G.R. No. L-23566; October 31, 1967
ELENA L. GARCIA, petitioner-appellant, vs. ANTONIO J. VILLEGAS, City Mayor of Manila, ET AL., respondents-appellees.

FACTS

Petitioner Elena L. Garcia, allegedly a victim of illegal arrest by members of the Manila Police Department (MPD), lodged a complaint against them with the office of the City Mayor of Manila. The City Mayor indorsed the complaint to the Inspection Division of the MPD to determine whether there was a cause of action. The petitioner contested the jurisdiction of the Inspection Division to investigate her complaint, but her objection was overruled based on an opinion from a legal officer of the MPD. Consequently, the petitioner filed a petition for mandamus and prohibition with preliminary injunction in the Court of First Instance of Manila, seeking to compel the City Mayor to file administrative charges against the policemen directly with the Municipal Board of Manila without a prior investigation by the Inspection Division. The lower court dismissed the petition, prompting this appeal.

ISSUE

Whether the City Mayor of Manila has a ministerial duty under Section 1 of Republic Act 557 to immediately file charges with the Municipal Board upon receipt of a private citizen’s complaint against a member of the police force, without first conducting or ordering a preliminary inquiry to determine the complaint’s prima facie merit.

RULING

No. The Supreme Court affirmed the lower court’s decision, holding that the City Mayor is not under a ministerial duty to file charges immediately upon receipt of a complaint. The Court ruled that Section 1 of Republic Act 557, which provides that charges for disciplinary action shall be preferred by the city mayor and investigated by the city council, does not preclude the city mayor from conducting a prior inquiry to ascertain whether the complaint is prima facie meritorious or sham before filing formal charges. The mayor may delegate this preliminary investigation to a subordinate office, such as the Inspection Division of the MPD. To hold otherwise would make the mayor’s office an instrument for persecution if complaints later prove baseless. The Court distinguished the case relied upon by the petitioner, Covacha v. Amante, as it involved a situation where charges had already been formally filed and a committee improperly substituted for the city council’s investigative role, which was not the circumstance here. Furthermore, the issue had become academic due to the enactment of the Police Act of 1966 (Republic Act No. 4864), which created the Police Commission. Section 14 of this new law provides that members of a local police agency shall not be suspended or removed except upon a written complaint filed under oath with the Board of Investigators, eliminating the requirement for charges to be preferred by the city mayor. Sections 24 and 25 of the new law repeal or modify inconsistent provisions of Republic Act 557 and absorb pending administrative cases. The decision of the lower court was affirmed, with no costs.