Post by atty36252 on Sept 25, 2007 7:56:49 GMT -5
The facts I know about the case of Senator Trillanes are all culled from the web. The facts I consider relevant are as follows:
1. Among the accused are Gary Alejano and Nicanor Faeldon;
2. Both are Marine Captains;
3. The Marine Corps is a service of the Philippine Navy, patterned after the US Marines;
4. The jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan is defined by PD 1606 as amended by RA 8249;
If the facts above are true, and there are no amendments to PD 1606 after RA 8249, then I think the motion below will present a good fight.
I am posting this purely for the intellectual exercise. If somebody finds it useful, then I shall have been doubly rewarded.
Accused, through counsel, to this Honorable Court, respectfully files this motion to quash, on the grounds discussed below.
The Rules of Court provide that a Motion to Quash may be filed if it is shown that the Court lacks jurisdiction to try the case [Rule 117 Sec 3 (b)]. A motion to quash based on lack of jurisdiction may be filed at any time, even on appeal. The Supreme Court, in the case of Rosa Uy v. CA (G.R. No. 119000 held that:
“....from the above-quoted law, we can see that even if a party fails to file a motion to quash, he may still question the jurisdiction of the court later on. Moreover, these objections may be raised or considered motu propio by the court at any stage of the proceedings or on appeal
The jurisdiction to try this case, we submit, lies in the Sandiganbayan, not this Honorable Court. Said Court’s jurisdiction, is provided as follows:
"Sec. 4. Jurisdiction. The Sandiganbayan shall exercise original jurisdiction in all cases involving:
a. Violations of Republic Act No. 3019, as amended, otherwise known as the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act, Republic Act No. 1379, and Chapter II, Section 2, Title VII of the Revised Penal Code, where one or more of the principal accused are officials occupying the following positions in the government, whether in permanent, acting or interim capacity, at the time of the commission of the offense:
"(1) 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 (Republic Act No. 6758), specifically including:
"(d) Philippine army and air force colonels, naval captains, and all officers of higher rank;
"b. Other offenses or felonies committed by the public officials and employees mentioned in subsection (a) of this section in relation to their office.
“A perusal of the aforequoted Section 4 of R.A. 8249 reveals that to fall under the exclusive original jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan, the following requisites must concur:
1) the offense committed is a violation of
a. R.A. 3019, as amended (the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act),
b. R.A. 1379 (the law on ill-gotten wealth),
c. Chapter II, Section 2, Title VII, Book II of the Revised Penal Code (the law on bribery),
d. Executive Order Nos. 1, 2, 14, and 14-A, issued in 1986 (sequestration cases), or
e. other offenses or felonies whether simple or complexed with other crimes;
2) the offender comitting the offenses in items (a), (b), (c) and (e) is a public official or employee holding any of the positions enumerated in paragraph a of Section 4; and
3) the offense committed is in relation to the office [Panfilo M. Lacson v. Executive Secretary, et al (GR 128096].
With respect to the first requisite, the Lacson case, held that the phrase “other offenses or felonies" is broad enough to include the crime of murder. It certainly is broad enough to include the crime of coup d’ etat. The first requisite is, therefore, satisfied.
The second requisite requires that the offender be an officer holding any of the positions enumerated in Section 4. Section 4 (a) (1) (d) states that the Sandiganbayan shall have original jurisdiction if one or more of the accused is at least a naval captain. Two of the accused, Nicanor Faeldon and Gary Alejano are marine captains. The Marine Corps is a service of the Philippine Navy. Accused Faeldon and Alejano, therefore, are “naval captains” within the contemplation of the law. The second requisite, therefore, has also been satisfied..
The third requisite is satisfied if the offense is committed in relation to the offender’s office. The Amended Information charges as follows:
“That on or about July 27, 2003, and on dates prior and subsequent thereto, in Makati City, a place within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, above-named accused, all officers and enlisted men of the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP), together with several John Does and Jane Does, conspiring, conniving, confederating and mutually helping one another, each committing individual acts toward a common design or purpose of committing coup d’etat, by did then and there, knowingly, willfully, unlawfully, feloniously plan, orchestrate, recruit, instigate, mobilize, deploy and execute said common design or purpose of committing coup d’ etat, swiftly attack and seize by means of force, intimidation, threat, strategy, or stealth the facilities of the Ayala Center, particularly Oakwood Premier Hotel and its immediate vicinity, for the exercise and continued possession of power, directed against the duly constituted authorities of the Republic of the Philippines, by did then and there, withdraw support and demand the resignation of PRESIDENT GLORIA MACAPAGAL-ARROYO and members of her official cabinet and top officials of the AFP and the Philippine National Police, for the purpose of seizing or diminishing state power.
CONTRARY TO LAW.” (quoted in G.R. No. 162318 and G.R. No. 162341, October 25, 2004)
The Amended Information charges that the accused withdrew support from the President. The office and function of a soldier is to support the President, who is the Commander in Chief. The withdrawal of support, therefore, is an element of the offense, committed in relation to the office of said accused soldiers.
It is clear, therefore, that all the requisites for acquisition of jurisdiction by the Sandiganbayan obtain in this case.
Neither may it be argued that the jurisdiction is concurrent with this Honorable Court, for Section 4 further provides that:
“In cases where none of the accused are occupying positions corresponding to Salary Grade “27” or higher, as prescribed in the said Republic Act No. 6758, or military and PNP officers mentioned above, exclusive original jurisdiction thereof shall be vested in the proper regional trial court, metropolitan trial court, municipal trial court, and municipal circuit trial court, as the case may be, pursuant to their respective jurisdictions as provided in Batas Pambansa Blg. 129, as amended.”
By the above provision, this Honorable Court may only acquire jurisdiction if none of the accused have the rank of naval captain.
Furthermore, the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court is defined by Batas Pambansa 129, which provides that:
“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.”
The very provision, that defines this Honorable Court’s jurisdiction clearly states that the jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan is exclusive.
Considering that this Honorable Court has no jurisdiction over this case, a grant of this Motion to Quash, we submit, is in order.
1. Among the accused are Gary Alejano and Nicanor Faeldon;
2. Both are Marine Captains;
3. The Marine Corps is a service of the Philippine Navy, patterned after the US Marines;
4. The jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan is defined by PD 1606 as amended by RA 8249;
If the facts above are true, and there are no amendments to PD 1606 after RA 8249, then I think the motion below will present a good fight.
I am posting this purely for the intellectual exercise. If somebody finds it useful, then I shall have been doubly rewarded.
MOTION TO QUASH
Accused, through counsel, to this Honorable Court, respectfully files this motion to quash, on the grounds discussed below.
D I S C U S S I O N
The Rules of Court provide that a Motion to Quash may be filed if it is shown that the Court lacks jurisdiction to try the case [Rule 117 Sec 3 (b)]. A motion to quash based on lack of jurisdiction may be filed at any time, even on appeal. The Supreme Court, in the case of Rosa Uy v. CA (G.R. No. 119000 held that:
“....from the above-quoted law, we can see that even if a party fails to file a motion to quash, he may still question the jurisdiction of the court later on. Moreover, these objections may be raised or considered motu propio by the court at any stage of the proceedings or on appeal
The jurisdiction to try this case, we submit, lies in the Sandiganbayan, not this Honorable Court. Said Court’s jurisdiction, is provided as follows:
"Sec. 4. Jurisdiction. The Sandiganbayan shall exercise original jurisdiction in all cases involving:
a. Violations of Republic Act No. 3019, as amended, otherwise known as the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act, Republic Act No. 1379, and Chapter II, Section 2, Title VII of the Revised Penal Code, where one or more of the principal accused are officials occupying the following positions in the government, whether in permanent, acting or interim capacity, at the time of the commission of the offense:
"(1) 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 (Republic Act No. 6758), specifically including:
"(d) Philippine army and air force colonels, naval captains, and all officers of higher rank;
"b. Other offenses or felonies committed by the public officials and employees mentioned in subsection (a) of this section in relation to their office.
“A perusal of the aforequoted Section 4 of R.A. 8249 reveals that to fall under the exclusive original jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan, the following requisites must concur:
1) the offense committed is a violation of
a. R.A. 3019, as amended (the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act),
b. R.A. 1379 (the law on ill-gotten wealth),
c. Chapter II, Section 2, Title VII, Book II of the Revised Penal Code (the law on bribery),
d. Executive Order Nos. 1, 2, 14, and 14-A, issued in 1986 (sequestration cases), or
e. other offenses or felonies whether simple or complexed with other crimes;
2) the offender comitting the offenses in items (a), (b), (c) and (e) is a public official or employee holding any of the positions enumerated in paragraph a of Section 4; and
3) the offense committed is in relation to the office [Panfilo M. Lacson v. Executive Secretary, et al (GR 128096].
With respect to the first requisite, the Lacson case, held that the phrase “other offenses or felonies" is broad enough to include the crime of murder. It certainly is broad enough to include the crime of coup d’ etat. The first requisite is, therefore, satisfied.
The second requisite requires that the offender be an officer holding any of the positions enumerated in Section 4. Section 4 (a) (1) (d) states that the Sandiganbayan shall have original jurisdiction if one or more of the accused is at least a naval captain. Two of the accused, Nicanor Faeldon and Gary Alejano are marine captains. The Marine Corps is a service of the Philippine Navy. Accused Faeldon and Alejano, therefore, are “naval captains” within the contemplation of the law. The second requisite, therefore, has also been satisfied..
The third requisite is satisfied if the offense is committed in relation to the offender’s office. The Amended Information charges as follows:
“That on or about July 27, 2003, and on dates prior and subsequent thereto, in Makati City, a place within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, above-named accused, all officers and enlisted men of the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP), together with several John Does and Jane Does, conspiring, conniving, confederating and mutually helping one another, each committing individual acts toward a common design or purpose of committing coup d’etat, by did then and there, knowingly, willfully, unlawfully, feloniously plan, orchestrate, recruit, instigate, mobilize, deploy and execute said common design or purpose of committing coup d’ etat, swiftly attack and seize by means of force, intimidation, threat, strategy, or stealth the facilities of the Ayala Center, particularly Oakwood Premier Hotel and its immediate vicinity, for the exercise and continued possession of power, directed against the duly constituted authorities of the Republic of the Philippines, by did then and there, withdraw support and demand the resignation of PRESIDENT GLORIA MACAPAGAL-ARROYO and members of her official cabinet and top officials of the AFP and the Philippine National Police, for the purpose of seizing or diminishing state power.
CONTRARY TO LAW.” (quoted in G.R. No. 162318 and G.R. No. 162341, October 25, 2004)
The Amended Information charges that the accused withdrew support from the President. The office and function of a soldier is to support the President, who is the Commander in Chief. The withdrawal of support, therefore, is an element of the offense, committed in relation to the office of said accused soldiers.
It is clear, therefore, that all the requisites for acquisition of jurisdiction by the Sandiganbayan obtain in this case.
Neither may it be argued that the jurisdiction is concurrent with this Honorable Court, for Section 4 further provides that:
“In cases where none of the accused are occupying positions corresponding to Salary Grade “27” or higher, as prescribed in the said Republic Act No. 6758, or military and PNP officers mentioned above, exclusive original jurisdiction thereof shall be vested in the proper regional trial court, metropolitan trial court, municipal trial court, and municipal circuit trial court, as the case may be, pursuant to their respective jurisdictions as provided in Batas Pambansa Blg. 129, as amended.”
By the above provision, this Honorable Court may only acquire jurisdiction if none of the accused have the rank of naval captain.
Furthermore, the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court is defined by Batas Pambansa 129, which provides that:
“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.”
The very provision, that defines this Honorable Court’s jurisdiction clearly states that the jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan is exclusive.
Considering that this Honorable Court has no jurisdiction over this case, a grant of this Motion to Quash, we submit, is in order.