Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 90 views

    Defensor Santiago v. Vasquez

    Uploaded by

    SophiaFrancescaEspinosa
    The petitioner, Miriam Defensor-Santiago, sought to enjoin criminal prosecutions against her through a petition for certiorari and prohibition. She argued the cases were meant to harass her as a presidential candidate and violated principles of fair play. The Supreme Court dismissed the petition, finding the cases did not fall under exceptions to the general rule prohibiting injunctions of criminal prosecutions. There was no evidence the cases were filed with vindictive intention to oppress or violate constitutional rights. The petitioner did not deny the operative facts of the charges and would have opportunity to present defenses during trial. A dissenting opinion believed two of the three charges should have been dismissed.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Defensor Santiago v. Vasquez

    Uploaded by

    SophiaFrancescaEspinosa
    90 views2 pages
    The petitioner, Miriam Defensor-Santiago, sought to enjoin criminal prosecutions against her through a petition for certiorari and prohibition. She argued the cases were meant to harass her as a presidential candidate and violated principles of fair play. The Supreme Court dismissed the petition, finding the cases did not fall under exceptions to the general rule prohibiting injunctions of criminal prosecutions. There was no evidence the cases were filed with vindictive intention to oppress or violate constitutional rights. The petitioner did not deny the operative facts of the charges and would have opportunity to present defenses during trial. A dissenting opinion believed two of the three charges should have been dismissed.

    Original Description:

    jj

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The petitioner, Miriam Defensor-Santiago, sought to enjoin criminal prosecutions against her through a petition for certiorari and prohibition. She argued the cases were meant to harass her as a presidential candidate and violated principles of fair play. The Supreme Court dismissed the petition, finding the cases did not fall under exceptions to the general rule prohibiting injunctions of criminal prosecutions. There was no evidence the cases were filed with vindictive intention to oppress or violate constitutional rights. The petitioner did not deny the operative facts of the charges and would have opportunity to present defenses during trial. A dissenting opinion believed two of the three charges should have been dismissed.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    90 views2 pages

    Defensor Santiago v. Vasquez

    Uploaded by

    SophiaFrancescaEspinosa
    The petitioner, Miriam Defensor-Santiago, sought to enjoin criminal prosecutions against her through a petition for certiorari and prohibition. She argued the cases were meant to harass her as a presidential candidate and violated principles of fair play. The Supreme Court dismissed the petition, finding the cases did not fall under exceptions to the general rule prohibiting injunctions of criminal prosecutions. There was no evidence the cases were filed with vindictive intention to oppress or violate constitutional rights. The petitioner did not deny the operative facts of the charges and would have opportunity to present defenses during trial. A dissenting opinion believed two of the three charges should have been dismissed.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    University of the Philippines College of Law

    CJSE D2021
    Case Name DEFENSOR-SANTIAGO v. VASQUEZ
    Topic Injunctions of criminal prosecutions
    Case No. | Date GR No. 99289-90 | Jan 13, 1992
    Ponente Regalado, J.

    RELEVANT FACTS
     Petitioner, Miriam Defensor-Santiago was charged under three separate informations:
    o Before the SB: As Commissioner of the Commission on Immigration and Deportation (CID), approving
    application for legalization of aliens who arrived in the PH, in violation of EO 324 & RA 3019
    o Before the RTC: Soliciting and receiving money, gifts from Filipino and foreign businessmen by reason
    of their official positions for past/future favors, in violation of PD 46
    o Before the RTC: For libel, making defamatory statements against Maria Tatoy, then Chief of the
    Certificate Section (CID), in the presence of the media
     Santiago filed this petition for certiorari and prohibition to enjoin the SB and RTC from proceeding with the
    cases, contending that the criminal charges were:
    o Meant to harass her as a presidential candidate, in violation of Sec 10, Art 9C (1987C), as the criminal
    informations were filed just a year before the presidential elections, and
    o That it violated the essence of fair play, as the informations were filed at a time when she was
    disadvantaged by injuries from a vehicular accident

    ISSUE AND RATIO DECIDENDI


    Issue Ratio
    WON her case falls NO. Her case does not fall under the exceptions to the rule.
    under the exception
    to the general rule GENERAL RULE: Writs of injunction or prohibition will not lie to restrain a criminal
    prosecution for the reason that public interest requires that criminal acts be immediately
    investigated and prosecuted for the protection of society.

    EXCEPTIONS: 1) To prevent the use of the strong arm of the law in an oppressive and
    vindictive manner, and 2) To afford adequate protection to constitutional rights

    There is nothing to show that the informations in question were filed with the vindictive
    intention to oppress, harass and discriminate against her or to violate her constitutional
    rights. She did not make any denial of the operative facts from which the charges filed
    were based on.

    We are not persuaded that we should, in the present recourse, pass upon these
    asseverations of petitioner which we note have previously been raised during the
    preliminary investigation. She will, of course, have all the opportunity to ventilate and
    substantiate the same in the proceedings before and/or during the trial of these cases.

    RULING
    Petition dismissed.
    University of the Philippines College of Law
    CJSE D2021
    SEPARATE OPINIONS
    J. Feliciano, dissenting:
     Believes that if the instant case does not fall under any of the exceptions in Brocka v. Enrile, then another
    exception should be recognized
    o 1st case: EO 324 implementation involves exercise of discretion, and defense of Santiago that her
    decision was to assure family unity is recognized as a ground to waive exclusion of aliens, and they
    were not included in the excluded classes  no undue injury made to government since the aliens
    were eligible under the conditions of EO 324
    o 2nd case: Solicitation letter was for the CID Christmas party
     2 out of the 3 charges should have been dismissed

    NOTES

    You might also like

    pFad - Phonifier reborn

    Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

    Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


    Alternative Proxies:

    Alternative Proxy

    pFad Proxy

    pFad v3 Proxy

    pFad v4 Proxy