o A MATTER OF RIGHT?

o A MATTER OF DISCRETION?

o ADMISSION TO BAIL?
o GUILTY BEYOND
REASONABLE DOUBT?

RIGHT TO BAIL
o ACCQUITED?
 BAIL

 Is the security required by a court and given for the provisional or

temporary release of a person who is in the custody of the law, for
the commission of an offense, furnished by him or a bondsman, to
guarantee his appearance before any court as required under the
condition specified
DOCTRINES:

 Primary objective of bail

The strength of the Prosecutions case, albeit a good measure of the accused’s propensity for flight or for
causing harm to the public, is subsidiary to the primary objective of bail, which is to ensure that the
accused appears at trial.
 Bail is a right and a matter of Discretion
 Sec. 13, article III, 1987 Constitution
Sec.7 rules of Criminal Procedure

 GENERAL RULE

- Any person, before conviction of any criminal offense, shall be bailable

 Exception

- Unless he is charged with an offense punishable with reclusion perpetua or life

imprisonment and the evidence of his guilt is strong.
JUAN PONCE ENRILE
VS.
SANDIGANBAYAN,
AND PEOPLE OF THE
PHILIPPINES
G.R NO. 213847, AUGUST 18,2015

BERSAMIN, J.:
 FACTS
 The Office of the Ombudsman charged Petitioner Enrile with Plunder before the
Sandiganbayan on basis of their involvement in the misuse and diversion of appropriation
under the Priority Development Assistance Fund (PDAF)
 Petitioner filed his motion to fix bail and He argued that  (a) the Prosecution had not yet
established that the evidence of his guilt was strong.
 He also argue that although charged with plunder his penalty would only be reclusion
temporal considering that there are two mitigating circumstances, his voluntary surrender
and that he is already at the age of 90,thus allowing for bail and;
 He is not a flight risk due to his Age and Physical Condition.
 Sandiganbayan denied his motion for reconsideration in its assailed resolution
on the grounds;
 His is Charged with capital offense and;
 It is Premature for the court to fix the amount of his bail because the
prosecution have not yet presented its evidences.
 Petitioner filed a motion for certiorari before the Supreme Court
 ISSUE

WHETHER OR NOT Petitioner Enrile is bailable because he is not a flight risk?

 RULING

 Yes, Petitioner Juan Ponce Enrile’s Age and Physical condition and his being not a Flight
risk justifies his admission to bail.
 Is entitled to bail as a matter of right based on humanitarian grounds
 The Supreme Court took note of 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. Under the obligation to
make available to every person under detention such remedies which safeguard their
fundamental right to liberty. There remedies include the right to be admitted to bail’
 Quoting from GOVERNMENT Of
HONGKONG SAR vs. OLALIA

‘’x x x Uphold the fundamental human rights as well as value the worth and dignity of every
person. This commitment is enshrined in Section II, Article II of our Constitution which provides:
"The State values the dignity of every human person and guarantees full respect for human rights.“
 The Philippines, therefore, has the responsibility of protecting and promoting the right of every
person to liberty and due process, ensuring that those detained or arrested can participate in the
proceedings before a court, to enable it to decide without delay on the legality of the detention
and order their release if justified. In other words, the Philippine authorities are under obligation
to make available to every person under detention such remedies which safeguard their
fundamental right to liberty. These remedies include the right to be admitted to bail.
 This national commitment to uphold the fundamental human rights as well as value the worth
and dignity of every person has authorized the grant of bail not only to those charged in
criminal proceedings but also upon convincing and clear showing
 That accused will not be a flight risk or a danger to the community
 That There exist special, humanitarian and compelling circumstances
 Hence , Petitioner Enrile is not a flight risk because of his social and political standing and
his immediately surrendered to the authorities upon being charged in court.
  SANDIGANBAYAN COMMITTED GRAVE ABUSE OF DISCRETION IN DENYING
THE MOTION TO FIX BAIL. IT IGNORED THE PRIMARY PURPOSE OF BAIL TO
ENSURE THE APPEARANCE OF THE ACCUSED AT THE TRIAL AND
DISREGARDED THE CLEAR SHOWING OF THE POOR HEALTH AND ADVANCED
AGE OF JUAN PONCE ENRILE.

SUPREME COURT FURTHER

EXPLAIN.
Bail for the provisional liberty of the accused, regardless of the crime charged, should be

allowed independently of the merits of the charge, provided his continued incarceration is
clearly shown to be injurious to his health or to endanger his life. Indeed, denying him bail
despite imperiling his health and life would not serve the true objective of preventive
incarceration during the trial
  THEREFORE THE COURT GRANTS THE PETITION
FOR CERTIORARI, ANNULLING AND SETTING ASIDE
THE RESOLUTION ISSUED BY THE
SANDIGANBAYAN.

PETITION FOR
CERTIORARI