[Letter]

Dear Attorney,

I hope this message finds you well. I have a pressing legal concern regarding a case involving multiple complainants. In a complaint filed by eight individuals, four have decided to file affidavits of desistance. My question is, what happens to the complaint now? Should the remaining complainants continue with the original complaint, or do they need to file a new one?

Your guidance on this matter would be greatly appreciated.

Sincerely,
A Concerned Citizen

[Legal Analysis]

When a subset of complainants files an affidavit of desistance in a joint complaint, several considerations under Philippine law arise. The outcome depends on the nature of the case, the specifics of the affidavits of desistance, and the procedural stage at which these are submitted. Below is a comprehensive discussion of the issue:

1. Affidavit of Desistance: Its Nature and Effects

An affidavit of desistance is a sworn statement by a complainant expressing their intent to discontinue pursuing a case or withdrawing their allegations. While often impactful, it does not automatically terminate legal proceedings, as the prosecution of cases, particularly criminal cases, is a public concern that transcends the individual complainants' preferences.

Key Points to Note:

Non-binding Nature: In criminal cases, an affidavit of desistance is not binding upon the court or the prosecutor. Crimes are considered offenses against the State, and it is the prosecutor's duty to determine whether the evidence warrants the continuation of the case, regardless of the complainants' withdrawal.
Contrast with Civil Cases: In civil disputes, affidavits of desistance by a complainant can directly lead to the dismissal of the complaint since the claims are private in nature and based on personal rights.

2. Applicability in Joint Complaints

In a joint complaint where multiple complainants allege a violation of their collective or individual rights, the withdrawal by some complainants does not necessarily affect the rights or actions of the remaining complainants.

Options for Remaining Complainants:

Continue with the Original Complaint:
- The remaining complainants have the legal standing to continue the case. The withdrawal of some complainants does not invalidate the original complaint unless the withdrawal undermines the factual or evidentiary basis of the claims.
- The prosecutor or court may evaluate whether the testimonies and evidence provided by the remaining complainants are sufficient to sustain the case.
File a New Complaint:
- If the affidavits of desistance significantly weaken the original case (e.g., key evidence or testimonies are retracted), the remaining complainants may opt to file a new complaint. This might be necessary to refocus the case or present new evidence.
- Filing a new complaint may also address potential procedural challenges arising from the withdrawal of key witnesses or complainants in the original case.

3. Procedural Considerations

Effect on Preliminary Investigation

If the case is at the preliminary investigation stage, the prosecutor may consider the affidavits of desistance in determining probable cause. However, the desistance of some complainants will not automatically result in the dismissal of the complaint if there is sufficient evidence from the remaining complainants.

Effect on Trial

During trial, the affidavits of desistance by some complainants may affect the strength of the case, particularly if they are also key witnesses. However, the prosecution can proceed if the testimonies of the remaining complainants and other evidence establish the elements of the offense.

Dismissal of the Case

The court will not dismiss a criminal case solely based on affidavits of desistance unless the prosecution itself moves for dismissal due to insufficiency of evidence. This principle is enshrined in the doctrine that the State is the real party in interest in criminal cases.

4. Legal Implications for Specific Case Types

Criminal Cases

Public Offenses: For crimes such as theft, estafa, or serious physical injuries, the withdrawal of some complainants may not terminate the case if the offense affects public interest.
Private Crimes: In cases like adultery or concubinage, which are initiated solely by private individuals, the affidavits of desistance from some complainants may lead to the dismissal of the complaint.

Civil Cases

In purely civil disputes, such as breach of contract, the withdrawal of some complainants usually leads to the dismissal of their claims. The remaining complainants, however, can pursue their individual claims if their rights are independent.

Special Cases (Quasi-Criminal)

In cases such as violation of labor rights or consumer protection laws, affidavits of desistance have limited impact if the law allows regulatory agencies to intervene as complainants in their own right.

5. Potential Risks and Challenges

Accusations of Coercion: If the affidavits of desistance are suspected to have been coerced or influenced by undue pressure, the court or prosecutor may disregard them and proceed with the case.
Weakened Evidence: If the withdrawing complainants were crucial witnesses, their desistance could weaken the evidentiary strength of the case.
Legal Strategy Adjustments: The remaining complainants may need to revise their legal strategy, such as seeking additional evidence or identifying new witnesses, to address the potential impact of the affidavits of desistance.

6. Practical Advice for Remaining Complainants

Consult Legal Counsel: Engage a lawyer to evaluate the strength of the remaining case and develop a strategy to address gaps caused by the affidavits of desistance.
Assess Evidence: Ensure that sufficient evidence exists to proceed independently of the withdrawing complainants.
Consider Mediation: Explore alternative dispute resolution methods if applicable, especially if the case is civil in nature or involves reconciliation opportunities.

7. Jurisprudence and Precedents

Philippine jurisprudence has consistently upheld the principle that criminal cases are prosecuted in the name of the State. Examples include:

People v. Rogelio Santos: The court ruled that an affidavit of desistance does not automatically terminate criminal prosecution, especially when public interest is at stake.
Jimenez v. People: The court highlighted the non-binding nature of affidavits of desistance in criminal cases and emphasized the prosecutor’s discretion in pursuing charges.

8. Conclusion

The filing of affidavits of desistance by some complainants in a joint complaint does not necessarily terminate the case. The remaining complainants have the option to continue with the original complaint or file a new one, depending on the strength of their evidence and the stage of the proceedings. It is crucial to evaluate the procedural and substantive implications of the desistance and to seek professional legal advice to navigate the complexities of the case effectively.

If you require further assistance or have additional questions, consulting a competent attorney who specializes in litigation is highly recommended.