Who may conduct Preliminary Investigations

Alawiya v Datumanong | g.r 164170 | April 16, 2009 |

Facts:

Alawiya and other two petitioners executed sworn statements before the Western Police District
charging five policemen with kidnapping for ransom. The sworn statements alleged that petitioners
were cruising on a board a vehicle when a Toyota Sedan bumped behind them. That when they went
to assess the damage, several armed men alighted from the vehicle and forced them to ride in. They
were brought to an office and Php 10Million and two vehicles were demanded from them in
exchange for their freedom. After further negotiations, the amount was reduced and Php
700Thousand and two vehicles were delivered to the accused. Petitioners were released in the
morning. The PNP ordered recommended that the accused be charged with violation of Article 267 of
the RPC. State Prosecutor Velasco conducted the preliminary investigation and issued a resolution
that the accused be charged with the crime of kidnapping for ransom. He then subsequently filed the
Information with the RTC of Manila. Meanwhile, the accused filed a petition for review on the
Resolution of Prosecutor Velasco with the Office of the Secretary of Justice and moved for the quashal
of the Information on the ground that the Officer has no authority to do so. RTC denied the motion to
quash. Secretary of Justice reversed the Resolution of Prosecutor Velasco and ordered Velasco to
withdraw or dismissed the information. It ruled on the ground that prior approval with the Office of
the Ombudsman should be secured before the filing of the Information. The Secretary also found out
that the incident complained of was buy-bust operation and not kidnapping for ransom. Petitioners
then filed a Motion for Reconsideration with then Secretary Datumanong against the Resolution but
were denied. The Court of Appeals affirmed the decision of the Secretary.

Issue:

Is the prior approval of the Ombudsman required for the investigation and prosecution of the criminal
case against the accused policemen.

Ruling:

No. Prior approval by the Ombudsman is not required for the investigation and prosecution of the
criminal case against the accused policemen. The power of the Ombudsman to investigate offenses
involving public officers or employees is not exclusive but is concurrent with other similarly
authorized agencies of the government such as the provincial, city and state prosecutors.