Dee, Manuel Jr.

2021400127

Republic v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 104768, July 21, 2003

Doctrine:

The case delves on Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution and how the
government, even during its time of transition is responsible in the enforcement of
international laws.

Facts:

The AFP Anti-Graft Board of the PCGG was created to investigate reports
of unexplained wealth and corrupt practices of the AFP personnel whether active
or retired. In view of this, one Maj. General Josephus Q. Ramas was investigated
by the Board, finding that the Maj. General owns two properties in Quezon City
and Cebu City respectively and found that he was living beyond his means, with
various equipment and amounts of money in his name. With this being the case,
the AFP Anti-Graft Board recommends for Maj. Gen. Ramas to be prosecuted and
tried for violating the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act and RA 1379. The
Sandiganbayan however, dismissed the case, prompting the PCGG filed for a
Motion for Reconsideration which was thereafter denied due to: (1) the failure of
the PCGG to comply with the rulings of the Supreme Court in Cruz vs.
Sandiganbayan; (2) No previous injury similar to preliminary investigations in
criminal cases was conducted against Ramas and Dimaano; (3) The evidence
adduced against Ramas does not constitute prima facie case against him; and (4)
There was an illegal search and seizure of the items confiscated.

Issue:

Whether or not the protection accorded to individuals under the International

Covenant on Civil and Political Rights ("Covenant") and the UDHR
("Declaration") remained in effect during the interregnum.
Held:

Yes. To hold the Bill of Rights under the 1973 Constitution as operative
during the interregnum would render void all sequestration orders issued by the
PCGG before the adoption of the Freedom Constitution. Such acts would violate
the due process and search seizure clauses of the Bill of Rights. Moreover, even
during the interregnum the Filipino people continued to enjoy, under the Covenant
and the Declaration, almost the same rights found in the Bill of Rights of the 1973
Constitution. The revolutionary government, being the de jure government
assumed the responsibility of the State to comply with the Covenant which
requires each signatory State "to respect and to ensure to all individuals within its
territory and subject to its jurisdiction the rights 45 recognized in the present
Covenant." The revolutionary government did not repudiate the Covenant or the
Declaration and, hence, could not escape responsibility for the State’s good faith
compliance with its treaty obligations under international law.