GR L 29268; (August, 1982) (Digest)
G.R. No. L-29268 August 30, 1982
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, petitioner, vs. HON. CESARIO C. GOLEZ, JUDGE, COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE OF CAPIZ, BRANCH I, and POLICARPIO AMORES, respondents.
FACTS
The City Fiscal of Roxas City filed an information against private respondent Policarpio Amores for an election offense under Section 87 of Republic Act No. 180 (the Revised Election Code). The information, docketed as Criminal Case No. 4452, alleged that Amores, a member of the board of election inspectors, willfully absented himself from the polling place for over twenty minutes on election day without permission or a substitute, taking the ballot box keys and preventing the canvass of votes. The information was filed with the Court of First Instance (CFI) for preliminary investigation pursuant to Section 187 of the Election Code.
Respondent Judge Cesario C. Golez issued an order dismissing the case. He relied on the Supreme Court ruling in Albano v. Arranz, which stated that a CFI could not legally conduct a preliminary investigation under the Rules of Court of an offense charged in an information filed by the fiscal. The City Fiscal’s motion for reconsideration, arguing that Albano was inapplicable and that the law did not divest fiscals of the power to prosecute election offenses, was denied. The People thus filed this petition for certiorari to annul the dismissal order and direct the CFI to conduct the preliminary investigation.
ISSUE
Whether the Court of First Instance has jurisdiction to conduct the preliminary investigation of an election offense under the Revised Election Code when the information is filed by the City Fiscal.
RULING
Yes, but the applicable law has been superseded. The Supreme Court clarified the jurisdictional conflict. Section 187 of Republic Act No. 180 (the Revised Election Code) explicitly granted Courts of First Instance “exclusive original jurisdiction to make preliminary investigations, issue warrants of arrest and try and decide any criminal action or proceeding for violation of this Code.” Therefore, under the law in force at the time of the alleged 1967 offense, the CFI indeed had the authority and duty to conduct the preliminary investigation, and respondent Judge erred in dismissing the information on the basis of Albano v. Arranz.
However, the Court noted that the legal landscape had changed. Section 182 of Presidential Decree No. 1296 (the 1978 Election Code) subsequently transferred the power to conduct preliminary investigations of election offenses from the Courts of First Instance to the Commission on Elections (COMELEC). Consequently, while the CFI originally had jurisdiction under the old law, the new decree mandated that such investigations be handled by COMELEC. The Supreme Court, therefore, did not order the CFI to proceed but directed respondent Judge to refer the records of the case to the Commission on Elections for appropriate action.