Agustin and Partners Law Firm

SC Declares Trillanes’ Amnesty Valid; Strikes Down Proclamation No. 572 That Revoked Said Amnesty |

In G.R. Nos. 241494, 256660 & 256078 (Sen. Antonio “Sonny” F. Trillanes IV v. Hon. Salvador C. Medialdea, et al; People of the Philippines v. Antonio F. Trillanes IV, People of the Philippines v. Antonio F. Trillanes IV), the Supreme Court En Banc ruled that the amnesty granted to former senator Antonio F. Trillanes IV (Trillanes) is valid and that its revocation through Proclamation No. 572, issued by former President Rodrigo R. Duterte, is unconstitutional.

The Court, speaking through Associate Justice Maria Filomena D. Singh, ruled that a President cannot revoke a grant of amnesty without concurrence from Congress. The Court also grounded its ruling on the primacy of the Bill of Rights and reaffirmed that neither the Government nor any of its officials, including the President, are above the law.

The Court ruled that the revocation of Trillanes’ amnesty long after it became final and without prior notice violated his constitutional right to due process.

Further, Proclamation No. 572, in seeking the revival of the criminal cases against Trillanes after they had been dismissed with finality, violated his constitutional rights against ex post facto laws and double jeopardy.

Finally, the Court found that there is convincing evidence that Trillanes did file his amnesty application. The Executive’s decision to revoke only Trillanes’ amnesty, notwithstanding the fact that the application forms of all the other amnesty grantees could similarly no longer be located, constituted a breach of his right to the equal protection of the laws.

The Decision affirms that in balancing the exercise of presidential prerogatives and the protection of the citizens’ rights, the Constitution and the laws remain as the Court’s anchor and rudder.

Read more at https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/sc-declares-trillanes-amnesty-valid-strikes-down-proclamation-no-572-that-revoked-said-amnesty/

𝗖𝗛𝗜𝗭 𝗦𝗣𝗢𝗡𝗦𝗢𝗥𝗦 '𝗔𝗕𝗢𝗚𝗔𝗗𝗢 𝗣𝗔𝗥𝗔 𝗦𝗔 𝗕𝗔𝗬𝗔𝗡' 𝗕𝗜𝗟𝗟

Sen. Francis "Chiz" Escudero pushed for the Senate's approval of the bill providing scholarships for deserving students who want to pursue legal education.

During Tuesday's plenary session, March 19, 2024, Escudero said the enactment of Senate Bill No. 2596 or the proposed "Abogado Para Sa Bayan" Act would address the need for public lawyers who will assist indigent Filipinos.

Under the bill, a legal scholarship program shall be established in state universities and colleges (SUCs) or in partner private higher education institutions (HEIs) for qualified students, who, in return, would be mandated to render service in government agencies for two years to provide legal services to poor and marginalized individuals, as well as public school teachers, public health workers, and military personnel.

Escudero also sponsored SBN 2597, which seeks to strengthen the 30-year-old Legal Education Board. (Voltaire F. Domingo/Senate Social Media Unit)

SC Dismisses Roxas Judge for Soliciting Bribes from Lawyers, Litigants |

The Supreme Court has imposed the penalty of dismissal from service on a judge who directly solicited bribes from lawyers, litigants, and even local elective officials in exchange for favorable actions.

In a per curiam Decision, the Court En Banc found Judge Edralin C. Reyes (Reyes), Presiding Judge of Branch 43, Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Roxas, Oriental Mindoro guilty of Gross Misconduct and ordered his dismissal from service. The Court also ordered the forfeiture of his retirement and other benefits, except accrued leave credits, and his perpetual disqualification from re-employment in any branch or agency of the government, including government-owned or controlled corporations.

The Court likewise ordered Reyes to pay a fine of PHP 17,500 for Simple Misconduct, for his negligence in supervising his court staff and ensuring proper and safe record- and evidence-keeping system in his court, resulting in missing fi****ms, exhibits, and pieces of evidence that were in court custody.

The Court, in determining Reyes’ administrative liability, emphasized that a government-issued computer, even if privately controlled, is subject to regulation and monitoring by the government employer.

It ruled that the SMS/iMessage exchanges and the findings of the audit team were not excludable as there was no violation of Reyes’ right to privacy.
For one, Reyes had no expectation of privacy for electronic communications stored in the subject laptop. The Court stressed that for judges and court employees, laptops and computers are provided to facilitate the courts’ function of adjudicating cases, and are not meant for private purposes.

In Reyes’ case, the SMS/iMessage correspondence were stored in the subject laptop and not in his private computer. Neither did it appear that the laptop was forcibly taken from him. “These circumstances convince this Court that Judge Reyes cannot successfully claim that the State unduly intruded into a personal matter,” said the Court.

The Court also held that since there is no violation of Reyes’ right to privacy, the information obtained through the judicial audit cannot be considered fruit of the poisonous tree.

“Further, even if the Court considered the MISO and OCA’s retrieval of the iPhone messages as violation of Judge Reyes’s right to privacy, this Court finds that the information obtained by the judicial audit team should be treated as an exception, as it is an inevitable discovery,” said the Court. “Indeed, an administrative investigation would have been conducted, and the judicial audit team would have found the incriminating information even without the SMS/iMessage exchanges from the laptop…Thus, in the natural course of events, the evidence and information contained in the judicial audit team report would have reached this Court.”

Read more at https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/sc-dismisses-roxas-city-judge-for-soliciting-bribes-from-lawyers-litigants/. Read A.M. No. RTJ-20-2579 in full at https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/rtj-20-2579-office-of-the-court-administrator-vs-judge-edralin-c-reyes-presiding-judge-branch-43-regional-trial-court-roxas-city-oriental-mindoro/.

SC: MMDA has Exclusive Authority to Enforce Traffic Rules in Metro Manila │

The Supreme Court has ruled that the Metro Manila Development Authority (MMDA) has exclusive authority to enforce traffic laws, rules and regulations, declaring that the local government units (LGUs) in Metro Manila may participate in such functions only when their traffic enforcers are deputized by the MMDA.

In a Decision penned by Associate Justice Alfredo Benjamin S. Caguioa, the Supreme Court En Banc granted the petition for review on certiorari filed by several groups of transport organizations with public utility transport operators and/or drivers of public utility vehicles for their members (petitioners). The petition challenged the rulings of the Court of Appeals (CA) upholding the traffic ordinances by Metro Manila LGUs.

The Court ruled that Republic Act No. 7924 creating the MMDA (MMDA Law) clearly bestowed upon the MMDA all the rule-making powers relative to traffic management in Metro Manila.

Under the MMDA Law, the MMDA was tasked to provide metro-wide services to Metro Manila, without prejudice to the autonomy of the affected LGUs. Such services are those with “metro-wide impact and transcend local political boundaries or entail huge expenditures such that it would not be viable for said services to be provided by the individual [LGUs] comprising [Metro] Manila.”

One of the functions assigned to the MMDA is “transport and traffic management,” which includes the “administration and implementation of all traffic enforcement operations … including the institution of a single ticketing system in [Metro] Manila.”

The Court hence ruled that the enactment of the MMDA Law shows a clear legislative intent to make the MMDA the central and policymaking body in Metro Manila on matters relating to traffic management, with the power to set the policies concerning traffic in Metro Manila, and the duty to coordinate and regulate the implementation of all programs and projects concerning traffic management, as provided under Section 5(e) of the law.

Read more at https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/sc-mmda-has-exclusive-authority-to-enforce-traffic-rules-in-metro-manila/

SC Issues Show Cause Order against Former Boac Mayor for Repeatedly Filing Defective Pleadings |

The Supreme Court is duty-bound to enforce applicable rules to avoid further congestion of clogged court dockets.

Thus stressed the Supreme Court En Banc, in a Decision penned by Associate Justice Amy C. Lazaro-Javier denying the Motion for Reconsideration filed by Pedrito M. Nepomuceno (Nepomuceno), former mayor of Boac, Marinduque, and ordering him to show cause within a non-extendible period of 10 days from notice why he should not be cited in contempt for his repeated filing of defective petitions before the Court involving the same subject matter.

On December 5, 2023, the Court dismissed Nepomuceno’s petition for the issuance of a writ of kalikasan and writ of continuing mandamus (2023 Petition). Nepomuceno claimed that the people of Boac suffered floods due to the Boac River Reclamation Project, which, according to him, was not subjected to the Environmental Impact Analysis of the Department of Environment and Natural Resources.

The 2023 Petition, however, was found non-compliant with the requirements under the Rules of Procedure for Environmental Cases. The Court found that Nepomuceno failed to submit proper verification; failed to pay the required docket and legal fees; failed to show proof of service on the adverse parties; failed to file the required number of plain copies of the petition; and failed to submit an electronic copy of the petition through electronic mail within 24 hours from the filing of the hard copy. Further, Nepomuceno’s claims in the 2023 Petition were not supported by any evidence.

The Court thus dismissed the 2023 Petition, prompting Nepomuceno to file the present motion for reconsideration.

The Court, however, found that the motion for reconsideration simply restated the contents of the 2023 Petition and ignored the ruling of the Court on the procedural flaws identified.

Read more at https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/sc-issues-show-cause-order-against-former-boac-mayor-for-repeatedly-filing-defective-pleadings/

Face the rule of law and be accountable.

This was ACT Teachers Party-List Rep. France Castro's unsolicited advice to Kingdom of Jesus Christ (KOJC) church leader Pastor Apollo Quiboloy, who earlier this month chose not to attend inquires by the House of Representatives and the Senate.

READ: https://mb.com.ph/2024/3/17/you-re-not-god-castro-tells-quiboloy-to-face-charges-attend-inquiries

At times we forget.

We forget the fact that we made it. We stand on grounds only our inner child dreamed of. We have succeeded in our own ways and became the person we are today.

At times we remember.

We remember the hardships we had to go through just to reach our current journey. At times we go blank. At times the bad memories flood the gates of our consciousness. From time to time, we are reminded of our struggles.

At times we dream bigger.

We let the day pass by daydreaming about the persons we wish to become tomorrow. We celebrate the wins that are yet to come. We enjoy the fruits that we still have not yet harvested.

At times we feel down.

We feel defeated because of the fact that not everything goes our way. It is as if fate has other plans even though you know that this is not what you want. Perhaps, it is what you need.

But whatever you are feeling right now or whatever you are thinking of, remember that you have gone this far. You have made it. You have done it. You have become the person your younger self could only wish for.

Never forget to cherish the little things.

Never let anyone say less of yourself.

SC: DOE may Exercise President’s Emergency Takeover Power over Oil Firms |

The Supreme Court has upheld Section 14(e) of Republic Act No. (RA) 8479 or the Downstream Oil Industry Deregulation Act, giving the Department of Energy (DOE), on behalf of the President, the power to take over oil firms in case of national emergency.

This was the ruling of the Supreme Court En Banc, in a Decision penned by Acting Chief Justice Marvic M.V.F. Leonen, as it granted the petition for review on certiorari filed by former Executive Secretary Leandro Mendoza, the DOE-Department of Justice Joint Task Force, and DOE Secretary Angelo T. Reyes. The petition challenged the rulings of the Court of Appeals (CA) which affirmed the Regional Trial Court’s (RTC) Decision declaring Section 14(e) of RA 8479 unconstitutional.

The case originated from the petition for prohibition, mandamus, and injunction filed before the RTC by Pilipinas Shell Petroleum Corporation (Pilipinas Shell) assailing Executive Order No. (EO) 839 which directed oil industry players to maintain oil prices of their petroleum products during the state of calamity brought about by Typhoons Ondoy and Pepeng. Pilipinas Shell also prayed, in an amended petition for declaratory relief, that Section 14(e) of RA 8479 be declared null and void for being an invalid delegation of emergency powers to the Executive.

Read more at https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/sc-doe-may-exercise-presidents-emergency-takeover-power-over-oil-firms/

Read the full text of G.R. No. 209216, Executive Secretary Mendoza v. Pilipinas Shell (February 21, 2023) at: https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/209216-executive-secretary-leandro-mendoza-department-of-energy-department-of-justice-joint-task-force-and-department-of-energy-secretry-angelo-t-reyes-vs-pilipinas-shell-petroleum-corporation/

Read the full text of the Separate Concurring Opinion of Associate Justice Alfredo Benjamin S. Caguioa at: https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/209216-separate-concurring-opinion-justice-alfredo-benjamin-s-caguioa/

SC Denies Petition Challenging POGO Rules |

For failure to observe the doctrine of hierarchy of courts and meet the requirements for judicial review, the Court has denied a petition challenging the validity of the rules issued by the Philippine Amusement and Gaming Corporation (PAGCOR) governing Philippine Offshore Gaming Operations (POGO).

In a Decision penned by Associate Justice Jhosep Y. Lopez, the Supreme Court En Banc denied the consolidated petitions for prohibition and/or certiorari filed by Jovencio H. Evangelista (Evangelista); Union for National Development and Good Governance-Philippines Chairperson Miguel Daniel C. Cruz (Cruz), and the Anti-Trapo Movement of the Philippines, Inc. (collectively, petitioners).

The petitions assail the constitutionality of the Rules and Regulations for POGO (RR-POGO) approved by the Board of Directors of PAGCOR, pursuant to PAGCOR’s power under Section 8 of Presidential Decree No. 1869 to promulgate rules and regulations relevant to the registration of persons engaged in gambling.

Read more at https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/sc-denies-petition-challenging-pogo-rules/

Read the full text of G.R. Nos. 228234, 228315, and 230080, Evangelista v. PAGCOR, Cruz v. PAGCOR, Anti-Trapo Movement v. PAGCOR (April 25, 2023) at: https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/228234-228315-230080-jovencio-h-evangelista-vs-philippine-amusement-and-gaming-corporation-pagcor-andrea-d-domingo-alfredo-c-lim-carmen-n-pedrosa-reynaldo-e-concordia-and-gabriel-s-claud/

Read the full text of the Separate Concurring Opinion of Acting Chief Justice Marvic M.V.F. Leonen at: https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/228234-228315-230080-separate-concurring-opinion-saj-marvic-m-v-f-leonen/

Read and study.

SC Denies Petition Challenging PUV Modernization Program |

The Supreme Court has denied the petition seeking to nullify the Department of Transportation’s (DOTr) “Public Utility Vehicle Modernization Program” (PUVMP).

In a Decision penned by Associate Justice Maria Filomena D. Singh, the Supreme Court En Banc denied the petition for certiorari and prohibition filed by petitioners Bayyo Association. Inc. (Bayvo) and Anselmo D. Perweg, in his capacity as President of Bayyo.

Pursuant to the national government policy to authorize and promote safe, reliable, efficient, and environment-friendly Public Utility Vehicles (PUVs), DO No. 2017-011 sets out new vehicle specifications, franchise issue procedures, and practices for all PUVs, which include public utility buses (PUBs), mini-buses, public utility jeepneys (PUJs), utility vehicle (UV) express services, Filcab services, school services, taxi services, transportation network vehicle services (TNVS), tourist transport services, and shuttle services.

The Court ruled that the petition must be denied for the petitioners’ lack of legal standing and violation of the principle of hierarchy of courts.

The Court stressed that no question involving the constitutionality or validity of a law or governmental act may be heard and decided by the Court unless there is compliance with the following legal requisites for judicial inquiry: (a) there must be an actual case or controversy calling for the exercise of judicial power; (b) the person challenging the act must have the standing to question the validity of the subject act or issuance; (c) the question of constitutionality must be raised at the earliest opportunity; and (d) the issue of constitutionality must be the very lis mota of the case.

Read more at https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/sc-denies-petition-challenging-puv-modernization-program/

It will all be worth it.

Never quit the fight.

Republic Act (RA) 11982 expands the coverage of RA 10868, or the Centenarians Act of 2016, to include all Filipinos, whether residing in the Philippines or abroad to be a recipient of a cash gift worth P10,000 upon reaching the age of 80 and every five years thereafter, or until the age of 95.

READ: https://mb.com.ph/2024/3/5/filipinos-who-turn-80-85-90-or-95-years-old-between-january-1-and-december-31-2024-may-soon-get-their-p10-k-cash-incentive

Be brave.

The Supreme Court, in a 10-page decision published on Feb. 19, said Vincenzo Nonato Taggueg is guilty of gross immoral conduct, violating “the fundamental canons of ethics expected to be obeyed by the members of the legal profession.” READ: https://bitly.ws/3dURe

ICYMI: Chief Justice Gesmundo expressed his hope that the collaborative effort among the Philippine Supreme Court, Philippine Judicial Academy, and The Hague Academy of International Law would cultivate a new generation of legal minds capable of addressing the complexities of the interconnected world and contributing to international understanding and positive change, at the Opening Ceremony of the Advanced Courses of The Hague Academy of International Law in the Philippines.

The Chief also discussed the evolving landscape of the international legal system, highlighting the need for cooperation in addressing global challenges such as climate change, maritime disputes, human trafficking, and cybercrimes and emphasizing the importance of legal practitioners being proficient in both domestic and international law, especially considering contemporary issues like boundary disputes, digital commerce, and terrorism.

The Advanced Courses Programe is organized by The Hague Academy of International Law in partnership with the Supreme Court and the Philippine Judicial Academy.

Agencies that refuse to accept the national ID as sufficient valid proof of identity without just cause are punishable with a fine of P500,000, the Philippine Statistics Authority (PSA) said.

READ: https://mb.com.ph/2024/2/20/denying-national-id-as-valid-proof-of-identity-could-result-in-p500-000-fine

Obligation between Husband and Wife.

Happy 100th Birthday Atty. Juan Ponce Enrile!

Always be noble.

Our motivational quote for today:

FYI 📣Updated Minimum Wage

SC: Surviving Spouse Entitled to SSS Pension Even if Marriage Was Contracted After Spouse’s Disability |

The Supreme Court has voided the provision in the Social Security Act that disqualifies as primary beneficiaries those who become the legitimate spouse of the pensioner only after the latter suffered permanent total disability.

The Supreme Court En Banc, through Associate Justice Henri Jean Paul B. Inting, declared void the proviso “as of the date of disability” in Section 13-A(c) of Republic Act No. (RA) 8282, or the Social Security Act of 1997 (Social Security Law), for being contrary to the due process and equal protection clauses of the Constitution, as it granted the petition for review on certiorari filed by Belinda D.R. Dolera (Belinda). The petition challenged the rulings of the Court of Appeals (CA) which had upheld the Order of the Social Security Commission (SSC) denying Belinda’s application for survivorship pension following the death of her husband, Leonardo L. Dolera (Leonardo).

Ordering the SSS to process Belinda’s claim for survivorship pension, the Court stressed that the Social Security Law was enacted pursuant to the policy of the State to promote social justice and provide protection to the workers and their beneficiaries against the hazards of contingencies, such as disability and death, resulting in loss of income or financial burden.

As a social welfare legislation, the Social Security Law should be liberally construed in favor of the intended beneficiary, for it is only by giving the law a liberal construction that the constitutional policy concerning promotion of social justice is realized, held the Court.

The assailed provision of Section 13-A(c) of the Social Security Law provides that to be considered a primary beneficiary entitled to receive survivorship pension, the applicant must be the legitimate spouse of the pensioner as of the date of the latter’s disability.

The Court ruled, however, that the said provision is void for being violative of the equal protection clause of the Constitution as it discriminates against dependent spouses who married the pensioners after the latter qualified for their pension.

The Court further ruled that Section 13-A(c) of the law violates the Constitution’s due process clause. Reiterating its 2004 ruling in GSIS, Cebu City Branch v. Montesclaros, the Court held that retirement benefits, including SSS pension, are protected property interest given that these are compulsory contributions that formed part of one’s compensation, rather than a mere gratuity.

In the case of Belinda, the Court held that her right to receive the survivorship pension was already established because as the deceased pensioner’s surviving spouse, she is entitled to the pension. Thus, its “unceremonious denial is an outright confiscation of [Belinda’s] right in violation of the due process clause,” the Court concluded.

Read more at https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/sc-surviving-spouse-entitled-to-sss-pension-even-if-marriage-was-contracted-after-spouses-disability/. Read G.R. No. 253940 (Dolera v. SSS) at https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/253940-belinda-d-r-dolera-vs-social-security-system/.

Repeat until it's true: You will become a lawyer any time soon.

Believe in yourself. What you can do is to dream big and work hard for the same. You can only be successful if you put effort into your works. Your dream won't become a reality if you will not do anything about it.

Remember that hard work is needed as well as imagination to do great things. With the right mindset and hustle, you will become the lawyer you are destined to be.

My note to self. ☺️

Why do you want to become a lawyer in the near future?

Come and join the discussion below and comment down your answers!

𝗛𝗢𝗧 𝗣𝗨𝗥𝗦𝗨𝗜𝗧𝗦

When an offense has just been committed and the arresting officer has probable cause to believe based on personal knowledge of facts or circumstances that the person to be arrested has committed it. (𝗦𝗲𝗰𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝟱𝗯, 𝗥𝘂𝗹𝗲 𝟭𝟭𝟯 𝗼𝗳 𝗥𝘂𝗹𝗲𝘀 𝗼𝗳 𝗖𝗼𝘂𝗿𝘁)

Requisites:
1. An offense has just been committed (immediacy), and
2. The person making the arrest has personal knowledge of the facts indicating that the person to be arrested committed it.