THE SANDIGANBAYAN, THE OFFICE OF OMBUDSMAN, AND THE SPECIAL PROSECUTOR 1
Introduction
 Aside from the three Constitutional Commissions,
the Philippine justice system also implements other
courts, considered as special courts - among which
are the Sandiganbayan, the Ombudsman and the
Special Prosecutor.
 These three are derived from different provisions of
the 1987 Constitution. Corollary to their
establishment is to determine the accountability of
public officers for their offenses against the core
principle behind Article XI, stating that “Public office
is a public trust.”
 Presumably, the framers of the Constitution
wanted to highlight the necessity for a return to the
old concepts and values of the public office. This is
perhaps the reason why the provision goes to say,
“public officers and employees must at all times be
accountable to the people, serve them with utmost
responsibility, integrity, loyalty and efficiency, act with
patriotism and justice, and lead modest lives.”
The Sandiganbayan
 The Sandiganbayan is a special appellate
collegial court in the Philippines that has
jurisdiction over criminal and civil cases
involving graft and corrupt practices and other
offenses committed by public officers and
employees, including those in government-
owned or government-controlled corporations
as may be determined by law
 Established by Presidential Decree No. 1486 of
the 1973 Constitution. It was subsequently
modified by Presidential Decree No. 1606 and
by Republic Acts numbered 7975 and 8249 in
the 1987 Constitution
Group 4 Constitutional Law 1 – Atty. Judiel M. ParejaBinghay, Forinas, Jamero, Revelo, & Solas
 Equal in rank to the Court of Appeals, and the
Office of the Ombudsman owns exclusive
authority to bring cases to the Sandiganbayan.
 charged with the direct responsibility of
maintaining morality, integrity and efficiency in
the public service.
 Under PD 1606, the Sandiganbayan consists of
a presiding justice and 14 associate justices. It
sits in 5 divisions of 3 justices each, who shall
be necessary to constitute a quorum and
whose unanimous vote shall be required for the
pronouncement of a judgement.
 The Sandiganbayan is retained by the New
Constitution under the following provision in
Article XI, Section 4:
“The present anti-graft court known as the
Sandiganbayan shall continue to function and
exercise its jurisdiction as now or hereafter may be
provided by law.”
o Qualifications (under PD 1606)
 natural-born citizen of the Philippine
 at least 40 years of age
   at least ten years has been a judge of a court
of record or;
 been engaged in the practice of law in the
Philippines or has held office requiring
admission to the bar as a pre-requisite for a
like period
Laws on Graft and Corruption in the Philippines
Laws on graft and corruption have been in effect as
early as the 1950s, before the creation of the
Sandiganbayan. Graft and corruption laws govern both
public officers and natural persons.
Republic Act Nos. 3019 and 1379
 Laws which stipulates that the Philippine
Government shall repress certain acts of both
public officers and natural person that may
constitute to graft or corruption. Acts that are
subject under these laws include graft, divulging
otherwise private information, negligence in
warranted requests, undue injury by a public officer
to any party - private or government - in the form
of unwarranted benefits or disadvantages.
 In the case of unexplained accrual of wealth, R.A.
No. 1379 states that a petition may be filed against
any public officer who has acquired property
unlawfully, be it through graft or any form of
corruption. This petition should come from the
Solicitor General of the Republic of the Philippines
as per complaint by a taxpayer.
Republic Act No. 7080
 Any public officer who amasses a certain amount of
ill-gotten wealth (at least fifty-million pesos)
through means of criminal acts - be it by himself or
in connivance with other, shall be subject to
reclusion perpetua or a life sentencing to death.
Any accomplice shall be sentenced with the same.
Jurisdiction
To determine whether the Sandiganbayan has
jurisdiction, lawyers look into two (2) criteria,
namely: the nature of the offense and the salary
grade of the public official.
The Sandiganbayan shall have original exclusive jurisdiction
over:
Provided that the accused belongs to a salary grade
of 27 or higher, the Sandiganbayan has jurisdiction
over:

 Violation of Anti-graft and Corrupt Practices
Law (RA 3019)
 Forfeitures of Illegally Acquired Wealth (RA
1379)
 Crimes committed by public officers namely
 Direct, Indirect and Qualified Bribery
The Ombudsman
 Corruption of public officials
 Other offenses or felonies whether simple or
complexed with other crimes committed in
relation to their office by public officials.
 Petitions for issuance of Writ of mandamus,
prohibition, certiorari, habeas corpus,
injunction and other ancillary writs and
processes in aid of its appellate jurisdiction;
Provided, jurisdiction is not exclusive of the
Supreme Court.
 Petitions for Quo Warranto arising or that may
arise in cases filed or that may be filed under
EO 1, 2, 14 & 14- A
 Violation of Code of Conduct and Ethical
Standards (RA 6713)
 Violation of the Plunder Law (RA 7080)
 Violation of The Heinous Crime Law (RA 7659)
 Violation of The Anti-Money Laundering Law
when committed by a public officer (RA 9160)
 Presidential Decree 46 referred to as the gift-
giving decree
The Sandiganbayan is vested with appellate
jurisdiction over final judgments, resolutions or
orders of the Regional Trial Court whether in the
exercise of their original or appellate jurisdiction
over crimes and civil cases falling within the original
Group 4 Constitutional Law 1 – Atty. Judiel M. ParejaBinghay, Forinas, Jamero, Revelo, & Solas
THE SANDIGANBAYAN, THE OFFICE OF OMBUDSMAN, AND THE SPECIAL PROSECUTOR 2
exclusive jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan but
which were committed by public officers below
Salary Grade 27.
Case Discussion: Enrile vs Sandiganbayan, G.R. No.
213847, August 18, 2015.
Composition, Qualifications and Term under RA 6770 or
 Under the 1987 Philippine Constitution and the
Ombudsman Act of 1989
Ombudsman Act of 1989, the Office of the
Ombudsman, also referred to as the Tanodbayan ng
Pilipinas, independently monitors all three branches
of the government for political corruption
 principally tasked to investigate on its own or upon
complaint by any person, in any form or manner,
any act or omission of any public officer or
employee, including those in government-owned or
controlled corporations, which appears to be illegal,
unjust, improper or inefficient
 After an investigation, the Ombudsman files
charges at the Sandiganbayan, a special anti-graft
court.
 The Office of the Ombudsman is a constitutional
office:
o It may not therefore be abolished nor may its
composition be changed by ordinary legislation.
Significantly, the appointment of the
Ombudsman and his deputies requires no
confirmation by the Commission on
Appointments, as an exception to the general
rule
o These officials have the same rank and salary as
the chairmen and associate commissioners
respectively of the Constitutional Commissions
and enjoy the same security of compensation
o the Constitution also gives the office fiscal
autonomy and the power to appoint its own
officials and employees in accordance with civil
and service law
 The Ombudsman is among the officials who may be
removed only through impeachment.
Composition
 The Office of the Ombudsman shall
include:
o Office of the Overall Deputy
o Office of the Deputy for Luzon, Visayas,
and Mindanao
o Deputy for the Armed Forces
o Office of the Special Prosecutor
The President may appoint other Deputies as
the necessity for it may arise, as
recommended by the Ombudsman.
Qualifications
 shall be natural-born citizens of the
Philippines
 at least forty (40) years old
 of recognized probity and independence,
members of the Philippine Bar
 must not have been candidates for any
elective national or local office in the
immediately preceding election whether
regular or special

 The Ombudsman must have, for ten (10)
years or more, been a judge or engaged in
the practice of law in the Philippines.
Term
 The Ombudsman and his Deputies, including the
Special Prosecutor, shall serve for a term of seven
(7) years without reappointment.
Powers and Functions
The Office of the Ombudsman shall have the
following powers, functions and duties:
(1) Investigate and prosecute on its own or on
complaint by any person, any act or omission of any
public officer or employee, office or agency, when
such act or omission appears to be illegal, unjust,
improper or inefficient.
(2) Direct, upon complaint or at its own instance,
any officer or employee of the Government, or of
any subdivision, agency or instrumentality thereof,
as well as any government-owned or controlled
corporations with original charter, to perform and
expedite any act or duty required by law, or to stop,
prevent, and correct any abuse or impropriety in
the performance of duties;
(3) Direct the officer concerned to take appropriate
action against a public officer or employee at fault
or who neglect to perform an act or discharge a
duty required by law, and recommend his removal,
suspension, demotion, fine, censure, or prosecution,
and ensure compliance therewith; or enforce its
disciplinary authority to remove, suspend, demote,
fine, censure, or prosecute an officer or employee
who is at fault or who neglects to perform an act or
discharge a duty required by law
Group 4 Constitutional Law 1 – Atty. Judiel M. ParejaBinghay, Forinas, Jamero, Revelo, & Solas
THE SANDIGANBAYAN, THE OFFICE OF OMBUDSMAN, AND THE SPECIAL PROSECUTOR 3
(4) Direct the officer concerned, in any appropriate
case, and subject to such limitations as it may
provide in its rules of procedure, to furnish it with
copies of documents relating to contracts or
transactions entered into by his office involving the
disbursement or use of public funds or properties,
and report any irregularity to the Commission on
Audit for appropriate action;
(5) Request any government agency for assistance
and information necessary in the discharge of its
responsibilities, and to examine, if necessary,
pertinent records and documents;
(6) Publicize matters covered by its investigation of
the matters mentioned in paragraphs (1), (2), (3) and
(4) hereof, when circumstances so warrant and with
due prudence: Provided, That the Ombudsman
under its rules and regulations may determine what
cases may not be made public: Provided, further,
That any publicity issued by the Ombudsman shall
be balanced, fair and true;
(7) Determine the causes of inefficiency, red tape,
mismanagement, fraud, and corruption in the
Government, and make recommendations for their
elimination and the observance of high standards of
ethics and efficiency;
(8) Administer oaths, issue subpoena and subpoena
duces tecum, and take testimony in any
investigation or inquiry, including the power to
examine and have access to bank accounts and
records;
(9) Punish for contempt in accordance with the
Rules of Court and under thesame procedure and
with the same penalties provided therein;
(10) Delegate to the Deputies, or its investigators
or representatives such authority or duty as shall
ensure the effective exercise or performance of the
powers, functions, and duties herein or hereinafter
provided;
(11) Investigate and initiate the proper action for
the recovery of ill-gotten and/or unexplained
wealth amassed after February 25, 1986 and the
prosecution of the parties involved therein.
The Ombudsman shall give priority to
complaints filed against high ranking government
officials and/or those occupying supervisory
positions, complaints involving grave offenses as
well as complaints involving large sums of money
and/or properties.
Salary
The Ombudsman and his Deputies shall have the
same ranks, salaries and privileges as the Chairman
and members, respectively, of a Constitutional
Commission. Their salaries shall not be decreased
during their term of office.
The members of the prosecution, investigation and
legal staff of the Office of the Ombudsman shall
receive salaries which shall not be less than those
given to comparable positions in any office in the
Government.
What is the difference between Ombudsman and
Sandiganbayan?

 The Ombudsman law expressly identifies the
Sandiganbayan as the venue where it can exercise
prosecutorial powers of cases involving public
officers within its original jurisdiction. Clearly then,
the Ombudsman does not have the power to
prosecute criminal cases within the original
jurisdiction of the regular courts.
Case Discussion: Office of the Ombudsman vs. CA, G.R. NO.
167844 : Nov. 22, 2006
The Special Prosecutor
 Previously known as Tanodbayan
 Continues to be governed by PD 1607, except
where his powers thereunder have been
transferred by the Constitution to the Ombudsman.
 Limited to and charged with the prosecution of
graft and corruption cases – not including election
offenses, as this is
 solely for the COMELEC.
 May prosecute before the Sandiganbayan justices
accused of graft and corruption even if they come
under the administrative supervision of the
Supreme Court. But administrative charges filed
against them with the SC will defer the filing of
criminal charges based on the same offense by the
Special Prosecutor before the Sandiganbayan.
 Is not an impeachable officer, hence, he can only be
removed from his office upon mandate of the
President. In the absence of the Ombudsman, the
Special Prosecutor can be the acting Ombudsman.
Special Prosecutor Composition
Group 4 Constitutional Law 1 – Atty. Judiel M. ParejaBinghay, Forinas, Jamero, Revelo, & Solas
THE SANDIGANBAYAN, THE OFFICE OF OMBUDSMAN, AND THE SPECIAL PROSECUTOR 4
 R.A 6770 or also known as the Ombudsman Act of
1989, stated the following composition:
o Special Prosecutor and;
o Prosecutor staff
The Office of the Special Prosecutor shall be an
organic component of the Office of the
Ombudsman and shall be under the supervision and
control of the Ombudsman.
 The position structure and staffing pattern of the
Office of the Ombudsman and the Office of the
Prosecutor, shall be approved and prescribed by the
Ombudsman. The Ombudsman shall appoint all
officers and employees of the Ombudsman,
including those of the Office of The Special
Prosecutor, in accordance with Civil Service Law,
rules and regulations.
Office of the Special Prosecutor Power
Under the supervision and upon the authority of
the Ombudsman, the Office of the Special
Prosecutor Shall have the following power:
 To conduct preliminary
investigation and prosecute
criminal cases within the
jurisdiction of Sandiganbayan;
 To enter into plea bargaining
agreements; and
 To perform such other duties
assigned to it by the Ombudsman
 Plea bargaining is a process in criminal cases whereby
the accused and the prosecution work out a mutually
satisfactory disposition of the case subject to court
approval. The essence of a plea bargaining agreement
is the allowance of an accused to plead guilty to a
lesser offense than that charged against him
Case Discussion: G.R. Nos. 163972-77, JOSELITO
RANIERO J. DAAN V. HON. SANDIGANBAYAN: March 28,
2008
Enrile vs Sandiganbayan
Facts:
On June 5, 2014 Senator Juan Ponce Enrile was charged by
the Office of the Ombudsman with plunder in the
Sandiganbayan on the basis of his purported involvement in
the diversion and misuse of appropriations under the
Priority Development Assistance Fund (PDAF). The case is a
petition for certiorari to annul the decision of the
Sandiganbayan denying his Motion to fix bail and Motion
for Reconsideration on the following grounds: (a) The
prosecution failed to show conclusively that Enrile, if ever
convicted, is punishable by reclusion perpetua; (b) The
prosecution failed to show that evidence of Enrile’s guilt is
strong; (c) Enrile is not a flight risk.
Issue:
Whether or not Enrile can bail –YES
Ruling:
1. The purpose of the bail is to guarantee the
appearance of the accused at the trial.
2. It is the Philippine’s responsibility in the
international community under the Universal Declaration of
Human Rights “….of protecting and promoting the right of
every person to liberty and due process.... These remedies
include the right to be admitted to bail”.
 THE SANDIGANBAYAN, THE OFFICE OF OMBUDSMAN, AND THE SPECIAL PROSECUTOR 5

3. Enrile is not a flight risk because of his social and The 1987 Constitution, the deliberations thereon, and the
political standing and his having immediately surrendered to opinions of constitutional law experts all indicate that the
the authorities upon being charged in court. Deputy Ombudsman is not an impeachable officer. The
4. The advance age and currently fragile state of court has likewise taken into account the commentaries of
Enrile’s health is a compelling justification for his admission the leading legal luminaries on the Constitution as to their
to bail. (Chronic hypertension, diffuse atherosclerotic opinion on whether or not the Deputy Ombudsman is
cardiovascular disease, Atrial and Ventricular Arrhythmia,
impeachable. All of them agree in unison that the
etc.)
impeachable officers enumerated in Section 2, Article XI of
the 1986 Constitution is exclusive. In their belief, only the
Office of the Ombudsman vs Court of Appeals Visayas Ombudsman, not his deputies, is impeachable. The
impeachable officers are the President of the Philippines,
Facts: the Vice-President, the members of the Supreme Court, the
The case had its inception on 29 December 1999, when members of the Constitutional Commissions, and the
twenty-two officials and employees of the Office of the Ombudsman. (see Art. XI, Sec. 2) The list is exclusive and
Deputy Ombudsman (OMB) for the Visayas, led by its two may not be increased or reduced by legislative enactment.
directors, filed a formal complaint with the Office of the
Ombudsman requesting an investigation on the basis of
allegations that then Deputy Ombudsman for the Visayas,
private respondent Arturo Mojica, committed the following:
1. Sexual harassment against Rayvi Padua-Varona; 2.
Mulcting money from confidential employees James Alueta
and Eden Kiamco; and 3. Oppression against all employees
in not releasing the P7,200.00 benefits of OMB-Visayas
employees. The complaints in Criminal Case No. OMB-0-
00-0615 and Administrative Case No. OMB-ADM-0-00-
0316, were dismissed.

Thereupon, on 15 January 2001, the Office of the

Ombudsman filed before this Court “a petition for review
on certiorari under Rule 45 of the 1997 Rules of Civil
Procedure, and alternatively, an original special civil action
for certiorari under Sec. 1, Rule 65 of the same rules,

ISSUE: Is the Deputy Ombudsman an impeachable officer

under Section 2, Article XI of the 1987 Constitution?

RULING:

Group 4 Constitutional Law 1 – Atty. Judiel M. ParejaBinghay, Forinas, Jamero, Revelo, & Solas