Next Steps After a Preliminary Investigation in Criminal Cases in the Philippines

Next Steps After a Preliminary Investigation in Criminal Cases in the Philippines
(A comprehensive guide under Philippine law)

I. Overview of Preliminary Investigation

A preliminary investigation is a crucial stage in the Philippine criminal justice system. Governed primarily by Rule 112 of the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure, it is an inquiry or proceeding to determine whether there is probable cause to hold a respondent for trial. Probable cause exists when the evidence sufficiently shows that a crime has been committed and that the person charged is probably guilty thereof.

  1. Purpose

    • To protect the accused from the trouble, expense, and anxiety of a useless trial.
    • To safeguard the state from the burden of prosecuting groundless or frivolous complaints.

  2. Who Conducts It

    • Generally, a public prosecutor (state prosecutor) or in some instances, an authorized officer under the Department of Justice (DOJ).

  3. Basic Procedure

    1. Filing of the complaint and supporting affidavits.
    2. Issuance of a subpoena to the respondent, directing submission of a counter-affidavit.
    3. Optional clarificatory hearing if needed.
    4. Resolution by the investigating prosecutor on whether probable cause exists.

Once a prosecutor concludes a preliminary investigation—either finding probable cause or dismissing the complaint—several “next steps” come into play. Below is a detailed overview.

II. Issuance of a Resolution and Information

After evaluating the evidence, the investigating prosecutor issues a resolution. There are two main outcomes:

  1. Finding of Probable Cause

    • The prosecutor drafts an Information, which is the formal charge sheet containing the specific offense, the name of the accused, and the acts or omissions constituting the offense.
    • This Information, along with the records of the case, is forwarded to the appropriate City or Provincial Prosecutor (or the Ombudsman for offenses falling under its jurisdiction) for review and approval.
    • If approved, the Information is then filed in court.

  2. Dismissal of the Complaint

    • The complaint is dismissed if the investigating prosecutor determines that no probable cause exists.
    • The dismissal is set out in the resolution. The respondent is effectively cleared of criminal liability at this stage (though this may be reconsidered or appealed, as discussed below).

III. Remedies Against the Prosecutor’s Resolution

Regardless of the finding (probable cause or dismissal), the parties have remedies to challenge or seek reconsideration of the prosecutor’s resolution:

  1. Motion for Reconsideration (MR)

    • Either the complainant (if the case is dismissed) or the respondent (if probable cause is found) may file a motion for reconsideration before the same investigating prosecutor’s office.
    • Generally, an MR must be filed within a reasonable period, often within 15 days from receipt of the resolution.

  2. Petition for Review (Appeal) Before the Secretary of Justice

    • If the MR is denied or if the party opts to bypass MR, the aggrieved party may file a petition for review before the Secretary of Justice.
    • This remedy is available to both complainant and respondent.
    • The Secretary of Justice has the power to reverse, modify, or affirm the prosecutor’s resolution. Where probable cause is found, the Secretary of Justice can direct that the Information be filed or withdrawn.

  3. Petition for Certiorari (Rule 65)

    • In rare cases, if a party can show grave abuse of discretion on the part of the prosecutor, the party may seek relief from the appropriate court (usually the Regional Trial Court or Court of Appeals) by filing a petition for certiorari under Rule 65 of the Rules of Court.
    • This is typically a last resort when there is no other plain, speedy, or adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law.

IV. Once the Information Is Filed in Court

A. Determination of Probable Cause by the Court

Even if the prosecutor has found probable cause and filed an Information in court, the trial court judge is still required to make an independent judicial determination of probable cause for the purpose of:

  1. Issuing a Warrant of Arrest

    • If the court finds probable cause, it may issue a warrant of arrest against the accused. Alternatively, the court may issue a hold departure order (in cases where the offense is not bailable or is of a serious nature), or a commitment order if the accused is already detained.
    • If the court does not find probable cause, it may dismiss the case outright.

  2. Ensuring the Right of the Accused

    • The judge’s duty to personally determine probable cause is a safeguard to protect the accused from arbitrary prosecution and arrest.

B. Arraignment and Plea

If the court finds probable cause and issues the corresponding process, the next steps are:

  1. Arraignment

    • The accused is formally informed of the charges against him/her in open court.
    • The accused then enters a plea (guilty or not guilty).

  2. Pre-trial

    • After arraignment, the case proceeds to pre-trial, where the prosecution and defense identify issues, witnesses, evidence, and explore possible plea bargaining (if allowed).

  3. Trial

    • If no settlement or plea bargain is reached, the case proceeds to trial, where evidence is presented, witnesses are examined, and the court ultimately decides on the guilt or innocence of the accused.

V. Further Possibility of Reinvestigation

At times, even after an Information is filed in court, either party may file a motion for reinvestigation with leave of court if new evidence or circumstances arise. The court, upon finding justifiable reasons, may remand or direct the prosecutor to conduct another investigation. The outcomes of reinvestigation are subject to court approval.

VI. Effect of Appeals and Reviews by the Secretary of Justice

  • If a petition for review is filed and is granted by the Secretary of Justice, the resolution by the investigating prosecutor may be reversed or modified.
  • The Secretary of Justice can direct the filing of an Information if one was previously dismissed, or conversely, order the withdrawal of an Information if the evidence is insufficient.
  • These directives are typically controlling, but the final say on whether to dismiss or proceed with the trial rests with the court once the Information is already filed.

VII. Summary of the Process After Preliminary Investigation

  1. Prosecutor’s Resolution

    • Probable Cause Found → Draft of Information → Approved by City/Provincial Prosecutor → Filed in Court → Judicial Determination of Probable Cause.
    • No Probable Cause → Dismissal → Remedies for the complainant include MR or petition for review.

  2. Remedies (Administrative/Executive Level)

    • Motion for Reconsideration → Same prosecutor’s office.
    • Petition for Review → Secretary of Justice (DOJ).
    • Possible Reinvestigation if the court allows it or upon DOJ directive.

  3. Judicial Phase

    • Filing of Information in Court → Court’s Determination of Probable Cause → Warrant of Arrest or Dismissal → Arraignment → Pre-trial → Trial → Judgment.

VIII. Key Takeaways

  1. Double Determination of Probable Cause: The prosecutor determines if there is enough evidence to file a case in court. The court independently verifies probable cause before issuing a warrant of arrest.
  2. Remedies are Available: Both the complainant and the respondent can challenge the outcome of a preliminary investigation through motions for reconsideration, petitions for review (DOJ), or, in exceptional cases, certiorari.
  3. Appeals and Court Discretion: The Secretary of Justice can reverse or affirm a prosecutor’s resolution, but once an Information is filed in court, the judge retains ultimate control over the proceedings.
  4. Safeguards: These steps are intended to balance the state’s interest in prosecuting crimes and the individual’s right against harassment through baseless criminal complaints.

IX. Conclusion

A preliminary investigation in the Philippines is designed to strike a fair balance between protecting individuals from baseless accusations and ensuring that legitimate criminal complaints proceed to court. Once probable cause is found, the Information is filed, but the court still exercises its own discretion to ensure there is sufficient ground to proceed. If the prosecutor dismisses the case, aggrieved parties have administrative and judicial remedies at their disposal. Ultimately, the entire process—from preliminary investigation to the court’s issuance of a warrant and eventual arraignment—reflects the constitutional right to due process and underscores the importance of procedural fairness in the Philippine criminal justice system.

Disclaimer: This content is not legal advice and may involve AI assistance. Information may be inaccurate.

Privacy Policy

Terms of Use

Lawyer Login

 
 
Privacy Policy         Terms of Use         Lawyer Login