Who falls under Sandiganbayan jurisdiction?
With the advent of the 1987 Constitution, the special court was retained as provided for in Section 4, Article XI thereof.[7] Aside from Executive Order Nos. 14[8] and 14-a,[9] and R.A. 7080,[10] which expanded the jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan, P.D. No. 1606 was further modified by R.A. No. 7975,[11] R.A. No. 8249,[12] and just this year, R.A. No. 10660.[13]
Based on Section 4 of R.A. No. 8249, those that fall within the original
jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan are: (1) officials of the executive branch
with Salary Grade 27 or higher, and (2) officials specifically enumerated in
Section 4 (A) (1) (a) to (g), regardless of their salary
grades.[14] While the first part of Section 4 (A) covers only officials
of the executive branch with Salary Grade 27 and higher, its second part
specifically includes other executive officials whose positions may not be of
Salary Grade 27 and higher but who are by express provision of law placed
under the jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan.[15]
That the phrase “otherwise classified as Grade ‘27’ and higher” qualifies
“regional director and higher” is apparent from the Sponsorship Speech of
Senator Raul S. Roco on Senate Bill Nos. 1353 and 844, which eventually became
R.A. Nos. 7975 and 8249, respectively:
As proposed by the Committee, the Sandiganbayan shall exercise original jurisdiction over the cases assigned to it only in instances where one or more of the principal accused are officials occupying the positions of regional director and higher or are otherwise classified as Grade 27 and higher by the Compensation and Position Classification Act of 1989, whether in a permanent, acting or interim capacity at the time of the commission of the offense. The jurisdiction, therefore, refers to a certain grade upwards, which shall remain with the Sandiganbayan.[16] (Emphasis supplied)
To speed up trial in the Sandiganbayan, Republic Act No. 7975 was enacted for that Court to concentrate on the “larger fish” and leave the “small fry” to the lower courts. This law became effective on May 6, 1995 and it provided a two-pronged solution to the clogging of the dockets of that court, to wit:
It divested the Sandiganbayan of jurisdiction over public officials whose salary grades were at Grade “26” or lower, devolving thereby these cases to the lower courts, and retaining the jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan only over public officials whose salary grades were at Grade “27” or higher and over other specific public officials holding important positions in government regardless of salary grade; x x x[17] (Emphasis supplied)
The legislative intent is to allow the Sandiganbayan to devote its time and
expertise to big-time cases involving the so-called “big fishes” in the
government rather than those accused who are of limited means who stand trial
for “petty crimes,” the so-called “small fry,” which, in turn, helps the court
decongest its dockets.[18]
Yet, those that are classified as Salary
Grade 26 and below may still fall within the jurisdiction of the
Sandiganbayan, provided that they hold the positions enumerated by the
law.[19] In this category, it is the position held, not the salary grade,
which determines the jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan.[20] The specific
inclusion constitutes an exception to the general qualification relating to
“officials of the executive branch occupying the positions of regional
director and higher, otherwise classified as Grade ‘27’ and higher, of the
Compensation and Position Classification Act of 1989.”[2]1 As ruled
in Inding:
Following this disquisition, the paragraph of Section 4 which provides that if the accused is occupying a position lower than SG 27, the proper trial court has jurisdiction, can only be properly interpreted as applying to those cases where the principal accused is occupying a position lower than SG 27 and not among those specifically included in the enumeration in Section 4 a. (1) (a) to (g). Stated otherwise, except for those officials specifically included in Section 4 a. (1) (a) to (g), regardless of their salary grades, over whom the Sandiganbayan has jurisdiction, all other public officials below SG 27 shall be under the jurisdiction of the proper trial courts “where none of the principal accused are occupying positions corresponding to SG 27 or higher.” By this construction, the entire Section 4 is given effect. The cardinal rule, after all, in statutory construction is that the particular words, clauses and phrases should not be studied as detached and isolated expressions, but the whole and every part of the statute must be considered in fixing the meaning of any of its parts and in order to produce a harmonious whole. And courts should adopt a construction that will give effect to every part of a statute, if at all possible. Ut magis valeat quam pereat or that construction is to be sought which gives effect to the whole of the statute – its every word. [22]
Thus, to cite a few, the Supreme Court has held that a member of the Sangguniang Panlungsod,[23] a department manager of the Philippine Health Insurance Corporation (Philhealth),[24] a student regent of the University of the Philippines,[25] and a Head of the Legal Department and Chief of the Documentation with corresponding ranks of Vice-Presidents and Assistant Vice-President of the Armed Forces of the Philippines Retirement and Separation Benefits System (AFP-RSBS)[26] fall within the jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan.
[1] SEC. 5. The Batasang Pambansa shall create a special court, to be known as Sandiganbayan, which shall have jurisdiction over criminal and civil cases involving graft and corrupt practices and such other offenses committed by public officers and employees including those in government-owned or controlled corporations, in relation to their office as may be determined by law.
[2] Entitled Creating A Special Court To Be Known As “Sandiganbayan” And For Other Purposes, Effective on June 11, 1978.
[3] Entitled Revising Presidential Decree No. 1486 Creating A Special Court To Be Known As "Sandiganbayan" And For Other Purposes, Effective on December 10,1978.
[4] The Judiciary Reorganization Act of 1980 (August 14, 1981) provided:
Sec. 20. Jurisdiction in criminal cases. – Regional Trial Courts shall exercise exclusive original jurisdiction in all criminal cases not within the exclusive jurisdiction of any court, tribunal or body, except those now falling under the exclusive and concurrent jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan which shall hereafter be exclusively taken cognizance of by the latter. (See Lacson v. Executive Secretary, 361 Phil. 251, 264 [1999] and Maj. Gen. Garcia v. Sandiganbayan, 499 Phil. 589, 607 [2005])
[5] Entitled Amending The Pertinent Provisions Of Presidential Decree No. 1606 And Batas Pambansa Blg. 129 Relative To The Jurisdiction Of The Sandiganbayan And For Other Purposes, Effective on January 14, 1983.
[6] Entitled Amending The Pertinent Provisions Of Presidential Decree No. 1606 And Batas Pambansa Blg. 129 Relative To The Jurisdiction Of The Sandiganbayan And For Other Purposes, Effective on March 23, 1983.
[7] Section 4. The present anti-graft court known as the Sandiganbayan shall continue to function and exercise its jurisdiction as now or hereafter may be provided by law.
[8] Entitled Defining The Jurisdiction Over Cases Involving The Ill-Gotten Wealth Of Former President Ferdinand E. Marcos, Mrs. Imelda R. Marcos, Members Of Their Immediate Family, Close Relatives, Subordinates, Close And/Or Business Associates, Dummies, Agents And Nominees, Effective on May 7, 1986.
[9] Effective on August 18, 1986.
[10] Entitled An Act Defining And Penalizing The Crime Of Plunder, Approved on July 12, 1991.
[11] Entitled An Act To Strengthen The Functional And Structural Organization Of The Sandiganbayan, Amending For That Purpose Presidential Decree No. 1606, As Amended, Approved on March 30, 1995 and took effect on May 16, 1995 (See Lacson v. Executive Secretary, 361 Phil. 251, 264 [1999]).
[12] Entitled An Act Further Defining The Jurisdiction Of The Sandiganbayan, Amending For The Purpose Presidential Decree No. 1606, As Amended, Providing Funds Therefor, And For Other Purposes, Approved on February 5, 1997.
[13] Entitled An Act Strengthening Further the Functional and Structural Organization of the Sandiganbayan, Further Amending Presidential Decree No. 1606, As Amended, and Appropriating Funds Therefor, Approved on April 16, 2015.
[14] See Inding v. Sandiganbayan, 478 Phil. 506 (2004), at 520-521.
[15] Geduspan v. People, 491 Phil. 375, 380 (2005), as cited in Lazarte, Jr. v. Sandiganbayan (First Division), et al., 600 Phil. 475, 497 (2009); Serana v. Sandiganbayan, et al., 566 Phil. 224, 249 (2008); and Alzaga v. Sandiganbayan (2nd Division), 536 Phil. 726, 731 (2006).
[16] RECORD OF THE SENATE, Vol. IV, No. 60, February 8, 1995, p. 701.
[17] RECORD OF THE SENATE, Vol. I, No. 24, September 25, 1996, p. 799.
[18] See RECORD OF THE SENATE, Vol. IV, No. 60, February 8, 1995, pp. 700-701.
[19] People v. Sandiganbayan (Third Div.) et al., 613 Phil. 407 (2009).
[20] Alzaga v. Sandiganbayan (2nd Division), 536 Phil. 726, 731 (2006).
[21] See Inding v. Sandiganbayan, 478 Phil. 506 (2004), at 520.
[22] Id. at 526-527.
[23] People v. Sandiganbayan (Third Div.) et al., 645 Phil. 53 (2010); People v. Sandiganbayan (Third Div.) et al., 613 Phil. 407 (2009); and Inding v. Sandiganbayan, 478 Phil. 506 (2004), at 520.
[24] Geduspan v. People, 491 Phil. 375, 380 (2005).
[25] Serana v. Sandiganbayan, et al., 566 Phil. 224, 249 (2008).
[26] Alzaga v. Sandiganbayan (2nd Division), 536 Phil. 726, 731 (2006), citing People v. Sandiganbayan, 456 Phil. 136 (2003) and Ramiscal, Jr. v. Hon. Sandiganbayan, 487 Phil. 384 (2004).
Under Section 2 of Executive Order No. 14, the Sandiganbayan has exclusive and original jurisdiction over all cases regarding "the funds, moneys, assets and properties illegally acquired by Former President Ferdinand E. Marcos, Mrs. Imelda Romualdez Marcos, their close relatives, subordinates, business associates, dummies, agents, or nominees," civil or criminal, including incidents arising from such cases. The Decision of the Sandiganbayan is subject to review on certiorari exclusively by the Supreme Court.
In the exercise of its functions, the PCGG is a co-equal body with the
regional trial courts and co-equal bodies have no power to control the other.
The regional trial courts and the Court of Appeals have no jurisdiction over
the PCGG in the exercise of its powers under the applicable Executive Orders
and Section 26, Article XVIII of the 1987 Constitution and, therefore, may not
interfere with and restrain or set aside the orders and actions of the
PCGG.[1]
[1] PCGG v. Aquino, 246 Phil. 371, 378-379 (1988).