GR 88126; (July, 1996) (Digest)
G.R. No. 88126 July 12, 1996
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES (PRESIDENTIAL COMMISSION ON GOOD GOVERNMENT [PCGG]), petitioner, vs. THE HONORABLE SANDIGANBAYAN (FIRST DIVISION), ALFREDO (BEJO) T. ROMUALDEZ and DIO ISLAND RESORT, INC., respondents.
FACTS
On April 14, 1986, Atty. Jose Tan Ramirez, head of a PCGG task force in Region VIII, issued a sequestration order against Dio Island Resort, Inc. and its assets. The PCGG later filed a complaint for recovery of ill-gotten wealth (Civil Case No. 0010) but did not implead Dio Island Resort as a party defendant. The corporation filed a motion with the Sandiganbayan seeking to stop PCGG interference and the return of its properties, arguing the sequestration was automatically lifted under the Constitution as no case was filed against it. During proceedings, the validity of the sequestration order was challenged. In response, the PCGG passed a resolution on June 16, 1988, purporting to confirm and ratify the writs of sequestration issued by its regional representatives.
ISSUE
The main issue is whether a sequestration order prepared, issued, and signed solely by the head of a PCGG task force, without the authority of at least two Commissioners, is valid and legal.
RULING
The Supreme Court affirmed the Sandiganbayan’s resolutions, ruling the sequestration order was invalid. The legal logic is grounded on strict compliance with the PCGG’s own Rules and Regulations promulgated on April 11, 1986. Section 3 explicitly provides that a writ of sequestration may be issued by the Commission only “upon the authority of at least two Commissioners.” The Court found this language clear and left no room for interpretation; the authority cannot be delegated. Since the order was issued solely by a task force head, it suffered from a fatal infirmity. The PCGG’s subsequent ratification in 1988 could not cure this basic defect, as there was no valid act to ratify in the first place. The Sandiganbayan correctly held that the PCGG failed to establish a prima facie case for a provisional remedy over the property. The Court found no grave abuse of discretion in the Sandiganbayan’s order for the PCGG to return the corporation’s assets.