Enrile vs.

People
G.R. No. 213847
July 12, 2016 (MR)

FACTS: The People of the Philippines, through the Office of the Ombudsman, filed a motion for
reconsideration assailing the decision of the Court in granting bail to Juan Ponce Enrile in the
premise that the decision granting bail to petitioner was premised on a factual finding that he is
not a flight risk, on a determination that he suffers from a fragile state of health and on other
unsupported grounds unique and personal to him. in granting bail to petitioner on the foregoing
grounds, the decision unduly and radically modified constitutional and procedural principles
governing bail without sufficient constitutional, legal and jurisprudential basis.

ISSUE: Is the grant of bail for the purpose of preventing the accused from committing additional
or licensing the commission of a crime or punishing a person accused of crime?

RULING: No. The Court has given due regard to the primary but limited purpose of granting
bail, which was to ensure that the petitioner would appear during his trial and would continue to
submit to the jurisdiction of the court to answer the charges levelled against him. Bail exists to
ensure society's interest in having the accused answer to a criminal prosecution without unduly
restricting his or her liberty and without ignoring the accused's right to be presumed innocent. It
does not perform the function of preventing or licensing the commission of a crime. The notion
that bail is required to punish a person accused of crime is, therefore, fundamentally misplaced.
Indeed, the practice of admission to bail is not a device for keeping persons in jail upon mere
accusation until it is found convenient to give them a trial.