I.

General Principles
Definition of a Remedial Law
It is a Branch of Public Law w/c prescribes the procedural rules to be observed in
litigations, whether Civil, Criminal, or Administrative, and in special proceedings, as well
as the remedies or reliefs available in each cases.
Definition if Criminal Procedure
It is a generic term to describe the network of laws and rules which governs the
procedural administration of justice. (Black’s law dictionary)
“provides or regulates the steps by which one who committed a crime is to be
punished” (people v lacson, 400 SCRA 267,306)
Difference Between Criminal Procedure and Criminal Law
Criminal Procedure- it lays down the process by which an offender is made to
answer for the crime he committed.
Criminal Law- declares what conduct is criminal, defines crimes and prescribes
punishment for such crimes; confines itself to the definition of offenses, and the
formulation of general principles for liability.
Adversarial and/Accusatory and Inquisitional System
+Accusatory/Adversarial
- It contemplates two contending parties before the court which hears them impartially
render judgement only after trial.
- It does not permit a judge to act as an inquisitor who pursues his own inevstiation
and arrives at his own conclusion.
- It has two-side structure consisting of the prosecution and the defense where
each sides tries to convince the court that its position is the correct version of the truth
• The accusation starts with a formal indictment of called in our jurisdiction as a
complaint or information, the allegations of which must be proven by the gornment
beyond reasonable doubt.
• Government and accused present their evidence before the court which shall
decide either on acquittal or conviction
- It has a passive role and relies largely on the evidence presented by both sides to
the action to reach a verdict. (Riano)
+Inquisitorial
- Court plays an active role and is not limited with the evidence presented before it
- Court may utilize evidence gathered outside the court and a judge or a group of
judges under this system actively participates in the gathering of facts and evidences
instead of passively receiving information or evidence from the parties.
- The Judge steers the course of the proceedings by directing and supervising the
gathering of the evidence and the questioning of the witnesses to the case.
- Thus, the counsels in the inquisitional system have less active roles that they
have in adversarial system.
Jurisdiction over the Subject Matter and Jurisdiction over the Person of the accused
+ Jurisdiction over the Subject Matter
o It is a question of law, the term imports the POWER and AUTHORITY to hear and
determine issues of facts and of laws; the power to inquire into the facts, to apply the law
and to pronounce the judgement (Riano)
o How is it conferred?
It is the LAW that confers and NOT the RULES
The Law that confers jurisdiction must be clear. It cannot be presumed.
It must appear as a statute or will not be held to exist.
The rule, therefore, is that in order to ascertain whether the court has jurisdiction
or not, the provision of law shall be inquired into.
It cannot be conferred by the accused, express waiver or otherwise
Cannot be conferred by the consent of acquiescence of any or all of the parties
It cannot be conferred by mere administrative policy of any trial court. (riano)
o How is it determined?
It is determined by the allegation in the complaint or information and not by the
findings based on evidence of the court after trial
• “in order to determine the jurisdiction of the court in criminal cases, the complaint
or information must be examined for the purpose of ascertaining whether or not THE
FACTS SET OUT THEREIN and punishment of provided for by the law for such acts FALL
WITHIN THE JURISDICTION of the court in which the criminal action is filed.” (riano)
It is determined by the penalty IMPOSABLE on the law NOT by the penalty
ACTUALLY IMPOSED after trial.
• “jurisdiction of the court is not determined by what may be meted out by the
offender after trial or even by the result of the evidence that would be presented during
the trial, but by the extent of the penalty which the law imposes, together with the other
legal obligations, on the basis of the facts as recited in the complaint or information.”
(riano)
It is determined or measured by the Law in effect at the of the
commencement/institution/filing of a criminal action rather than by the law in effect at the
time of the commission of the offense charged
Note: “principle of adherence of jurisdiction or continuing jurisdiction” once a court
acquires jurisdiction, it may not be ousted from the case by any subsequent events. The
only exception to the rule arises when: (a) there is an express provision in the statute, or
(b) the satuteis clearly intended to apply to actions pending before its enactment.
+ Jurisdiction over the Person of the Accused
o It refers to the authority of the court over the person charged.
o How is it acquired? It is acquired in two ways;
(a) upon his arrest, with or without warrant;
or (b) his voluntary appearances or submission to the jurisdiction of the court
• as a rule, filing pleadings seeking affirmative relief constitutes voluntary
appearance, and the consequent jurisdiction of one’s person to the jurisdiction of the
court. (note: there are exceptions when pleading seeking affirmative reliefs objects to
jurisdiction over the person of the accused, see page 33-34, riano)
• Voluntary submission is accomplished either by his pleadings to the merits such
as the filing for a motion to quash, or other pleadings requiring the exercise of the
court’s jurisdiction, appearing in for arraignment or entering trial.
(note: also see the distinction between custody of the law and jurisdiction over the
person of the accused)

Territorial Jurisdiction
i. Requisites
a.) Jurisdiction over the subject matter/offense charged - refers to the authority ot the
court to hear and determine a particular criminal case
b.) Jurisdiction over the person of the accused - refers to the authority of the court over
the person charged. It requires that the person charged with the offense must have been
 brought into its forum for trial either a.) forcibly by warrant; or b.) upon his voluntary
submission
c.) Jurisdiction over the territory - venue is jurisdictional and a court is bereft of
jurisdiction to try an offense committed outside of its territory.
Requisite/s: The offense should have been committed either: a.) within the
court’s territorial jurisdiction; or b.) any of its essential elements took place within said
jurisdiction such as in cases of transitory or continuing offenses. In such cases, the first
court taking cognizance of the case will exclude the others.

ii. Territorial Jurisdiction and Extraterritorial jurisdiction

● Territorial Jurisdiction - refers to VENUE or the place where the case is to be tried. The
action should be instituted and tried in the municipality or territory where offense has
been committed or where any one of the essential ingredients thereof took place
(General Rule; Exception: complex/continuing/transitory crimes, among others)
● Extraterritorial jurisdiction - refers to a court’s ABILITY to exercise power ​beyond​ its
territorial limits.

1. Section 5 (4), Article VIII, Constitution

1. Section 5 (4), Article VIII, Constitution
The Supreme Court shall have the following powers:
xxx
(4) Order a change of venue or place of trial to avoid a miscarriage of justice.

iii. Territorial Jurisdiction distinguished from Venue in Civil Procedure

 f. Define and Distinguish: Exclusive Original, Concurrent and Special Jurisdiction

ORIGINAL EXCLUSIVE CONCURRENT SPECIAL

Original - A court's Exclusive - refers to Concurrent - courts' authority over

power to hear and power of a court to Concurrent certain types of cases
decide a case before adjudicate a case to jurisdiction is the such as bankruptcy,
claims against the
any appellate review. the exclusion of all ability to exercise
government, probate,
A trial court must other courts. It is the judicial review by family
necessarily have sole forum for different courts at the matters,immigration
original jurisdiction determination of a same time, within the and customs, or
over the types of particular type of same territory, and limitations on courts'
cases it hears. case. Exclusive over the same authority to try cases
jurisdiction is decided subject matter. involving maximum
on the basis of the Whichever court amounts of money or
value.
subject matter dealt actually exercises its
with by a particular jurisdiction first will do
court. so exclusively.

g. Hierarchy of Courts
- The judicial system follows a ​ladderized​ scheme which in essence requires that
lower courts initially decide on a case before it is considered by a higher court.
Specifically, under the judicial policy recognizing hierarchy of courts, a higher
court will not entertain direct resort to it unless the redress cannot be obtained in
the appropriate courts.
- The principle is an established policy necessary to ​avoid inordinate demands
upon the Court‘s time and attention​ which are better devoted to those matters
within its exclusive jurisdiction, and to preclude the further clogging of the Court‘s
docket.
- - When the doctrine/principle may be disregarded:​ A direct recourse of the
Supreme Court‘s original jurisdiction to issue writs (referring to the writs of
certiorari, prohibition, or mandamus) should be allowed only when there are
special and important reasons therefor, clearly and specifically set out in the
petition. [Mangahas v. Paredes (2007)]. The Supreme Court may disregard the
principle of hierarchy of courts if warranted by the nature and importance of the
issues raised in the interest of speedy justice and avoid future litigations [Riano].
 h. Adherence of Jurisdiction
- Also known as the principle of continuing jurisdiction, it is the view that once a court has
acquired jurisdiction, that jurisdiction continues until the court has done all that it can do in the
exercise of that jurisdiction.
- Once a court acquires the same, it may not be ousted from the case by any
subsequent events.
EXCEPTIONS:
a,) there is an express provision in the statute; or
b.) the statute is clearly intended to apply to actions pending before its enactment

i. Due Process in Criminal Procedure

i. Sources
a) Rules 110-127 of the Revised Rules of Court, as amended by AM No. 00-5-03-SC;
b) 1987 Constitution, particularly those under the rights of the accused (Art. II);
c) Various acts passed by Congress such as BP 22, as amd. by RA 7691 and RA 8439;
d) Civil Code (Arts 32-34);
e) Presidential Decrees;
f) Executive Orders; and
g) Decisions of the SC

ii. Requirements
a.) That the court/tribunal trying the case is properly clothed with the judicial power to
hear and determine the matter before it;
b.) That jurisdiction is lawfully acquired by it over the person of the accused;
c.) That the accused is given the opportunity to be heard; and
d.) That judgment is rendered only upon lawful hearing.

II. Jurisdiction

a. Katarungang Pambarangay (Local Government Code, Book III, Title 1, Chapter 7)

Section 406.​ ​Character of Office and Service of Lupon Members.​ -
(a) The lupon members, while in the performance of their official duties or on the occasion
thereof, shall be deemed as persons in authority, as defined in the Revised Penal Code.

(b) The lupon or pangkat members shall serve without compensation, except as provided for in
Section 393 and without prejudice to incentives as provided for in this Section and in Book IV of
this Code. The Department of the Interior and Local Government shall provide for a system of
granting economic or other incentives to the lupon or pangkat members who adequately
demonstrate the ability to judiciously and expeditiously resolve cases referred to them. While in
the performance of their duties, the lupon or pangkat members, whether in public or private
employment, shall be deemed to be on official time, and shall not suffer from any diminution in
compensation or allowance from said employment by reason thereof.

Section 407. ​Legal Advice on Matters Involving Questions of Law. - The provincial, city legal
officer or prosecutor or the municipal legal officer shall render legal advice on matters involving
questions of law to the punong barangay or any lupon or pangkat member whenever necessary
in the exercise of his functions in the administration of the katarungang pambarangay.

Section 408. ​Subject Matter for Amicable Settlement; Exception Thereto. - The lupon of each
barangay shall have authority to bring together the parties actually residing in the same city or
municipality for amicable settlement of all disputes except:

(a) Where one party is the government, or any subdivision or instrumentality thereof;
(b) Where one party is a public officer or employee, and the dispute relates to the performance
of his official functions;
(c) Offenses punishable by imprisonment exceeding one (1) year or a fine exceeding Five
thousand pesos (P5,000.00);
(d) Offenses where there is no private offended party;
(e) Where the dispute involves real properties located in different cities or municipalities unless
the parties thereto agree to submit their differences to amicable settlement by an appropriate
lupon;
(f) Disputes involving parties who actually reside in barangays of different cities or
municipalities, except where such barangay units adjoin each other and the parties thereto
agree to submit their differences to amicable settlement by an appropriate lupon;
(g) Such other classes of disputes which the President may determine in the interest of Justice
or upon the recommendation of the Secretary of Justice.
The court in which non-criminal cases not falling within the authority of the lupon under this
Code are filed may, at any time before trial motu propio refer the case to the lupon concerned
for amicable settlement.

Section 409. Venue​. -

(a) Disputes between persons actually residing in the same barangay shall be brought for
amicable settlement before the lupon of said barangay.

(b) Those involving actual residents of different barangays within the same city or municipality
shall be brought in the barangay where the respondent or any of the respondents actually
resides, at the election of the complaint.

(c) All disputes involving real property or any interest therein shall be brought in the barangay
where the real property or the larger portion thereof is situated.

(d) Those arising at the workplace where the contending parties are employed or at the
institution where such parties are enrolled for study, shall be brought in the barangay where
such workplace or institution is located.

Objections to venue shall be raised in the mediation proceedings before the punong barangay;
otherwise, the same shall be deemed waived. Any legal question which may confront the
punong barangay in resolving objections to venue herein referred to may be submitted to the
Secretary of Justice, or his duly designated representative, whose ruling thereon shall be
binding.

Section 410.​ ​Procedure for Amicable Settlement.​ -

(a) Who may initiate proceeding - Upon payment of the appropriate filing fee, any individual who
has a cause of action against another individual involving any matter within the authority of the
lupon may complain, orally or in writing, to the lupon chairman of the barangay.
(b) Mediation by lupon chairman - Upon receipt of the complaint, the lupon chairman shall within
the next working day summon the respondent(s), with notice to the complainant(s) for them and
their witnesses to appear before him for a mediation of their conflicting interests. If he fails in his
mediation effort within fifteen (15) days from the first meeting of the parties before him, he shall
forthwith set a date for the constitution of the pangkat in accordance with the provisions of this
Chapter.

(c) Suspension of prescriptive period of offenses - While the dispute is under mediation,
conciliation, or arbitration, the prescriptive periods for offenses and cause of action under
existing laws shall be interrupted upon filing the complaint with the punong barangay. The
prescriptive periods shall resume upon receipt by the complainant of the complainant or the
certificate of repudiation or of the certification to file action issued by the lupon or pangkat
secretary: Provided, however, That such interruption shall not exceed sixty (60) days from the
filing of the complaint with the punong barangay.

(d) Issuance of summons; hearing; grounds for disqualification - The pangkat shall convene not
later than three (3) days from its constitution, on the day and hour set by the lupon chairman, to
hear both parties and their witnesses, simplify issues, and explore all possibilities for amicable
settlement. For this purpose, the pangkat may issue summons for the personal appearance of
parties and witnesses before it. In the event that a party moves to disqualify any member of the
pangkat by reason of relationship, bias, interest, or any other similar grounds discovered after
the constitution of the pangkat, the matter shall be resolved by the affirmative vote of the
majority of the pangkat whose decision shall be final. Should disqualification be decided upon,
the resulting vacancy shall be filled as herein provided for.

(e) Period to arrive at a settlement - The pangkat shall arrive at a settlement or resolution of the
dispute within fifteen (15) days from the day it convenes in accordance with this section. This
period shall, at the discretion of the pangkat, be extendible for another period which shall not
exceed fifteen (15) days, except in clearly meritorious cases.  
 
Source:​ http://www.lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra1991/ra_7160_1991.html

b. Municipal Trial Court/Metropolitan Trial Court

 1. Exclusive Original Jurisdiction
Section 2​. ​Section 32​ of the same law is hereby amended to read as follows: "Sec. 32.
Jurisdiction of Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal Trial Courts and Municipal Circuit Trial Courts
in Criminal Cases. – Except in cases falling within the exclusive original jurisdiction of Regional
Trial Courts and of the Sandiganbayan, the Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal Trial Courts,
and Municipal Circuit Trial Courts shall exercise:

"(1) Exclusive original jurisdiction over all violations of city or municipal ordinances committed
within their respective territorial jurisdiction; and

"(2) Exclusive original jurisdiction over all offenses punishable with imprisonment not
exceeding six (6) years irrespective of the amount of fine, and regardless of other imposable
accessory or other penalties, including the civil liability arising from such offenses or predicated
thereon, irrespective of kind, nature, value or amount thereof: Provided, however, That in
offenses involving damage to property through criminal negligence, they shall have exclusive
original jurisdiction thereof."

Source: ​http://www.lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra1994/ra_7691_1994.html

2. Special Jurisdiction
Special jurisdiction to hear and decide petitioners for a writ of habeas corpus or
application for bail in the province or city where the RTC judge is absent
Source:
https://www.batasnatin.com/law-library/remedial-law/criminal-procedure/395-jurisdiction-of-the-
municipal-trial-courts-in-criminal-cases.html 
3. Rule on Summary Procedure
i. Distinguish Summary Proceeding from Summary Procedure
Summary proceeding: A proceeding in a lower court, usually as to a minor offense or claim,
generally fast-tracked. Although certain legal rights are overlooked or minimized during a
summary proceeding, the rights to notice and to be heard are preserved.
Summary procedure: A legal procedure used for enforcing a right that takes effect faster and
more efficiently than ordinary methods. The legal papers—a court order, for example—used to
achieve an expeditious resolution of the controversy.
ii. BP 22

Section 1. Scope. This rule shall govern the summary procedure in Metropolitan Trial Courts,
the Municipal Trial Courts in Cities, Municipal Trial Courts, and the Municipal Circuit Trial Courts
in the following cases falling within their jurisdiction.

All other criminal cases where the penalty prescribed by law for the offense charged is
imprisonment not exceeding six months, or a fine not exceeding one thousand pesos
(P1,000.00), or both, irrespective of other imposable penalties, accessory or otherwise, or of the
civil liability arising therefrom: Provided, however, that in offenses involving damage to property
through criminal negligence, this Rule shall govern where the imposable fine does not exceed
ten thousand pesos (P10,000.00).

This Rule shall not apply to a civil case where the plaintiff’s cause of action is pleaded in the
same complaint with another cause of action subject to the ordinary procedure; nor to a criminal
case where the offense charged is necessarily related to another criminal case subject to
ordinary procedure.

Source:
http://www.chanrobles.com/supremecourtamno001101bouncingchecksc.html#.WWuxEoiGPIU

c. Regional Trial Court

1. Exclusive Original Jurisdiction
Section 20​. Jurisdiction in criminal cases: Regional Trial Courts shall exercise exclusive original
jurisdiction in all criminal cases not within the exclusive jurisdiction of any court, tribunal or
body,except those now falling under the exclusive and concurrent jurisdiction of the
Sandiganbayan which shall hereafter be exclusively taken cognizance of by the latter.

2. Concurrent and Original

Section 21​. Original jurisdiction in other cases: Regional Trial Courts shall exercise original
jurisdiction: (1) In the issuance of writs of certiorari, prohibition, mandamus, quo warranto,
habeascorpus and injunction which may be enforced in any part of their respective regions;and
(2) In actions affecting ambassadors and other public ministers and consuls.

3. Family Court
Section 5​. Jurisdiction offamily Courts. - The Family Courts shall have exclusive original
jurisdiction to hear and decide the following cases:
a) Criminal cases where one or more of the accused is below eighteen (18) years of age but not
less than nine (9) years of age but not less than nine (9) years of age or where one or more of
the victims is a minor at the time of the commission of the offense: Provided, That if the minor is
found guilty, the court shall promulgate sentence and ascertain any civil liability which the
accused may have incurred. The sentence, however, shall be suspended without need of
application pursuant to Presidential Decree No. 603, otherwise known as the "Child and Youth
Welfare Code";

b) Petitions for guardianship, custody of children, habeas corpus in relation to the latter;

c) Petitions for adoption of children and the revocation thereof;

d) Complaints for annulment of marriage, declaration of nullity of marriage and those relating to
marital status and property relations of husband and wife or those living together under different
status and agreements, and petitions for dissolution of conjugal partnership of gains;

e) Petitions for support and/or acknowledgment;

f) Summary judicial proceedings brought under the provisions of Executive Order No. 209,
otherwise known as the "Family Code of the Philippines";

g) Petitions for declaration of status of children as abandoned, dependent o neglected children,

petitions for voluntary or involuntary commitment of children; the suspension, termination, or
restoration of parental authority and other cases cognizable under Presidential Decree No. 603,
Executive Order No. 56, (Series of 1986), and other related laws;

h) Petitions for the constitution of the family home;

i) Cases against minors cognizable under the Dangerous Drugs Act, as amended;

j) Violations of Republic Act No. 7610, otherwise known as the "Special Protection of Children
Against Child Abuse, Exploitation and Discrimination Act," as amended by Republic Act No.
7658; and
k) Cases of domestic violence against:

1) Women - which are acts of gender based violence that results, or are likely to result in
physical, sexual or psychological harm or suffering to women; and other forms of physical abuse
such as battering or threats and coercion which violate a woman's personhood, integrity and
freedom movement; and

2) Children - which include the commission of all forms of abuse, neglect, cruelty, exploitation,
violence, and discrimination and all other conditions prejudicial to their development.

If an act constitutes a criminal offense, the accused or batterer shall be subject to criminal
proceedings and the corresponding penalties.
If any question involving any of the above matters should arise as an incident in any case
pending in the regular courts, said incident shall be determined in that court.

Section 6​. Use of Income. - All Family Courts shall be allowed the use of ten per cent (10%) of
their income derived from filing and other court fees under Rule 141 of the Rules of Court for
research and other operating expenses including capital outlay: Provided, That this benefit shall
likewise be enjoyed by all courts of justice.
The Supreme Court shall promulgate the necessary guidelines to effectively implement the
provisions of this Sec.

iv. Dangerous Drugs Court

Section 90​. Jurisdiction. – The Supreme Court shall designate special courts from among the
existing Regional Trial Courts in each judicial region to exclusively try and hear cases involving
violations of this Act. The number of courts designated in each judicial region shall be based on
the population and the number of cases pending in their respective jurisdiction.
The DOJ shall designate special prosecutors to exclusively handle cases involving violations of
this Act. The preliminary investigation of cases filed under this Act shall be terminated within a
period of thirty (30) days from the date of their filing.

When the preliminary investigation is conducted by a public prosecutor and a probable cause is
established, the corresponding information shall be filed in court within twenty-four (24) hours
from the termination of the investigation. If the preliminary investigation is conducted by a judge
and a probable cause is found to exist, the corresponding information shall be filed by the
proper prosecutor within forty-eight (48) hours from the date of receipt of the records of the
case.

Trial of the case under this Section shall be finished by the court not later than sixty (60) days
from the date of the filing of the information. Decision on said cases shall be rendered within a
period of fifteen (15) days from the date of submission of the case for resolution.

v. Appellate Jurisdiction
Section 22​. Regional Trial Courts shall exercise appellate jurisdiction over all cases decided by
Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal Trial Courts, and Municipal Circuit Trial Courts in their
respective territorial jurisdictions. Such cases shall be decided on the basis of the entire record
of the proceedings had in the court of origin and such memoranda and/or briefs as maybe
submitted by the parties or required by the Regional Trial Courts. The decision of the Regional
Trial Courts in such cases shall be appealable by petition for review to the Court of Appeals
which may give it due course only when the petition shows prima facie that the lower court has
committed an error of fact or law that will warrant a reversal or modification of the decision or
judgment sought to be reviewed.

vi. Special Jurisdiction

Section 23​. The Supreme Court may designate certain branches of the Regional Trial Courts to
handle exclusively criminal cases, juvenile and domestic relations cases, agrarian cases, urban
land reform cases which do not fall under the jurisdiction of quasi-judicial bodies and agencies,
and/or such other special cases as the Supreme Court may determine in the interest of a
speedy and efficient administration of justice.
 

d. Sandiganbayan
i. Exclusive Original Jurisdiction
The jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan under Presidential Decree No. 1606, as amended
by Executive Order No. 184, has been changed by ​REPUBLIC ACT NO. 8249 — "AN
ACT TO STRENGTHEN THE FUNCTIONAL AND STRUCTURAL ORGANIZATION OF
THE SANDIGANBAYAN, AMENDING FOR THAT PURPOSE PRESIDENTIAL
DECREE NO. 1606."
“Jurisdiction. — ​The Sandiganbayan shall exercise exclusive original jurisdiction in all
cases involving:
a. Violations of Republic Act No. 3019, as amended, otherwise known as the
Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act, Republic Act No. 1379, and Chapter II,
Section 2, Title VII, Book II of the Revised Penal Code, where one or more of the
accused are officials occupying the following positions in the government,
whether in a permanent, acting or interim capacity, at the time of the commission
of the offense:
(1) Official of the executive branch occupying the positions of regional
director and higher, otherwise classified as Grade '27' and higher, of the
Compensation and Position Classification Act of 1989 (Republic Act No.
6758), specifically including:
(a) Provincial governors, vice-governors, members of the
sangguniang panlalawigan, ​and provincial treasurers, assessors,
engineers, and other provincial department heads;
(b) City mayors, vice-mayors, members of the ​sangguniang
panlungsod, ​city treasurers, assessors, engineers, and other city
department heads;
(c) Officials of the diplomatic service occupying the position of
consul and higher;
(d) Philippine army and air force colonels, naval captains, and
all officers of higher rank;
 (e) Officers of the Philippine National Police while occupying
the position of provincial director and those holding the rank of
senior superintendent or higher;
(f) City and provincial prosecutors and their assistants, and
official and prosecutors in the Office of the Ombudsman and
special prosecutor; and
(g) Presidents, directors or trustees, or managers of
government-owned or -controlled corporations, state universities
or educational institutions or foundations;
(2) Members of Congress and officials thereof classified as Grade '2'
and up under the Compensation and Position Classification Act of 1989;
(3) Members of the judiciary without prejudice to the provisions of the
Constitution;
(4) Chairmen and members of Constitutional Commissions, without
prejudice to the provisions of the Constitution; and
(5) All other national and local officials classified as Grade '27' and
higher under the Compensation and Position Classification Act of 1989.
b. Other offenses or felonies whether simple or complexed with other crimes
committed by the public officials and employees mentioned in subsection (a) of
this section in relation to their office.
c. Civil and criminal case filed pursuant to and in connection with Executive
Order Nos. 1, 2, 14 and 14-A, issued in 1986.
In cases where none of the accused are occupying positions corresponding to Salary
Grade '27' or higher, as prescribed in the said Republic Act No. 6758, or military and
PNP officers mentioned above, exclusive original jurisdiction thereof shall be vested in
the proper regional trial court, metropolitan trial court, municipal trial court, and municipal
circuit trial court, as the case may be, pursuant to their respective jurisdictions as
provided in ​Batas Pambansa Big. 129, ​as amended.
The ​Sandiganbayan ​shall exercise exclusive appellate jurisdiction over final judgments,
resolutions or orders of regional trial courts whether in the exercise of their own original
jurisdiction or of their appellate jurisdiction as herein provided.
The ​Sandiganbayan ​shall have exclusive original jurisdiction over petitions for the
issuance of the ​writs of mandamus, ​prohibition, ​certiorari, habeas corpus, ​injunctions,
and other ancillary writs and processes in aid of its appellate jurisdiction and over
petitions of similar nature, including ​quo warranto, ​arising or that may arise in cases filed
or which be filed under Executive Order Nos. 1, 2, 14 and 14- A, issued in 1986:
Provided, ​That the jurisdiction over these petitions shall not be exclusive of the Supreme
Court.
In case private individuals are charged as co-principals, accomplices or accessories with
the public officers or employees including those employed in government-owned or
-controlled corporations, they shall be tried jointly with said public officers and employees
in the proper courts which shall exercise exclusive jurisdiction over them.”
● Under the present law, both the nature of the offense and the positions occupied by the
accused are the conditions sine qua non before the Sandiganbayan can validly take
cognizance of the case.
● The Sandiganbayan retains jurisdiction only in cases where the accused are those
enumerated in subsection (a) Section 4 above and, generally, national and local officials
classified as Grade "27" and higher under the Compensation and Position Classification
Act of 1989.
● To determine the jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan in cases involving violations of Rep.
Act No. 3019, the reckoning period is the time of the commission if the offense.
● The specific inclusion of the officials from (a) to (g) constitutes an exception to the
general qualification relating to officials of the executive branch as "occupying the
positions of regional director and higher, otherwise classified as Grade 27 and higher, of
the Compensation and Classification Act of 1989. In other words, violation of Rep. Act
No. 3019 committed by officials specifically enumerated in (a) to (g) regardless of their
salary grade. All other officials below grade 27 shall be under the jurisdiction of the
proper trial courts.
● The Sandiganbayan has original jurisdiction over criminal cases involving crimes and
felonies under the first classification:
● a. Violations of Republic Act No. 3019, as amended, otherwise known as the
Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act, Republic Act No. 1379, and Chapter II, Section 2,
Title VII, Book II of the Revised Penal Code, where one or more of the accused are
officials occupying the following positions in the government, whether in a permanent,
acting or interim capacity, at the time of the commission of the offense.
● The exclusive jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan over those public officers holding
positions classified as Grade 27 refers to Violations of R.A. No. 3019, Act No. 1379 and
Chapter II, Section 2, Title VII, Book II of the Revised Penal Code referring to
Malfeasance and Misfeasance in office
(1) Art. 204, knowingly rendering an unjust judgment;
(2) Art. 205, Judgment rendered thru negligence;
(3) Art. 206, Unjust Interlocutory Order;
(4) Art. 207, Malicious Delay in the administration of justice;
(5) Art. 208, Prosecution of offenses; negligence and tolerance;
(6) Art. 209, Betrayal of trust by an attorney or solicitor — Revelation of secrets;
(7) Art. 210, Direct Bribery;
(8) Art. 211, Indirect Bribery;
(9) Art. 211-A, Qualified Bribery;
(10) Art. 212, Corruption of public officials.
which does not include the crime of Rebellion or coup d'etat.
● In other words, the case would fall under the Sandiganbayan if the crime is committed
"in relation to public office except the crimes of rebellion and coup d'etat.
● There are two ways of determining whether or not the information charges that the
offense was committed in relation to public office. The statement that the "committed in
relation to public office" is not sufficient.
 a. Where the public office of the accused is by statute a constituent element of the
crime charged, there is no need for the Prosecutor to state in the Information specific
factual allegations of the intimacy between the office and the crime charged, or that the
accused committed the crime in the performance of his duties.
b. When specific factual allegations of crime committed in relation to public office
required. These are offenses or felonies which are intimately connected with the public
office and are perpetrated by the public officer or employee while in the performance of
his official functions, through improper or irregular conduct.
● Where the office is not a constituent element of the offense charged there must be
specific allegation of facts that it was intimately related to the discharge of their official
duties.
● Thus, for jurisdiction over crimes committed by public officers in relation to public office
to fall within jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan — the intimate relation between the
offense charged and the discharge of official duties must be alleged in the information.
● PCGG - Under Section 2 of Executive Order No. 14, the Sandiganbayan has exclusive
and original jurisdiction over all cases regarding the "funds, moneys, assets and
properties illegally acquired by former President Ferdinand E. Marcos x x x civil or
criminal, including incidents arising from such cases.
The decision of the Sandiganbayan is subject to review on certiorari exclusively by the
Supreme Court."
● In the exercise of its functions, the PCGG is a co-equal body with the Regional Trial
Courts and co-equal bodies have no power to control the other.
● The Regional Trial Courts and the Court of Appeals have no jurisdiction over the PCGG
in the exercise of its powers under the applicable Executive Orders and Section 26,
Article XVIII of the 1987 Constitution and, therefore, may not interfere with and restrain
or set aside the orders and actions of the PCGG acting for and in behalf of said
Commission.
● The exclusive jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan over civil and criminal cases filed by
PCGG, as well as incidents arising from, incidental or related to such cases is subject to
review on certiorari exclusively by the Supreme Court.
● The PCGG must be a party to the suit in order that the Sandiganbayan's exclusive
jurisdiction may be correctly invoked. The PCGG must be a party to the suit in order that
the Sandiganbayan's exclusive jurisdiction may be correctly invoked.
● In subsequent cases jointly decided on August 10, 1988, the Court pointed out that:
"(the) exclusive jurisdiction conferred on the Sandiganbayan would evidently extend not
only to the principal causes of action, i.e., the recovery of alleged ill-gotten wealth, but
also to 'all incidents arising from, incidental to, or related to, such cases,' such as the
dispute over the sale of shares, the propriety of the issuance of ancillary writs or
provisional remedies relative thereto, the sequestration thereof, which may not be made
the subject of separate actions or proceedings in another forum."
● Likewise, in the case of Republic v. Sandiganbayan, the Court ruled that while the
PCGG is ordinarily allowed a free hand in the exercise of its administrative or executive
function, the Sandiganbayan is empowered to determine in an appropriate case, if in the
 exercise of such functions, the PCGG has gravely abused its discretion or has
overstepped the boundaries of the power conferred upon it by law.
● The Court stated: Any act or order transgressing the parameter of the objectives for
which the PCGG was created, if tainted with abuse of discretion, is subject to a remedial
action by the Sandiganbayan, the court vested with exclusive and original jurisdiction
over cases involving the PCGG including cases filed by those who challenge PCGG's
acts or orders.
● The Sandiganbayan has jurisdiction to annul a judgment of partition by the RTC
involving a sequestration related property.
● The Court, however, ruled that Sandiganbayan is without jurisdiction where the matter
does not really seek to question the propriety of the sequestration by the PCGG or any
matter incidental to or arising out of such sequestration but deals mainly with what is a
business judgment.
● The original and exclusive jurisdiction given to the Sandiganbayan over PCGG cases
pertains to (a) cases filed by the PCGG, pursuant to the exercise of its power under
Executive Order Nos. 1, 2 and 14, as amended by the Office of the President, and Article
XVIII, Section 26 of the Constitution, i.e., where the principal cause of action is the
recovery of ill-gotten wealth, as well as all incidents arising from, incidental to or related
to such cases and (b) cases filed by those who wish to question or challenge the
commission's acts or orders in such cases.
● The regional trial courts shall have jurisdiction to try all cases on money laundering.
Republic Act No. 9160 as amended (The Anti-Money Laundering Act of 2001)
● Those committed by public officers and private persons who are in conspiracy with such
public officers shall be under the jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan.
● It is to be noted that under the Anti-Money Laundering Act, so far as Civil Forfeiture is
concerned it is the AMLC that is authorized to institute civil forfeiture proceedings and all
other remedial proceedings through the Office of the Solicitor General with the Regional
Trial Court. There is no similar authority to file such cases with the Sandiganbayan. It is
only in criminal cases that the AMLC is authorized to cause the filing of complaints with
the Department of Justice or the Ombudsman for the prosecution of money laundering
offenses.
● But unlike Civil Forfeiture under R.A. No. 1379 which specifically authorized its filing by
the Ombudsman or thru the Office of Special Prosecutor in the Sandiganbayan, no
similar authority have been granted the Ombudsman with respect to civil forfeiture under
the Anti-money Laundering Law.
● The rule that "accessory follows the principal" appears to underlie the provision of
Presidential Decree No. 1606, for when private individuals are charged as co-principals,
accomplices or accessories with the public officers or employees, the implication is that
the latter was charged as principal. Hence, if a public officer or employee is charged as a
mere accomplice or accessory with a private individual, as principal, the corollary
implication is that the former shall be tried jointly with the latter in the ordinary courts.
ii. Appellate Jurisdiction
 "Section 5. Section 7 of the same decree is hereby further amended to read as follows:
xxx
Decisions and final orders of other courts in cases cognizable by said courts under this
decree as well as those rendered by them in the exercise of their appellate jurisdiction
shall be appealable to, or be reviewable by, the Sandiganbayan in the manner provided
by Rule 122 of the Rules of the Court.
xxx"
1. Ancillary writs and processes in aid of appellate jurisdiction
"The Sandiganbayan shall have exclusive original jurisdiction over petitions for
the issuance of the ​writs of mandamus, prohibition, certiorari, habeas corpus,
injunctions, and other ancillary writs and processes​ in aid of its appellate
jurisdiction ​and over petitions of similar nature, including quo warranto​, arising or
that may arise in cases filed or which may be filed under Executive Order Nos.
1,2,14 and 14-A, issued in 1986: Provided, That the jurisdiction over these
petitions shall not be exclusive of the Supreme Court.”

e. Court of Tax Appeals

RA 9282 - ​AN ACT EXPANDING THE JURISDICTION OF THE COURT OF TAX APPEALS (CTA),
ELEVATING ITS RANK TO THE LEVEL OF A COLLEGIATE COURT WITH SPECIAL
JURISDICTION AND ENLARGING ITS MEMBERSHIP, AMENDING FOR THE PURPOSE
CERTAIN SECTIONS OR REPUBLIC ACT NO. 1125, AS AMENDED, OTHERWISE KNOWN AS
THE LAW CREATING THE COURT OF TAX APPEALS, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES

i. Exclusive Original Jurisdiction

Exclusive original jurisdiction ​over :

- all c​riminal offenses arising from violations of the National Internal Revenue Code or Tariff
and Customs Code and other laws administered by the Bureau of Internal Revenue or the
Bureau of Customs​:
o Provided, however, That offenses or felonies mentioned in this paragraph
where the principal amount o taxes and fees, exclusive of charges and
penalties, claimed is less than One million pesos (P1,000,000.00) or where
there is no specified amount claimed shall be tried by the regular Courts and
the jurisdiction of the CTA shall be appellat​e.
- Any provision of law or the Rules of Court to the contrary notwithstanding, the criminal action
and the corresponding civil action for the recovery of civil liability for taxes and penalties shall at
all times be simultaneously instituted with, and jointly determined in the same proceeding by the
CTA, the filing of the criminal action being deemed to necessarily carry with it the filing of the
civil action, and no right to reserve the filling of such civil action separately from the criminal
action will be recognized

Jurisdiction over tax collection cases as herein provided:

● Exclusive original jurisdiction ​in tax collection cases involving final and executory
assessments for taxes, fees, charges and penalties: Provided, however, That collection
cases where the principal amount of taxes and fees, exclusive of charges and penalties,
claimed is less than One million pesos (P1,000,000.00) shall be tried by the proper
Municipal Trial Court, Metropolitan Trial Court and Regional Trial Court.

ii. Exclusive Appellate Jurisdiction

Exclusive appellate jurisdiction​ in criminal offenses:

● Over appeals from the judgments, resolutions or orders of the Regional Trial
Courts in tax cases originally decided by them, in their respected territorial
jurisdiction.
● Over petitions for review of the judgments, resolutions or orders of the Regional
Trial Courts in the exercise of their appellate jurisdiction over tax cases originally
decided by the Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal Trial Courts and Municipal
Circuit Trial Courts in their respective jurisdiction.

Jurisdiction over tax collection cases as herein provided:

Exclusive appellate jurisdiction i​n tax collection cases:

● Over appeals from the judgments, resolutions or orders of the Regional Trial
Courts in tax collection cases originally decided by them, in their respective
territorial jurisdiction.
● Over petitions for review of the judgments, resolutions or orders of the Regional
Trial Courts in the Exercise of their appellate jurisdiction over tax collection cases
originally decided by the Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal Trial Courts and
Municipal Circuit Trial Courts, in their respective jurisdiction."

f. Court of Appeals
 RA 7902 - AN ACT EXPANDING THE JURISDICTION OF THE COURT OF APPEALS,
AMENDING FOR THE PURPOSE SECTION NINE OF BATAS PAMBANSA BLG. 129, AS
AMENDED, KNOWN AS THE JUDICIARY REORGANIZATION ACT OF 1980

i. Exclusive Original Jurisdiction

● EXCLUSIVE original jurisdiction​ over actions for annulment of judgments of RTCs.

ii. Concurrent and Original Jurisdiction

● ORIGINAL jurisdiction to issue writs of ​mandamus​, prohibition, ​certiorari​, ​habeas corpus​,

and ​quo warranto​, and auxiliary writs or processes, whether or not in aid of its appellate
jurisdiction (concurrent with SC and RTCs)
● Concurrent jurisdiction with the Supreme Court over petitions for certiorari, prohibition
or mandamus filed against the RTCs, the Civil Service Commission, the Court of Tax
Appeals, the Central Board of Assessment Appeals, commissions and other
quasi-judicial bodies or agencies.

** T​he court of Appeals shall have the power to try cases and conduct hearings, receive
evidence and perform any and all acts necessary to resolve factual issues raised in cases falling
within its original and appellate jurisdiction, including the power to grant and conduct new trials
or Appeals must be continuous and must be completed within three (3) months, unless
extended by the Chief ​Justice. (RA 7902)

iii. Appellate Jurisdiction

● ​ xclusive appellate jurisdiction over all final judgments, decisions, resolutions,

E
orders or awards of the Regional Trial Courts and quasi-judicial agencies,
instrumentalities, boards or commissions, including the Securities and Exchange
Commission, the Social Security Commission, the Employees' Compensation
Commission and the Civil Service Commission,
○ except those falling within the appelate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court in
accordance with the Constitution, the Labor Code of the Philippines under
Presidential Decree No. 442, as amended, the provisions of this Act, and of
subparagraph (1) of the third paragraph and subparagraph (4) of the fourth
paragraph of Section 17 of the Judiciary Act of 1948.

g. Supreme Court

RA 5440
AN ACT AMENDING SECTIONS NINE AND SEVENTEEN OF THE JUDICIARY ACT OF 1948

i. Exclusive Original Jurisdiction

"Sec. 17. Jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court shall have ​original
jurisdiction​:

● over cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers, and consuls; and original and
exclusive jurisdiction in petitions for the issuance of writs of certiorari, prohibition and
mandamus against the Court of Appeals.

ii. Concurrent Jurisdiction

● In the following cases, the Supreme Court shall exercise ​original and concurrent
jurisdiction with Courts of First Instance(RTC)​:
"1. In petition for the issuance of writs of certiorari, prohibition, mandamus, quo warranto,
and habeas corpus; and
"2. In actions brought to prevent and restrain violations of law concerning monopolies
and combinations in restraint of trade.

iii. Appellate Jurisdiction

● "The Supreme Court shall have ​exclusive jurisdiction to ​review, revise, reverse, modify
or affirm on appeal, as the law or rules of court may provide, final judgments and
decrees of inferior courts as herein provided, in
○ All cr​iminal cases involving offenses for which the penalty imposed is death or life
imprisonment​; and those involving other offenses which, although not so
punished, arose out of the same occurrence or which may have been committed
by the accused on the same occasion, as that giving rise to the more serious
offense, regardless of whether the accused are charged as principals,
accomplices or accessories, or whether they have been tried jointly or separately;
○ All cases in​volving petitions for naturalization or denaturalization;​ and
○ All ​decisions of the Auditor General, if the appellant is a private person or entity​.

● "The Supreme Court shall further have exclusive jurisdiction t​o review, revise, reverse,
modify or affirm on certiorari as the law or rules of court may provide, final judgments
and decrees of inferior courts as herein provided, in:
○ All cases in which the constitutionality or validity of any treaty, law, ordinance, or
executive order or regulation is in question;
○ All cases involving the legality of any tax, impost, assessment or toil, or any
penalty imposed in relation thereto;
○ All cases in which the jurisdiction of any inferior court is in issue;
○ All other cases in which only errors or questions of law are involved: Provided,
however, That if, in addition to constitutional, tax or jurisdictional questions, the
cases mentioned in the three next preceding paragraphs also involve questions
of fact or mixed questions of fact and law, the aggrieved party shall appeal to the
Court of Appeals; and the final judgment or decision of the latter may be
reviewed, revised, reversed, modified or affirmed by the Supreme Court on writ of
certiorari; and
○ Final awards, judgments, decisions, or orders of the Commission on Elections,
Court of Tax Appeals, Court of Industrial Relations, the Public Service
Commission and the Workmen's Compensation Commission."