfin, wherein the same prosecutor faced a similar challenge. In that instance, the court held that in the absence of such directive or written approval, the information filed was devoid of jurisdictional authority, resulting in the dismissal of the case.

Court Findings and Conclusion

The court found that in the present case, state prosecutor Tolentino similarly lacked the authority necessary to file the Informatio

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources. AI digests are study aids only—use responsibly.