ChanRobles Virtual law Library
[G.R. No. 105965-70.February 22, 2000]
GEORGE UY vs. SANDIGANBAYAN, et al.
EN BANC
Gentlemen:
Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a resolution of this Court dated FEB 22 2000.
����������� G.R. Nos. 105965-70(George Uy vs. Sandiganbayan, Ombudsman and Roger C. Berbano, Sr., Special Prosecution Officer III, Office of the Special Prosecutor.)
The motion for clarification, which in fact appears to be a partial motion for reconsideration, filed by the Office of the Ombudsman and the Office of the Special Prosecutor seeks clarification of that portion of our decision dated August 9, 1999 which reads:
"In this connection, it is the prosecutor, not the Ombudsman, who has the authority to file the corresponding information/s against petitioner in the regional trial court. The Ombudsman exercises prosecutorial powers only in cases cognizable by the Sandiganbayan."
The Offices of the Ombudsman and Special Prosecutor seem to suggest that they still retain the power to re-file the information and prosecute the petitioner before the regional trial court despite our finding that it is the regional trial court which has jurisdiction over the case.
The clear import of such pronouncement is to recognize the authority the State and regular provincial and city prosecutors under the Department of Justice to have control over prosecution of cases falling within the jurisdiction of the regular courts.The investigation and prosecutorial powers of the Ombudsman relate to cases rightfully falling within the jurisdiction of Sandiganbayan under Section 15 (1) of R. A. 6770 ("An Act Providing for the Functional and Structural Organization of the Office of the Ombudsman, and for other purposes") which vests upon the Ombudsman "primary jurisdiction over cases cognizable by the Sandiganbayan." And this is further buttressed by Section 11(4a) of R. A. 6770 which emphasizes that the Office of the Special Prosecutor shall have the power "to conduct preliminary investigation and prosecute criminal cases within the jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan." Thus, repeated references to the Sandiganbayan's jurisdiction clearly serve to limit the Ombudsman's and Special Prosecutor's authority to cases cognizable by the Sandiganbayan.
WHEREFORE , the motion for clarification is hereby DENIED for lack of merit. Buena, J., is on leave.
Very truly yours,
LUZVIMINDA D. PUNO
Clerk of Court
(Sgd.) MA. LUISA D. VILLARAMA
Asst. Clerk of Court
HERE FOR THE LATEST SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE
PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS
QUICK SEARCH