Enrile vs Sandiganbayan

GR 213847, August 18, 2015

Bersamin, J.:

Facts:

On June 5, 2014, Enrile was charged with plunder along with several others by the
Sandiganbayan; on June 10, 2014 Enrile filed his Omnibus Motion and prayed the he be allowed to post
bail; On July 3, 2014 the Sandiganbayan issued its resolution denying Enrile’s motion specifically on the
matter of his bail, on the ground of its prematurity

On July7, 2014, Erile filed his Motion for Detention at the PNP General Hospital, which were
heard by the Sandiganbayan on July 8, 2014; and on July 14, 2014 The Sandiganbayan issued its
resolution denying Enrile’s Motion to fix Bail.

On August 8, 2014, The Sandiganbayan issued its second resolution denying Enrile’s Motion for
Reconsideration.

Issues:

1. (CONSITUTIONAL) Whether or not should Enrile be granted bail?

2. (ADMINISTRATIVE) Whether or not the Sandiganbayan abused their discretion?

Ruling:

1. Yes. The right to bail is expressly afforded by Section 13 of Article 3 of the Constitution. In all criminal
prosecutions, the accused shall be presumed innocent until the contrary is proved; the presumption of
innocence is the guarantee of due process, and is safe guarded by the constitutional right to bail.

2. Yes. The Sandiganbayan abused its discretion when it denied Enrile’s motion to Fix Bail; Grave Abuse
on the whimsical exercise of judgment on the issuance of the writ of certiorari.

Disposition:

In the courts decision dated August 18, 2015, the petition for certiorari is granted; issues a writ
of certiorari annuls and sets aside the resolutions issued by the Sandiganbayan on July 14, and August 8,
2014; orders the provisional release of Juan Ponce Enrile upon posting of a cash bond in the
Sandiganbayan.