Perez vs.

People
[G.R. No. 164763; February 12, 2008]

Facts: An administrative case was filed against petitioner when it was found that he incurred shortage
with the money he was supposed to have on hand. Later, petitioner was charged by the Sandiganbayan
of malversation of public funds. The case was opened in 1990, while the decision came out in 2003.
Petitioner asserts that his right to due process of law and to speedy disposition of his case was violated
because the decision of the Sandiganbayan was handed down after the lapse of more than twelve years.

Issue: Whether or not there was an undue delay of the decision for the case, violating petitioner’s right
to a speedy disposition of his case.

Ruling: There is no violation of the rights to a speedy disposition of the case and to due process of law.
He was given all the chances in the world to present his case, and the Sandiganbayan rendered its
decision only after considering all the pieces of evidence presented before it.

As ruled by the Court in Gonzales vs. Sandiganbayan, equally applicable is the balancing test used to
determine whether a defendant has been denied his right to a speedy trial, or a speedy disposition of a
case for that matter, in which the conduct of both the prosecution and the defendant are weighed, and
such factors as length of the delay, reason for the delay, the defendant’s assertion or non-assertion of
his right, and prejudice to the defendant resulting from the delay, are considered.

Petitioner has clearly slept on his right. The matter could have taken a different dimension if during all
those twelve years, petitioner had shown signs of asserting his right to a speedy disposition of his case
or at least made some overt acts, like filing a motion for early resolution, to show that he was not
waiving that right.