Preliminary investigation aims to assess the validity of accusations against an individual. This process is not just a formality; it is a vital step to ensure that trials do not burden the courts with unsubstantiated claims. Its scope extends to evaluating evidence, hearing witnesses, and weighing the probability of a crime.
Is the right to preliminary investigation a constitutional right?
The right to preliminary investigation is not a constitutional right but is merely a right conferred by statute.
When is preliminary investigation required?
It is required to be conducted before the filing of a complaint or an information for an offense where the penalty prescribed by law is at least 4 years, 2 months and 1 day, without regard to fine, unless a person is arrested without a warrant and undergoes inquest proceedings.
However, a person subjected to inquest proceedings may request for preliminary investigation in the following instances:
- Before the information is filed, the person arrested may ask for a preliminary investigation but must sign a waiver of the provisions of Art. 125, RPC, in the presence of his counsel; or
- After the filing of the complaint or information in court, without a preliminary investigation, the accused may, within 5 days from the time he learns of its filing, ask for a preliminary investigation.
What is the effect of absence of preliminary investigation on the validity of the information?
The absence of preliminary investigation does not impair the validity of the information or otherwise render the same defective. Neither does it affect the jurisdiction of the court or constitute a ground for quashing the information.
What is meant by probable cause for purposes of preliminary investigation?
Probable cause has been defined as the existence of such facts and circumstances as would excite the belief, in a reasonable mind, acting on the facts within the knowledge of the prosecutor, that the person charged was guilty of the crime for which he was prosecuted.
Who may conduct preliminary investigations?
The following may conduct preliminary investigations:
- Provincial or City Fiscal and their assistants;
- National and Regional State prosecutors; or
- Such other officers as may be authorized by law such as
- COMELEC, with respect to election offenses, concurrent with other prosecuting arms of the government;
- Ombudsman; and
- PCGG, with respect to ill-gotten wealth cases of former President Ferdinand E. Marcos, his immediate family, relatives, subordinates and close associates, and cases of graft and corruption as the President may assign to the Commission from time to time.
What shall the investigating prosecutor do if he finds no probable cause to hold the respondent for trial?
The investigating prosecutor shall recommend the dismissal of the case.
May the investigating prosecutor cause the dismissal of the complaint, or the filing of the information, on the basis of his resolution alone?
No complaint or information may be filed or dismissed by an investigating prosecutor without the prior written authority or approval of the provincial or city prosecutor or chief state prosecutor or the Ombudsman or his deputy.
What shall the court do upon the filing of an information before it?
Within 10 days from the filing of the complaint or information, the judge shall personally evaluate the resolution of the prosecutor and its supporting evidence. Thereafter, the judge has the following options: Immediately dismiss the case if the evidence on record clearly failed to establish probable cause; If he finds probable cause, issue a warrant of arrest or commitment order when the complaint or information was filed pursuant to Sec. 6, Rule 112 (Inquest); or
In case of doubt as to the existence of probable cause, order the prosecutor to present additional evidence within 5 days from notice, the issue to be resolved by the court within 30 days from the filing of the information.
In the determination of probable cause for issuance of warrant of arrest, does the judge need to personally interview the complainant and each of the witnesses?
Although the Constitution provides that probable cause shall be determined by the judge after an examination under oath or an affirmation of the complainant and his witnesses, the judge’s personal examination of the complainant and his witnesses is not mandatory and indispensable. It is enough that the judge personally evaluates the Prosecutor’s report and supporting documents showing the existence of probable cause for the indictment and, on the basis thereof, issue a warrant of arrest. What is required is that the judge personally evaluate the resolution of the prosecutor and its supporting evidence.
In what cases is preliminary investigation not required?
Preliminary investigation is not required in the following cases:
- Cases in which the imposable penalty does not exceed 4 years, 2 months and 1 day; and
- Where the accused who has been lawfully arrested without a warrant has undergone inquest proceeding.
Source:
The Rules of Court
