Nature and purpose | Preliminary Investigation (RULE 112) | CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

Preliminary Investigation under Rule 112: Nature and Purpose

1. Nature of Preliminary Investigation

Preliminary Investigation (PI) is a crucial procedural safeguard in the criminal justice system, designed to ensure that an accused is not subjected to the rigors of a trial without a prior determination of probable cause. It is a summary, inquisitorial proceeding conducted by competent officers to determine whether there is sufficient ground to engender a well-founded belief that a crime has been committed and that the respondent is probably guilty thereof, thereby warranting the filing of an information in court.

Key Characteristics:

1. Right of the Accused:

   • PI is a substantive right, though not a constitutional right, as clarified in jurisprudence (e.g., Go v. Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas).
   • It is part of due process as guaranteed under the Bill of Rights.

2. Judicial Nature:

   • Although inquisitorial and non-litigious in nature, it is quasi-judicial, as it involves the exercise of discretion by investigating officers.
   • It is not a part of the trial but a preparatory step.

3. Summary Character:

   • A PI is not a full-blown trial. It does not involve examining evidence to determine guilt beyond reasonable doubt, but only to establish probable cause.

4. Not a Jurisdictional Requirement:

   • A defect or absence of PI does not affect the jurisdiction of the court over the case, but it can be questioned as a violation of the right to due process (People v. Court of Appeals).

---

2. Purpose of Preliminary Investigation

The primary purposes of PI are:

1. Protection Against Hasty Prosecution:

   • It shields the accused from the inconvenience, expense, and trauma of an unnecessary trial by determining the existence of probable cause.

2. Avoidance of Unwarranted Litigation:

   • It acts as a filter to prevent frivolous and baseless cases from reaching the courts, reducing the burden on the judiciary.

3. Safeguarding Due Process Rights:

   • It ensures that no person is prosecuted without adequate evidence, upholding the constitutional guarantee of fairness.

4. Preparation for Trial:

   • It aids in clarifying the facts and legal issues, thereby streamlining the prosecution’s case.

5. Probable Cause Standard:

   • It establishes whether there is a well-founded belief that a crime has been committed and the respondent is probably guilty, sufficient for filing a case in court.

---

3. Governing Provisions and Jurisprudence

Under Rule 112 of the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure, the following key provisions govern preliminary investigation:

Section 1: Definition and Cases Requiring PI

• A preliminary investigation is required in offenses where the penalty prescribed by law is at least four (4) years, two (2) months, and one (1) day, without regard to the fine.

Section 2: Officers Authorized to Conduct PI

The following officers have the authority to conduct PI:

• Provincial or City Prosecutors and their assistants;
• National and Regional State Prosecutors;
• Other officers authorized by law (e.g., Ombudsman, COMELEC in election cases).

Section 3: Procedure of Preliminary Investigation

1. Filing of Complaint:

   • The complaint is filed with the officer authorized to conduct PI.
   • It must be supported by the affidavit of the complainant and witnesses, along with supporting evidence.

2. Issuance of Subpoena:

   • The investigating officer issues a subpoena to the respondent, attaching copies of the complaint and affidavits, giving the respondent a chance to submit a counter-affidavit.

3. Counter-Affidavit of Respondent:

   • The respondent submits a counter-affidavit and supporting documents. Failure to submit without valid cause constitutes a waiver of the right to present evidence.

4. Clarificatory Hearing:

   • If necessary, a clarificatory hearing may be conducted. However, this is not mandatory.

5. Resolution of the Investigating Officer:

   • The officer determines whether there is probable cause to hold the respondent for trial.
   • A resolution either recommending the filing of an information or dismissal of the case is issued.

6. Approval of Resolution:

   • The resolution must be approved by the proper authority (e.g., Provincial Prosecutor or City Prosecutor).

Section 4: Review of Resolution

• The resolution of the investigating prosecutor may be subject to review by the Secretary of Justice in cases involving grave abuse of discretion or manifest error.

Section 5: Inquest Proceedings

• For persons lawfully arrested without a warrant involving cases requiring PI, an inquest proceeding may take the place of a formal PI.

---

4. Remedies in Preliminary Investigation

1. Motion for Reconsideration:

   • The aggrieved party may file a motion for reconsideration with the investigating officer.

2. Petition for Review:

   • A petition for review may be filed with the Secretary of Justice for errors of judgment or abuse of discretion.

3. Certiorari under Rule 65:

   • If there is grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction, the aggrieved party may elevate the case to the Court of Appeals or Supreme Court.

---

5. Jurisprudence on Preliminary Investigation

1. Due Process in PI:

   • In Ang Tibay v. Court of Industrial Relations, the Court emphasized that due process entails the opportunity to be heard. The absence of PI violates the respondent’s right to due process (Cruz v. People).

2. Probable Cause vs. Guilt Beyond Reasonable Doubt:

   • In Salonga v. Paño, the Court clarified that the determination of probable cause is distinct from the trial court’s finding of guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

3. Absence of Preliminary Investigation:

   • In Rodis v. Sandiganbayan, the Supreme Court ruled that the absence of PI does not invalidate a criminal case but entitles the accused to request one before trial.

4. Role of Prosecutors:

   • Prosecutors have the discretion to determine probable cause. Courts cannot interfere unless there is grave abuse of discretion (Ledesma v. Court of Appeals).

---

6. Special Considerations

1. Preliminary Investigation in Special Cases:

   • In cases involving special laws (e.g., Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act, Dangerous Drugs Act), specialized procedures for PI may apply.

2. Preliminary Investigation for Juveniles:

   • The Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act ensures special safeguards for minors undergoing PI.

3. Public Interest Cases:

   • Expediency and the gravity of the case may sometimes justify deviation from the usual PI process, subject to judicial scrutiny.

---

This framework encapsulates the nature, purpose, and procedural requirements of Preliminary Investigation, ensuring adherence to the due process rights of both the complainant and the respondent while facilitating the fair administration of justice.