GOVERNMENT OF THE USA vs GUILLERMO PURGANAN

FACT:

Before the Court are private respondent's Motion for Reconsideration dated 10 October 2002,
petitioner's Comment thereon dated 05 November 2002, private respondent's Motion for
Leave of Court to File and to Admit Additional Arguments in Support of Motion for
Reconsideration dated November 6, 2002, and Reply (to petitioner's Comment) dated
November 26, 2002.

The private respondent Mark Jimenez insists that the Extradition Court did not commit a grave
abuse of discretion by granting his petition to bail. The Supreme Court held that there has been
no clear and convincing evidence as to the absence of flight risk and the non-endangerment of
the community, or as to the existence of special, humanitarian and compelling circumstances
justifying grant of bail by the Extradition Court.

ISSUE: Whether or not private respondent is entitled to bail.

HELD:
The petition is granted. the court had the occasion to resolve the issue as to whether or not
extraditees are entitled tothe right to bail and provisional liberty while the extradition
proceedings are pending. Private respondent Mark Jimenez (extradite) invoked the
constitutional provision under the 1987 Constitution, that persons are entitled to bail except
those charged with offenses punishable by reclusion perpetua or death when evidence of guilt
is strong. The Supreme Court that the provision only applies to criminal cases and not to
extradition cases. In the words of the ponencia ‘as suggested by the use of the word
“conviction,” the constitutional provision on bail quoted above, as well as Section 4 of Rule 114
of the Rules of Court, applies only when a person has been arrested and detained for violation
of Philippine criminal laws.  It does not apply to extradition proceedings, because extradition
courts do not render judgments of conviction or acquittal.’ Moreover, the Court held that
although the offenses of the extradite are bailable in the United States, the Court is not obliged
to grant him one in the present case. To stress, extradition proceedings are separate and
distinct from the trial for the offenses for which he is charged.  He should apply for bail before
the courts trying the criminal cases against him, not before the extradition court.