JEFFREY LIANG VS PEOPLE

GR. NO. 125865, JANUARY 28, 2000

FACTS

 Petitioner is an economist working with the Asian Development Bank

(ADB)
 He was charged before the Metropolitan Trial Court (MeTC) of
Mandaluyong City with two counts of grave oral defamation.

 Petitioner was arrested by virtue of a warrant issued by the MeTC.

FACTS

 MeTC judge received an "office of protocol" from the Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA)
stating that petitioner is covered by immunity from legal process under Section 45 of the
Agreement between the ADB and the Philippine Government regarding the Headquarters of
the ADB in the country.

 MeTC judge without notice to the prosecution dismissed the two criminal cases
FACTS

 The prosecution filed a motion for reconsideration which was opposed by the
DFA.
 The prosecution filed a petition for certiorari and mandamus with the Regional
Trial Court (RTC) of Pasig City.
 RTC set aside the MeTC rulings and ordered the latter court to enforce the
warrant of arrest it earlier issued.

 Petitioner elevated the case to the Supreme Court via a petition for review arguing
that he is covered by immunity under the Agreement and that no preliminary
investigation was held before the criminal cases were filed in court.
ISSUE

Whether or not petitioner Liang is covered by

immunity under the Agreement between the ADB and
the Philippine Government.

Whether or not preliminary investigation may be

invoked.
RULING

 Whether or not petitioner Liang is covered by immunity under the Agreement between the
ADB and the Philippine Government.

 NO, the Court ruled that petitioner Liang is not covered by immunity under the Agreement
between the ADB and the Philippine Government.

 The DFA's determination that a certain person is covered by immunity is only preliminary which
has no binding effect in courts.

 In what capacity petitioner was acting at the time of the alleged utterances requires for its resolution
evidentiary basis that has yet to be presented at the proper time.
RULING

 Section 45 of the Agreement which provides:

Officers and staff of the Bank including for the purpose of this Article
experts and consultants performing missions for the Bank shall enjoy the
following privileges and immunities:
a.) immunity from legal process with respect to acts performed by them
in their official capacity except when the Bank waives the immunity.
 RULING

 Slandering a person could not possibly be covered by the immunity agreement because our
laws do not allow the commission of a crime, such as defamation, in the name of official
duty.
 t is well-settled principle of law that a public official may be liable in his personal
private capacity for whatever damage he may have caused by his act done with
malice or in bad faith or beyond the scope of his authority or jurisdiction.
RULING

 The Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, a diplomatic agent,

assuming petitioner is such, enjoys immunity from criminal
jurisdiction of the receiving state except in the case of an action
relating to any professional or commercial activity exercised by the
diplomatic agent in the receiving state outside his official functions.
 RULING

 Whether or not preliminary investigation may be invoked.

 NO, preliminary investigation is not a matter of right in cases cognizable by the

MeTC.
 Being purely a statutory right, preliminary investigation may be invoked only
when specifically granted by law.

 Petition is DENIED