R U L E 11 2

Preliminary Investigation
 Preliminary
Investigation

Is an inquiry or proceeding conducted by authorized persons by law in

order to determine whether there is sufficient ground to engender a well-
founded belief that a crime has been committed and the respondent is
probable guilty thereof, and should be held for trial.
When is Preliminary Investigation is required?

P.I Not Required

P.I REQUIRED
Exception to Less Than
4-2-1 & up 4-2-1 and up 4-2-1
imposable penalty of 4 years, 2 when respondent is arrested In imposable penalty is Less Than
months and 1 day or more Flagrante Delicto (section , 4 years, 2 months and 1 day or
(section 1, Rule 112) Rule 113) and undergoing more (section 1, Rule 112)
inquest . No need P.I
 NATURE and PURPOSE
The conduct of pi belongs is a function that belongs to TO ESTABLISH PROBABLE PROBABLE CAUSE IN P.I.
public prosecutor (State’s Agent) CAUSE
Probable cost pertains to facts
The determination of probable cause is under our criminal PI is a mere inquiry or and circumstances sufficient to
justice system and executive function that courts cannot proceeding. It is not a trial. Its support a well founded belief that
interfere with in the absence of grave abuse of discretion. purpose is not to declare the a crime has been committed in
(Salapudin vs. CA 691 SCRA 578, 597) respondent guilty beyond the accused is probably guilty
reasonable doubt. (Estrada vs. thereof. (Shu vs. Dee, April 23,
Ombudsman, January 21, 2015). 2014)
ONLY A STATUTORY RIGHT Thus, WAIVABLE Thus, in PI is "whether the
The holding of preliminary The right to PI may be waived for respondent is probable guilty The evidence necessary to
investigation is not required by failure to invoke the right prior to thereof, and therefore should be establish probable cause is
the constitution. Does it is not a or at the time of the plea (People held for trial?" This is ultimately based only on the likelihood, or
constitutional right rather a vs. Gomez. 117 SCRA 73, 78) the PROBABLE CAUSE IN P.I. probability of guilt. (Estrada vs.
statutory character and may be Ombudsman, supra)
invoked only when specifically
created by statute. (Marinas vs. In fact the absence of PI will not
Siochi, 104 SCRA 423). Though affect the jurisdiction of Courts.
not of constitutional grant the
denial of the same would deprive
the accused the full measure of
his right to due process. (Duterte
vs. Sandiganbayan, 289 SCRA
721).
Instances when probable cause need to be established

By Prosecutor

By the JUDGE

By Arresting Officer
 Preliminary Preliminary
P.I. Investigation P.E. Examination

Executive Function by Judicial Function by a

Prosecutr Judge

For the Purpose of Filing Information in For the Purpose of Issuing Warrant of Arrest
Court

Judge can't interfere with prosecutors function to However, judiciary has expanded power to
determine probable cause this is an review acts and decision of the executive
encroachment of powers in lieu of doctrine of department.
separation of powers.
 Officers Authorized to Conduct Preliminary Investigation

A. Prvincial or City Prosecutors and their

assistants;
B. National and Regional State Prosecutors; and PCGG
C. Other officers as may be authorized by law.

Comelec (Section 265 of Ombudsman

Ombudsman
Election Code)
PROCEDURE OF
P R E L I M I N A RY
I N V E S T I G AT I O N
PHASE 1. FILING A COMPLAINT

P. I . R e q u i r e d 4 - 2 - 1 a n d U p imposable penalty of
FILING OF 4 years, 2 months
imposable penalty of 4
I N F O R M AT I O N and 1 day or more
years, 2 months and 1 day
(section 1, Rule 112)
or more (section 1, Rule
112)
P H A S E 2 . I N V E S T I G AT I N G P R O S E C U T O R ’ S R E S O L U T I O N

WITH PROBABLE CAUSE WITHOUT PROBABLE CAUSE

SUBMIT
ISSUE
COUNTER
SUBPOENA
AFFIDAVIT

Respondents files Respondents did DISMISSED

counter affidavit? not file counter
-hearing is affidavit?
optional to the
Prosecutor

RESOLUTION RESOLUTION
Recommend Filing of Information Recommend Dismissal
P H A S E 3 . C H I E F P R O S E C U TO R A P P R O VA L
 PHASE 4. REMEDY AND THE SOJ
The Secretary of Justice (SOJ)
Upon Petition or Motu Proprio
SOJ may reverse or modify the resolution of the provincial or city prosecutor or chief state prosecutor
and direct the prosecutor concerned either:

to file the corresponding information without To dismiss or move for dismissal or

conducting another preliminary investigation withdrawal of the complaint or information
with notice to the parties.

NB: The same rule shall apply in preliminary

investigations conducted by the officers of
the office of the ombudsman
 Reversal by SOJ is Withdrawal

SOJ may reverse or modify the resolution of the provincial or city prosecutor or chief state prosecutor
and direct the prosecutor concerned either:

Rule: The court has this question to grant the motion to withdraw or not

When the information is filed within the court, then it is within the jurisdiction of the court already. The
court may either grant the motion to withdraw by the soj or proceed with the criminal case. The court is
the best and sole judge on what to do with the case before it. (Crespo vs. Mogul GR L-53373, 30 June
1987)

Motion to withdraw by the prosecutor was granted by the court:

Requirement of the court: the court shall make an independent finding of the lack of probable cause,
separate from findings of the soj or prosecution.
E ff e c t :
The appeal does not hold the filing of the information in
court unless otherwise directed by the soj

The appellant may move for the suspension of

a r r a i g n m e n t p u r s u e 1 t o s e c t i o n 11 ( c ) r u l e 11 6 ( D O J )
circular number 70 2000 NPS, Rule on Appeal Section 9
P H A S E 5 . F I L I N G O F I N F O R M AT I O N T O C O U R T
THANK YOU
For Listening