DOCSLIB.ORG

Speedy Trial; Double Jeopardy

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Speedy Trial; Double Jeopardy SPEEDY TRIAL; DOUBLE JEOPARDY The recent case of DANTE T. TAN vs. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, G.R. No. 173637, April 21, 2009, deals with the issues of speedy trial and double jeopardy. Although the doctrinal pronouncements therein are not novel, I deem it useful to digest the case, as a refresher material for the legal researchers visiting this law blog. (Note: As widely known in Philippine business circles, the criminal cases involving the petitioner Dante Tan, who was a crony of past Philippine president Joseph Estrada, were somehow related to the murder of publicist Bubby Dacer some years back. The recent reopening of the preliminary investigation of the Dacer murder case by Justice Secretary Raul Gonzalez, now the Chief Presidential Legal Counsel, will surely drag the names of Estrada and his former national police chief and now Sen. Panfilo Lacson into the proceedings). A digest of the abovementioned Supreme Court decision follows hereinbelow. On 19 December 2000, a Panel of Prosecutors of the Department of Justice (DOJ), on behalf of the People of the Philippines (People), filed three Informations against Dante T. Tan the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Pasig City. The cases pertained to allegations that petitioner employed manipulative devises in the purchase of Best World Resources Corporation (BW) shares and the alleged failure of petitioner to file with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) a sworn statement of his beneficial ownership of BW shares. In two other related cases, two Informations were filed against a certain Jimmy Juan and Eduardo G. Lim for violation of the Revised Securities Act involving BW shares of stock. On the same day, the DOJ, through Assistant Chief State Prosecutor Nilo C. Mariano, filed a Motion for Consolidation praying that the cases be consolidated together which the trial court granted. Petitioner was arraigned on 16 January 2001, and pleaded not guilty to the charges. On 6 February 2001, the pre-trial was concluded, and a pre-trial order set, among other things, the first date of trial on 27 February 2001. At the crux of the controversy was the issue of whether there was a violation of petitioner Dante Tan’s right to speedy trial. Petitioner assailed the decision and resolution of the Court of Appeals which determined that he “impliedly agreed” that his case would not be tried until after termination of the other related cases. Offhand, the Court stated that an accused’s right to “have a speedy, impartial, and public trial” is guaranteed in criminal cases by Section 14(2) of Article III of the Constitution. This right to a speedy trial may be defined as one free from vexatious, capricious and oppressive delays, its “salutary objective” being to assure that an innocent person may be free from the anxiety and expense of a court litigation or, if otherwise, of having his guilt determined within the shortest possible time compatible with the presentation and consideration of whatsoever legitimate defense he may interpose. The oft-repeated adage “justice delayed is justice denied” requires the expeditious resolution of disputes, much more so in criminal cases where an accused is constitutionally guaranteed the right to a speedy trial. The Court added that following the policies incorporated under the 1987 Constitution, Republic Act No. 8493, otherwise known as “The Speedy Trial Act of 1998,” was enacted, with Section 6 of said act limiting the trial period to 180 days from the first day of trial. Aware of problems resulting in the clogging of court dockets, the Court implemented the law by issuing Supreme Court Circular No. 38-98, which has been incorporated in the 2000 Rules of Criminal Procedure, Section 2 of Rule 119. The Court emphasized qualified that a balancing test of applying societal interests and the rights of the accused necessarily compels the court to approach speedy trial cases on an ad hoc basis. In determining whether the accused has been deprived of his right to a speedy disposition of the case and to a speedy trial, four factors must be considered: (a) length of delay; (b) the reason for the delay; (c) the defendant’s assertion of his right; and (d) prejudice to the defendant. Closely related to the length of delay is the reason or justification of the State for such delay. Different weights should be assigned to different reasons or justifications invoked by the State. In the case at bar, it was established that from the initial hearing on 27 February 2001 until the time the prosecution filed its formal offer of evidence for Criminal Cases No. 119831-119832 on 25 November 2003, both prosecution and defense admitted that no evidence was presented for Criminal Case No. 119830. Hence, for a period of almost two years and eight months, the prosecution did not present a single evidence for Criminal Case No. 119830. The question was whether there was vexatious, capricious, and oppressive delay. To this, the Court applied the four-factor test previously mentioned. It stated that in determining the right of an accused to speedy trial, courts are required to do more than a mathematical computation of the number of postponements of the scheduled hearings of the case. A mere mathematical reckoning of the time involved is clearly insufficient, and particular regard must be given to the facts and circumstances peculiar to each case. In previous cases the Court ruled that there was no violation of the right to speedy trial and speedy disposition where the delay was attended by the frequent amendments of procedural laws by presidential decrees, the structural reorganizations in existing prosecutorial agencies and the creation of new ones by executive fiat, resulting in changes of personnel, preliminary jurisdiction, and the functions and powers of prosecuting agencies. The Court also considered the failure of the accused to assert such right, the complexity of the issues, the conduct of the lawyers of the accused, and the lack of prejudice caused by the delay to the accused. Petitioner’s objection to the prosecution’s stand that he gave an implied consent to the separate trial of Criminal Case No. 119830 is belied by the records of the case. No objection was interposed by his defense counsel when this matter was discussed during the initial hearing. Petitioner’s conformity thereto can be deduced from his non-objection at the preliminary hearing when the prosecution manifested that the evidence to be presented would be only for Criminal Cases No. 119831-119832. His failure to object to the prosecution’s manifestation that the cases be tried separately is fatal to his case. The acts, mistakes and negligence of counsel bind his client, except only when such mistakes would result in serious injustice. In fact, petitioner’s acquiescence is evident from the transcript of stenographic notes during the initial presentation of the People’s evidence in the five BW cases on 27 February 2001, which the Court quoted extensively. The Court stressed that although periods for trial have been stipulated, these periods were not absolute. Where periods had been set, certain exclusions were allowed by law. After all, the Court and the law recognize the fact that judicial proceedings did not exist in a vacuum and had to contend with the realities of everyday life. In spite of the prescribed time limits, jurisprudence continued to adopt the view that the fundamentally recognized principle was that the concept of speedy trial was a relative term and must necessarily be a flexible concept. As to the assertion that delay in the presentation of evidence for Criminal Case No. 119830 has prejudiced petitioner because the witnesses for the defense may no longer be available at this time, the Court stated that suffice it to say that the burden of proving his guilt rests upon the prosecution. Should the prosecution fail for any reason to present evidence sufficient to show his guilt beyond reasonable doubt, petitioner would be acquitted. Unless the prosecution discharges its burden to prove the guilt of an accused beyond reasonable doubt, the latter need not even offer evidence in his behalf. On a related issue, the Court stated that there was no merit to petitioner’s claim that a reversal of the RTC’s Order dismissing Criminal Case No. 119830 was a violation of his constitutional right against double jeopardy which dismissal was founded on an alleged violation of his right to speedy trial. The constitutional protection against double jeopardy shields one from a second or later prosecution for the same offense. Article III, Section 21 of the 1987 Constitution declares that no person shall be twice put in jeopardy of punishment for the same offense, providing further that if an act is punished by a law and an ordinance, conviction or acquittal under either shall constitute a bar to another prosecution for the same act. Following the above constitutional provision, Section 7, Rule 117 of the Revised Rules of Court found it apt to stipulate: SEC. 7. Former conviction or acquittal; double jeopardy. – When an accused has been convicted or acquitted, or the case against him dismissed or otherwise terminated without his express consent by a court of competent jurisdiction, upon a valid complaint or information or other formal charge sufficient in form and substance to sustain a conviction and after the accused had pleaded to the charge, the conviction or acquittal of the accused or the dismissal of the case shall be a bar to another prosecution for the offense charged, or for any attempt to commit the same or frustration thereof, or for any offense which necessarily includes or is necessarily included in the offense charged in the former complaint or information.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Energy Development Corporation
    APRIL 2012 www.lopezlink.ph Happy birthday, OML! Chairman emeritus launches new contest. See story on page 2. http://www.facebook.com/lopezlinkonline www.twitter.com/lopezlinkph EDC: King of the hill WHERE in the world is Energy Development Corporation (EDC)? EDC, one of the world’s largest producers of geothermal energy, is exporting its expertise in Chile after bagging its first international concession areas in the South American EDC: King country early this year. Turn to page 6 of the hill Nomination for ABS-CBN drive Summer essentials inspires kids to from Power Plant LAA begins …page 5 ‘bida’ best!…page 4 Mall…page 12 Lopezlink April 2012 NEWS BIZ NEWS Lopezlink April 2012 Birthday thoughts EL3: ABS-CBN finds Meralco shareholders to receive Rockwell Land shares FILIPINO stockholders of The electric utility’s board curities and Exchange Com- preferred shares with a par Meralco, meanwhile, is seek- Meralco shareholders within fulfillment in inspiring Pinoys Meralco as of March 23 will of directors in February 2012 mission (SEC) and the Phil- value of P0.01 each. ing SEC approval to distrib- five trading days after securing ippine Stock Exchange by “We look forward to the ute the property dividends to The following is an excerpt from inspire the Filipino through receive 2.818 shares of Rock- declared its 51% equity in all approvals from the SEC and OML on Wellness well Land Corporation for ev- Rockwell Land as property way of introduction. Rockwell listing of Rockwell Land. We Meralco shareholders. It plans the PSE. Target listing date is the welcome address by ABS-CBN shows that reflect their values, Land proposed to list all its have built one of the strongest to distribute 3.18 billion com- president Eugenio Lopez III dur- that affirm their self-worth ery Meralco share held.
    [Show full text]
  • J. Leonen, En Banc]
    EN BANC G.R. No. 221697 - MARY GRACE NATIVIDAD S. POE­ LLAMANZARES, Petitioner, v. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS and ESTRELLA C. ELAMPARO, Respondents. G.R. No. 221698-700 - MARY GRACE NATIVIDAD S. POE­ LLAMANZARES, Petitioner, vs. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, FRANCISCO S. TATAD, ANTONIO P. CONTRERAS, and AMADO T. VALDEZ, Respondents. Promulgated: March 8, 2016 x---------------------------------------------------------------------~~o=;::.-~ CONCURRING OPINION LEONEN, J.: I am honored to concur with the ponencia of my esteemed colleague, Associate Justice Jose Portugal Perez. I submit this Opinion to further clarify my position. Prefatory The rule of law we swore to uphold is nothing but the rule ofjust law. The rule of law does not require insistence in elaborate, strained, irrational, and irrelevant technical interpretation when there can be a clear and rational interpretation that is more just and humane while equally bound by the limits of legal text. The Constitution, as fundamental law, defines the mm1mum qualifications for a person to present his or her candidacy to run for President. It is this same fundamental law which prescribes that it is the People, in their sovereign capacity as electorate, to determine who among the candidates is best qualified for that position. In the guise of judicial review, this court is not empowered to constrict the electorate's choice by sustaining the Commission on Elections' actions that show that it failed to disregard doctrinal interpretation of its powers under Section 78 of the Omnibus Election Code, created novel jurisprudence in relation to the citizenship of foundlings, misinterpreted and misapplied existing jurisprudence relating to the requirement of residency for election purposes, and declined to appreciate the evidence presented by petitioner as a whole and instead insisted only on three factual grounds j Concurring Opinion 2 G.R.
    [Show full text]
  • The Celebrity's Right to Autonomous Self-Definition
    65 THE CELEBRITY’S RIGHT TO AUTONOMOUS SELF-DEFINITION AND FALSE ENDORSEMENTS: ARGUING THE CASE FOR A RIGHT OF PUBLICITY IN THE PHILIPPINES Arvin Kristopher A Razon* Abstract With the Philippines being the top country in terms of social media usage, social media platforms have expanded opportunities for celebrities to profit from their fame. Despite the pervasiveness of celebrity culture in the country and the increasing number of unauthorised celebrity advertisements in such platforms, the right of publicity does not explicitly exist in Philippine law. This paper explains that the lack of an explicit statute-based right of publicity does not mean that it does not exist in common law or other statutory law. Centred on the minimalist path of law reform, the paper argues that the existing right to privacy in Philippine law can justify a right to publicity, anchored on the right to protect unwarranted publicity about oneself regardless of one’s status in the public eye, as well as on the right to autonomous self-definition. The illustrative cases in this paper evidence the hurt feelings celebrities suffer from unwanted publicity. A publicity right also exists as a property right under local intellectual property laws on unfair competition. I. Introduction The opportunity to economically exploit one’s name, likeness or identity, often through celebrity endorsements, is a perk that comes with being a celebrity.1 The internet, particularly social media platforms like Facebook and Instagram, has expanded the opportunities for celebrities to profit from their fame, providing them with another channel by which they can endorse brands to a global audience, * BA Organizational Communication (magna cum laude), Juris Doctor (University of the Philippines), LLM (University of Melbourne); Lecturer, De La Salle University.
    [Show full text]
  • Papal Visit Philippines 2014 and 2015 2014
    This event is dedicated to the Filipino People on the occasion of the five- day pastoral and state visit of Pope Francis here in the Philippines on October 23 to 27, 2014 part of 22- day Asian and Oceanian tour from October 22 to November 13, 2014. Papal Visit Philippines 2014 and 2015 ―Mercy and Compassion‖ a Papal Visit Philippines 2014 and 2015 2014 Contents About the project ............................................................................................... 2 About the Theme of the Apostolic Visit: ‗Mercy and Compassion‘.................................. 4 History of Jesus is Lord Church Worldwide.............................................................................. 6 Executive Branch of the Philippines ....................................................................... 15 Presidents of the Republic of the Philippines ....................................................................... 15 Vice Presidents of the Republic of the Philippines .............................................................. 16 Speaker of the House of Representatives of the Philippines ............................................ 16 Presidents of the Senate of the Philippines .......................................................................... 17 Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the Philippines ...................................................... 17 Leaders of the Roman Catholic Church ................................................................ 18 Pope (Roman Catholic Bishop of Rome and Worldwide Leader of Roman
    [Show full text]
  • United Nations Juridical Yearbook, 1997
    Extract from: UNITED NATIONS JURIDICAL YEARBOOK 1997 Part Three. Judicial decisions on questions relating to the United Nations and related intergovernmental organizations Chapter VIII. Decisions of national tribunals Copyright (c) United Nations CONTENTS (continued) Page 13. Submission of proposals by intergovernmental organiza- tions in functional commissions of the Economic and Social Council—Rules of procedure 69 (3), 71 (2>) and 74 of the functional commissions of the Council—Council decision 1995/209 451 14. Restructuring of the Secretariat—Authority of the Secretary- General 452 15. Institutional aspects of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development 459 16. Participation by Yugoslavia in international confer- ences—General Assembly resolutions 47/1 and 47/229 . 463 17. Practice of the United Nations in cases of chai lenged repre- sentation of a Member State—General Assembly resolution 396 (V) of 14 December 1950 465 18. Question whether the Pan American Health Organization (PAHO) could be considered part of the United Nations sys- tem—Agreement of 24 May 1949 between WHO and PAHO—Agreement of 23 May 1950 between the Organi- zation of American States and PAHO 468 Part Three. Judicial decisions on questions relating to the United Nations and related intergovernmental organizations CHAPTER VII. DECISIONS AND ADVISORY OPINIONS OF INTERNA- TIONAL TRIBUNALS International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea The M/V "Saiga" (No. 1) Case (Saint Vincent and the Grenadines v. Guinea) Jurisdiction of a State over the exclusive economic zone—Article 73, para. 2, of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea—Right of hot pursuit in accordance with article 111 of the Convention 477 CHAPTER VIII.
    [Show full text]
  • Former President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo Acquitted of Plunder: a Case of Justice Catering to Political Power in the Philippines?
    Former President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo Acquitted of Plunder: A Case of Justice Catering to Political Power in the Philippines? By Rappler Region: South-East Asia Asia-Pacific Research, July 20, 2016 Theme: Justice, Society Rappler 19 June 2016 The presidential administration of former Philippine president Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo was marked by corruption, fraud, misuse of public funds, and utter disregard for constitutionalism and the rule of law. She has been widely accused of murder, kidnapping, plundering, and cheating. The US Embassy in Manila was even informed in 2005 by corporate accounting firm SGV founder Washington Sycip that her husband, José Miguel Arroyo, was one of the most corrupt figures in the Philippines, according to US diplomat cables that were leaked in 2011. The Arroyo Administration also arbitrarily and unlawfully arrested her political opponents while it used national security measures and the language of law and order as pretexts to suppress her opponents and Filipinos and Filipinas seeking justice. The Hello Garci scandal that emerged in 2005 merely served to prove that the 2004 Philippine general-election’s were rigged by Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo and her political associates. After the scandal, Arroyo would admit that the audio evidence produced about her election rigging was authentic, but nothing happened to her. Her government argued on the basis of procedural law that since the key evidence against Arroyo was a phone conversation that was recorded without her consent that it could not be used while her political party and coalition prevented her impeachment and justice from ever taking place through legislative means by blocking any action against her by using their majority vote in the Congress of the Philippines.
    [Show full text]
  • G.R. No. 113375 May 5, 1994 KILOSBAYAN, INCORPORATED
    G.R. No. 113375 May 5, 1994 1.2. PCSO is seeking a suitable contractor which shall build, at its own expense, all the facilities ('Facilities') needed to operate and maintain a nationwide on-line lottery system. PCSO shall lease the Facilities for a fixed percentage ofquarterly gross receipts. All receipts from ticket sales shall be turned over directly to PCSO. All capital, operating expenses and expansion expenses and risks KILOSBAYAN, INCORPORATED, JOVITO R. SALONGA, CIRILO A. RIGOS, ERME CAMBA, EMILIO C. CAPULONG, JR., JOSE T. APOLO, shall be for the exclusive account of the Lessor. EPHRAIM TENDERO, FERNANDO SANTIAGO, JOSE ABCEDE, CHRISTINE TAN, FELIPE L. GOZON, RAFAEL G. FERNANDO, RAOUL V. VICTORINO, JOSE CUNANAN, QUINTIN S. DOROMAL, SEN. FREDDIE WEBB, SEN. WIGBERTO TAÑADA, and REP. JOKER P. ARROYO, petitioners, xxx xxx xxx vs. TEOFISTO GUINGONA, JR., in his capacity as Executive Secretary, Office of the President; RENATO CORONA, in his capacity as 1.4. The lease shall be for a period not exceeding fifteen (15) years. Assistant Executive Secretary and Chairman of the Presidential review Committee on the Lotto, Office of the President; PHILIPPINE CHARITY SWEEPSTAKES OFFICE; and PHILIPPINE GAMING MANAGEMENT CORPORATION, respondents. 1.5. The Lessor is expected to submit a comprehensive nationwide lottery development plan ("Development Plan") which will include the game, the marketing of the games, and the logistics to introduce the games to all the cities and municipalities of the DAVIDE, JR., J.: country within five (5) years. This is a special civil action for prohibition and injunction, with a prayer for a temporary restraining order and preliminary xxx xxx xxx injunction, which seeks to prohibit and restrain the implementation of the "Contract of Lease" executed by the Philippine Charity Sweepstakes Office (PCSO) and the Philippine Gaming Management Corporation (PGMC) in connection with the on- line lottery system, also known as "lotto." 1.7.
    [Show full text]
  • Updates on the Implementation of Laws
    Republic of the Philippines Senate Pasay City UPDATES ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF LAWS (as of May 31, 2013) Fourteenth & Fifteenth Congress 1 PREFACE A law that successfully hurdles the legislative mill is a great achievement. But for all the tedious work that goes into the act of legislation, a law passed by Congress is rendered meaningless if it remains nothing more than a signed document on paper. In other words, if the law is not implemented, it becomes a “dead letter law.” There is therefore a need to continuously monitor and review the implementation of laws. It is in the interest of the citizens to check whether concerned agencies of the government have complied with the requirements, and if the corresponding Implementing Rules and Regulations have been issued. This is to ensure that stakeholders are able to maximize the benefits that these laws were originally designed to provide. This handbook contains a report on the implementation of laws passed during the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Congress. It aims to provide reference materials for Senators, Senate officials and other interested parties about the laws being implemented by different government departments, including their instrumentalities and agencies. It seeks to shed light on the reasons why some laws are not being fully carried out, as well as the problems encountered by the government agencies concerned in their implementation. We sincerely hope that this humble report would serve as a useful guide to everyone who may have the opportunity to use it. Atty. Crisante J. del Mundo Executive-Legislative Liaison Service Office of the External Affairs & Relations 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS Fourteenth Congress I.
    [Show full text]
  • Searching for Success
    Searching for Success in Judicial Reform TECHNICAL EDITOR: Livingston Armytage NETWORK FACILITATOR: Lorenz Metzner Searching for Success in Judicial Reform Voices from the Asia Pacific Experience Asia Pacific Judicial Reform Forum 1 1 YMCA Library Building, Jai Singh Road, New Delhi 110 001 Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University’s objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide in Oxford New York Auckland Cape Town Dar es Salaam Hong Kong Karachi Kuala Lumpur Madrid Melbourne Mexico City Nairobi New Delhi Shanghai Taipei Toronto With offices in Argentina Austria Brazil Chile Czech Republic France Greece Guatemala Hungary Italy Japan Poland Portugal Singapore South Korea Switzerland Thailand Turkey Ukraine Vietnam Oxford is a registered trade mark of Oxford University Press in the UK and in certain other countries Published in India by Oxford University Press, New Delhi © United Nations Development Programme 2009 This publication was prepared in partnership with the Asia Pacific Judicial Reform Forum (APJRF) The moral rights of the author have been asserted Database right Oxford University Press (maker) First published 2009 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the prior permission in writing of Oxford University Press, or as expressly permitted by law, or under terms agreed with the appropriate reprographics rights organization.
    [Show full text]
  • View Philippine Report
    Rule of Law for Human Rights in the Asean Region: A Base-line Study Schweizerische Eidgenossenschaft Confédération suisse Canadian International Confederazione Svizzera Development Agency Confederaziun svizra Embassy of Switzerland The Republic of The Philippines Rule of Law for Human Rights in the ASEAN Region: A Base-line Study 177 Philippines Faith Suzzette Delos Reyes-Kong Snapshoti Formal Name Republic of the Philippines Capital City Manila Independence 12 June 1898 (Independence from Spain) 4 July 1946 (Independence from the United States) Historical Background The Philippines became a Spanish colony during the 16th century and was ceded to the United States in 1898 following the Spanish-American War. It became a self-governing commonwealth in 1935. In 1942, during World War II, it fell under Japanese occupation. US forces and Filipinos fought together in 1944-45 to regain control. The Philippines attained its independence on 4 July 1946. In 1972, President Ferdinand E. Marcos declared martial law; his rule ended in 1986, when a “people power” movement (“EDSA 1”) installed Corazon Aquino as president. There were coup attempts during her presidency that prevented full political stability and economic development. Fidel V. Ramos became president in 1992 and his administration saw increased stability and progress on economic reforms. Joseph Estrada was elected president in 1998. His Vice-president, Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, assumed as President in January 2001 when Estrada’s impeachment trial broke down and another “people power” movement (“EDSA 2”) demanded his resignation. Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo was elected as President in May 2004. Impeachment charges were brought against Arroyo for allegedly tampering with the results of the 2004 elections, but were dismissed by Congress.
    [Show full text]
  • Families Angry
    FEBRUARY 2015 L.ittleM.anilaConfidential Families Angry Aquino reaches out to relatives of dead SAF soldiers but relatives are not convinced MANILA - President Benigno Aquino III, arriving late for the necrological services for the 44 slaughtered police commandos at Camp Bagong Diwa, said he feels the grief of the bereaved families because he lost his father too more than two decades ago. “I was watching television on my own in our house in Boston, waiting for news of my father. I heard the television announcer say: Opposition leader Benigno Aquino was seen lying in a pool of blood; shots were fired. At that instance, time julia stopped for me, and my world turned upside down,” he said. MONTES “At the saddest and most painful point, I had several questions- now that my father is dead, how can we achieve what he wanted to achieve KISSING THE WIND OF FAME for our country? Does that mean the fight is over? ANGRY continued on page 24 JENNYLYN MERCADO is the successor to Marian Rivera VINA MORALES is opening her heart COSMOPOLITAN GOES YOUNG WITH (gasp) KATHRYN BERNARDO ON THE COVER Charo Give a Helping Hand Santos-Concio for a Cause Pageant ABS-CBN PRESIDENT AND CEO Nathalie Ramos is one of the contestants for this CHARO SANTOS-CONCIO NAMED year’s Philippine Canadian Charitable Foundation’s OUTSTANDING PAULINIAN ALUMNA Manny Yanga of Scarborough Toyota (3RD FROM LEFT SEATED) and Anna Eusebio of UMAC Miss Philippines-Canada pageant. Here, she models door to door Cargo (5TH FROM LEFT SEATED) pose with Senator Tobias Enverga and his wife one of the gowns during the PCCF Induction dinner.
    [Show full text]
  • Oca Circular No. 06-2004
    Hepublic of tlJe -t1t}i1ippillC9 ~uprcrnt l.ourt <Officl of tlJc (Ollrt ,.AbministrMor mdnila OCA CIRCULAR NO. 06-2004 TO : THE COURT OF APPEALS, SANDIGANBAYAN, COURT OF TAX APPEALS, REGIONAL TRIAL COURTS, SHARl' A DISTRICT COURTS, METROPOLITAN TRIAL COURTS, MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURTS IN CITIES, MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURTS, MUNICIPAL CIRCUIT TRIAL COURTS, SHARI' A CIRCUIT COURTS, 'mE OFFICE OF THE STATE PROSECUTOR, PUBLIC DEFENDERS OFFICE AND THE INTEGRATED BAR OF THE PHILIPPINES SUBJECT: INDEFINITE SUSPENSION OF ATTY. ALAN PAGUIA FROM THE PRACTICE OF LAW For the information and guidance of all concerned, quoted hereunder is the Decision of the Supreme Court En Banc dated November 25,2003 in G.R No. 159486-88 entitled '"President Joseph Ejercito Estrada vs. Hon. Sandiganbayan", to wit: "On 23 September 2003, this Court issued its resolution in the above- numbered case, it read: "The case for consideration has been brought to this Court via a Petition for Certiorari under Rule 65 of the Rules of Court filed by Joseph Ejercito Estrada, acting through his counsel Attorney Alan F. Paguia, against the Sandiganbay®, et al. The Petition prays - . "1. That Chief Justice Davide and the rest of the members of the Honorable Court disqualify themselves from hearing and deciding this petition~ "2. That the assailed resolutions of the Sandiganbayan be vacated and set aside~and "3. That Criminal Cases Nos. 26558, No. 26565 and No. 26905 pending before the Sandiganbayan be dismissed fro lack of jurisdiction. 1 <CAttorneyAlan F. Paguia, speaking for petitioner, asserts that the inhibition of the members of the Supreme Court from hearing the petition is called for under Rule 5.10 of the Code of Judicial Conduct prohibiting justices or judges from participating in any partisan political activity which proscription, according to him, the ju'stices have violated by attending the 'EDSA 2 RALLY' and by authorizing the assumption of Vice-president Gloria Macapagal Arroyo to the Presidency in violation of the 1987 Constitution.
    [Show full text]