Guevarra vs Sandiganbayan
G.R. No. 138792-804
March 31, 2005
Facts:
A complaint was filed against the petitioners, who are administrators of PUP, for
violation of R.A. No. 3019 (Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act) with the Office of the
Ombudsman. It was alleged that there were transactions entered into by PUP which
have caused undue damage to the government. Graft Investigator Reyes,
recommended that the charges be dismissed. However, Ombudsman disapproved and
adopted instead the recommendation of Special Prosecutor to charge the petitioners
with 17 counts of violation of RA 3019. Upon review on the recommendation of Jurado,
Special Prosecutor Agcaoili submitted a memorandum recommending the 17 cases be
filed and Case 22854 be withdrawn. She referred the case to Judge Marigomen, who
recommended the dropping of some of the charges against Zenaida Olonan only, and
remains to be one of the accused in the remaining cases – approved by Ombudsman. It
turned out that those 13 cases which were also filed against accused Guevarra, Cesar
and Salvador were also dismissed. Special Prosecutor prayed before the
Sandiganbayan to consider reinstating the 13 cases against the other three. Accused
opposed the motion contending that the Order had become final and executory since no
appeal was filed within the period.
Issue:
Whether the Sandiganbayan erred in reinstating the 13 criminal cases on the
basis of the Motion for Reconsideration filed beyond the 15-day reglementary period.
Ruling:
No. The petitioners are correct in claiming that an order or resolution of the
Sandiganbayan ordering the dismissal of criminal cases becomes final and executory
upon the lapse of 15 days from notice thereof to the parties, and, as such, is beyond the
jurisdiction of the graft court to review, modify or set aside, if no appeal therefrom is filed
by the aggrieved party. However, if the Sandiganbayan acts in excess or lack of
jurisdiction, or with grave abuse of discretion amounting to excess or lack of jurisdiction
in dismissing a criminal case, the dismissal is null and void.
The Sandiganbayan ordered the dismissal of the 13 cases as against the
petitioners over the objection of the Special Prosecutor on its erroneous perception that
Justice Marigomen recommended in his report the dismissal of the 13 cases against the
petitioners. By its Order, the graft court deprived the respondent People of the
Philippines of its right to due process. Its Order dated January 26, 1998 dismissing the
13 criminal cases, as against the petitioners, was null and void; it may thus be rectified,
as did the graft court, per its Resolution dated April 6, 1999 despite the lapse of fifteen
days from notice of the Special Prosecutor of its January 26, 1998 Order. By rectifying
its void Order, it cannot be said that the graft court acted with grave abuse of its
discretion, amounting to excess or lack of jurisdiction.
