G.R. Nos. L-50508-11 October 11, 1985
VICENTE S. ORAP, petitioner, vs. HON. SANDIGANBAYAN, et al., respondents.

FACTS

Petitioner Vicente S. Orap, the Presiding Judge of the Municipal Court of Mangatarem, Pangasinan, along with his Clerk of Court, was charged before the Sandiganbayan with multiple violations of Section 3(e) of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act ( R.A. No. 3019 ). The Tanodbayan, through its Special Prosecutor, conducted a preliminary investigation, found a prima facie case, and filed the corresponding informations. The charges alleged that the accused unlawfully received money from individuals in connection with a criminal case pending in petitioner’s court.
Before arraignment, petitioner filed a motion to quash the informations. He contended that the Tanodbayan had no authority to investigate, file, and prosecute the case against him. He argued that under Presidential Decree No. 1607 (the Tanodbayan Decree), courts, judges, and judicial staff are expressly excluded from the definition of “administrative agency” subject to the Tanodbayan’s investigatory power. The Sandiganbayan denied his motion, prompting this petition for certiorari and prohibition.

ISSUE

Whether the Tanodbayan has the authority to conduct a preliminary investigation, file an information, and prosecute a criminal case against a municipal judge for violations of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act.

RULING

Yes, the Tanodbayan possesses such authority. The Supreme Court affirmed the Sandiganbayan’s ruling, clarifying the dual functions of the Tanodbayan under P.D. No. 1607. As an Ombudsman, its investigatory power over administrative complaints is indeed limited to “administrative agencies” as defined in Section 9(a), which excludes courts, judges, and judicial staff. This limitation is proper, as administrative supervision over judicial personnel is constitutionally vested in the Supreme Court.
However, the Tanodbayan also functions as a prosecutor. In this capacity, its authority is distinct and broader. Section 17 of the same decree explicitly grants the Tanodbayan, through the Chief Special Prosecutor and Special Prosecutors, the exclusive authority to “conduct preliminary investigation of all cases cognizable by the Sandiganbayan, to file informations therefor, and to direct and control the prosecution of said cases therein.” The offenses charged against petitioner are violations of R.A. No. 3019 , which are expressly within the jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan under P.D. No. 1606.
The Court rejected petitioner’s interpretation, as it would lead to an absurdity: no judge or court employee could ever be prosecuted for Sandiganbayan-cognizable crimes due to a lack of an authorized officer to conduct the requisite preliminary investigation. This would defeat the very purpose of the Tanodbayan to promote integrity in government service. The informations in question complied with legal requirements, including the necessary certifications, and were properly filed with the Sandiganbayan, which validly acquired jurisdiction. The petition was dismissed.