EN BANC

[G.R. No. 148965. February 26, 2002]

JOSE JINGGOY E. ES!R"#", petitioner, vs. S"N#IG"N$"Y"N %!&IR# #I'ISION(,
)EO)*E OF !&E)&I*I))INES a+, OFFI-E OF !&E
O.$/#S."N, respondents.
# E - I S I O N
)/NO, J.0
A law may not be constitutionally infrm but its application to a particular party may be
unconstitutional. This is the submission of the petitioner who invokes the equal protection
clause of the Constitution in his bid to be ecluded from the char!e of plunder fled a!ainst
him by the respondent "mbudsman.
The antecedent facts are as follows#
$n November %&&&' as an o(shoot of the impeachment proceedin!s a!ainst )oseph
E*ercito Estrada' then +resident of the ,epublic of the +hilippines' fve criminal complaints
a!ainst the former +resident and members of his family' his associates' friends and
conspirators were fled with the respondent "-ce of the "mbudsman.
"n April .' %&&/' the respondent "mbudsman issued a )oint ,esolution
0/1
fndin!
probable cause warrantin! the flin! with the 2andi!anbayan of several criminal
$nformations a!ainst the former +resident and the other respondents therein. "ne of the
$nformations was for the crime of plunder under ,epublic Act No. 3&4& and amon! the
respondents was herein petitioner )ose 5)in!!oy6 Estrada' then mayor of 2an )uan' 7etro
7anila.
The $nformation was amended and fled on April /4' %&&/. 8ocketed as Criminal Case
No. %9::4' the case was assi!ned to respondent Third 8ivision of the 2andi!anbayan. The
arrai!nment of the accused was set on )uly /&' %&&/ and no bail for petitioner;s provisional
liberty was fed.
"n April %.' %&&/' petitioner fled a 57otion to <uash or 2uspend6 the Amended
$nformation on the !round that the Anti=+lunder >aw' ,.A. No. 3&4&' is unconstitutional and
that it char!ed more than one o(ense. ,espondent "mbudsman opposed the motion.
"n April %:' %&&/' the respondent court issued a warrant of arrest for petitioner and
his co=accused. "n its basis' petitioner and his co=accused were placed in custody of the
law.
"n April ?&' %&&/' petitioner fled a 5@ery Ar!ent "mnibus 7otion6
0%1
alle!in! that# B/C
no probable cause eists to put him on trial and hold him liable for plunder' it appearin!
that he was only alle!edly involved in ille!al !amblin! and not in a 5series or combination
of overt or criminal acts6 as required in ,.A. No. 3&4&D and B%C he is entitled to bail as a
matter of ri!ht. +etitioner prayed that he be ecluded from the Amended $nformation and
be dischar!ed from custody. $n the alternative' petitioner also prayed that he be allowed
to post bail in an amount to be fed by respondent court.
"n )une %4' %&&/' petitioner fled a 57otion to ,esolve 7ayor )ose E)in!!oy; Estrada;s
7otion To Fi Bail "n Grounds That An "ut!oin! 7ayor >oses Clout An $ncumbent Has And
That "n $ts Face' the Facts Char!ed $n The $nformation 8o Not 7ake "ut A Non=Bailable
"(ense As To Him.6
0.1
"n )uly ?' %&&/' petitioner fled a 57otion to 2trike "ut 2o=Called EEntry of
Appearance'; To 8irect "mbudsman To Eplain Ihy He Attributes $mpropriety To The
8efense And To ,esolve +endin! $ncidents.6
0:1
"n )uly J' %&&/' respondent 2andi!anbayan issued a ,esolution denyin! petitioner;s
57otion to <uash and 2uspend6 and 5@ery Ar!ent "mnibus 7otion.6
091
+etitioner;s
/
alternative prayer to post bail was set for hearin! after arrai!nment of all accused. The
court held#
5IHE,EF",E' in view of the fore!oin!' the Court hereby 8EN$E2 for lack of merit the
followin!# B/C 7"T$"N T" <AA2H AN8 2A2+EN8 dated April %.' %&&/ fled by accused )ose
E)in!!oy; EstradaD B%C 7"T$"N T" <AA2H dated )une 3' %&&/ fled by accused )oseph
E*ercito EstradaD and B?C 7"T$"N T" <AA2H B,e# Amended $nformation dated /4 April
%&&/C dated )une %9' %&&/ fled by accused Edward 2. 2erapio.
Considerin! the denial of the 7"T$"N T" <AA2H AN8 2A2+EN8 of accused )ose E)in!!oy;
Estrada' his @E,K A,GENT "7N$BA2 7"T$"N' prayin! that he be# B/C dropped from the
information for plunder for want of probable cause and B%C dischar!ed from custody
immediately which is based on the same !rounds mentioned in this 7"T$"N T" <AA2H
AN8 2A2+EN8 is hereby 8EN$E8. >et his alternative prayer in said "7N$BA2 7"T$"N that
he be allowed to post bail be 2ET for hearin! to!ether with the petition for bail of accused
Edward 2. 2erapio scheduled for )uly /&' %&&/' at %#&& o;clock in the afternoon after the
arrai!nment of all the accused.6
031
The followin! day' )uly /&' %&&/' petitioner moved for reconsideration of the
,esolution. ,espondent court denied the motion and proceeded to arrai!n
petitioner. +etitioner refused to make his plea promptin! respondent court to enter a plea
of 5not !uilty6 for him.
041
Hence' this petition. +etitioner claims that respondent 2andi!anbayan acted without
or in ecess of *urisdiction or with !rave abuse of discretion amountin! to lack of
*urisdiction in#
5/C not declarin! that ,.A. No. 3&4& is unconstitutional on its face and' as applied to
petitioner' and denyin! him the equal protection of the lawsD
%C not holdin! that the +lunder >aw does not provide complete and su-cient standardsD
?C sustainin! the char!e a!ainst petitioner for alle!ed o(enses' and with alle!ed
conspirators' with which and with whom he is not even remotely connected = contrary to
the dictum that criminal liability is personal' not vicarious = results in the denial of
substantive due processD
.C not fin! bail for petitioner for alle!ed involvement in *ueten! in one count of the
information which amounts to cruel and unusual punishment totally in defance of the
principle of proportionality.6
0J1
Ie shall resolve the ar!uments of petitioner in seriatim.
I.
+etitioner contends that ,.A. No. 3&4& is unconstitutional on its face and as applied to
him and denies him the equal protection of the laws.
0/&1
The contention deserves our scant attention. The constitutionality of ,.A. No. 3&4&'
the Anti=+lunder >aw' has been settled in the case of E12ra,a 3. Sa+,45a+baya+.
0//1
Ie
take o( from the Amended $nformation which char!ed petitioner' to!ether with former
+resident )oseph E. Estrada' Atty. Edward 2erapio' Charlie 5Aton!6 An!' Kolanda T. ,icaforte
and others' with the crime of plunder as follows#
".EN#E# INFOR."!ION
!6e u+,er145+e, O7bu,17a+ )ro1e8u2or a+, OI-9#4re82or, E)I$ O:8e o; 26e
O7bu,17a+, 6ereby a88u1e1 ;or7er )RESI#EN! OF !&E )&I*I))INES, Jo1e<6
E=er842o E12ra,a a.>.a. "SIONG S"*ONG" "N# a.>.a JOSE 'E*"R#E, 2o5e26er
?426 Jo1e @J4+55oyA E12ra,a, -6arB4e @"2o+5A "+5, E,?ar, Sera<4o, YoBa+,a !.
R48a;or2e, "B7a "B;aro, JO&N #OE a.>.a. EBeu2er4o !a+ OR EBeu2er4o Ra7o1 !a+ or
.r. /y, Ja+e #oe a.>.a. #eB4a Ra=a1, a+, Jo6+ #OES C Ja+e #oe1, o; 26e 8r47e o;
%
)Bu+,er, ,eD+e, a+, <e+aB4Ee, u+,er R.". No. F080, a1 a7e+,e, by Se8. 12 o;
R.". No. F659, 8o77422e, a1 ;oBBo?10
!6a2 ,ur4+5 26e <er4o, ;ro7 Ju+e, 1998 2o Ja+uary, 2001, 4+ 26e )64B4<<4+e1, a+,
?4264+ 26e =ur41,4824o+ o; 2641 &o+orabBe -our2, a88u1e, Jo1e<6 E=er842o
E12ra,a, !&EN " )/$*I- OFFI-ER, $EING !&EN !&E )RESI#EN! OF !&E
RE)/$*I- OF !&E )&I*I))INES, by
6471eB;"N#GOR 4+ -ONNI'"N-EG-ONS)IR"-Y ?426 641 8o9a88u1e,, H&O "RE
.E.$ERS OF &IS F".I*Y, RE*"!I'ES $Y "FFINI!Y OR -ONS"NG/INI!Y, $/SINESS
"SSO-I"!ES, S/$OR#IN"!ES "N#GOR O!&ER )ERSONS, $Y !"IING /N#/E
"#'"N!"GE OF &IS OFFI-I"* )OSI!ION, "/!&ORI!Y, RE*"!IONS&I),
-ONNE-!ION, OR INF*/EN-E, ,4, 26e+ a+, 26ere ?4B;uBBy, u+Ba?;uBBy a+,
8r474+aBBy a7a11, a88u7uBa2e a+, a8Ju4re $Y &I.SE*F, #IRE-!*Y OR IN#IRE-!*Y,
4BB95o22e+ ?eaB26 4+ 26e a55re5a2e a7ou+2 OR !O!"* '"*/E o; FO/R $I**ION
NINE!Y SE'EN .I**ION EIG&! &/N#RE# FO/R !&O/S"N# ONE &/N#RE#
SE'EN!Y !&REE )ESOS "N# SE'EN!EEN -EN!"'OS [)4,09F,804,1FK.1F], 7ore
or Be11, !&ERE$Y /NJ/S!*Y ENRI-&ING &I.SE*F OR !&E.SE*'ES "! !&E
EL)ENSE "N# !O !&E #"."GE OF !&E FI*I)INO )EO)*E "N# !&E RE)/$*I- OF
!&E )&I*I))INES, 26rou56 "NY OR " 8o7b4+a24o+ OR " 1er4e1 o;
o3er2 OR 8r474+aB a821, OR SI.I*"R S-&E.ES OR .E"NS, ,e18r4be, a1 ;oBBo?10
%a( by re8e434+5 OR 8oBBe824+5, ,4re82By or 4+,4re82By, o+ SE'ER"*
INS!"N-ES, .ONEY IN !&E "GGREG"!E ".O/N! OF FI'E &/N#RE#
FOR!Y9FI'E .I**ION )ESOS %)545,000,000.00(, .ORE OR *ESS, FRO.
I**EG"* G".$*ING IN !&E FOR. OF GIF!, S&"RE, )ER-EN!"GE,
II-I$"-I OR "NY FOR. OF )E-/NI"RY $ENEFI!, $Y &I.SE*F
"N#GOR 4+ 8o++43a+8e ?426 8o9a88u1e, -&"R*IE @"!ONGA "NG, Jo1e
@J4+55oyA E12ra,a, YoBa+,a !. R48a;or2e, E,?ar, Sera<4o, "N (sic) JO&N
#OES "N# J"NE #OES, 4+ 8o+14,era24o+ OF !O*ER"!ION OR
)RO!E-!ION OF I**EG"* G".$*INGM
%b( by #I'ER!ING, RE-EI'ING, 741a<<ro<r4a24+5,
8o+3er24+5 OR 741u14+5 #IRE-!*Y OR IN#IRE-!*Y, ;or &IS OR !&EIR
)ERSON"* 5a4+ a+, be+eD2, <ubB48 ;u+,1 4+ 26e a7ou+2 o; ONE
&/N#RE# !&IR!Y .I**ION )ESOS [)1K0,000,000.00], 7ore or Be11,
re<re1e+24+5 a <or24o+ o; 26e !HO &/N#RE# .I**ION )ESOS
[)200,000,000] 2oba88o eN841e 2aN 16are aBBo8a2e, ;or 26e )ro34+8e o;
IBo8or Sur u+,er R.". No. F1F1, $Y &I.SE*F
"N#GOR 4+ -ONNI'"N-E ?426 8o9a88u1e, -6arB4e @"2o+5A "+5, "B7a
"B;aro, JO&N #OE a.>.a. EBeu2er4o !a+ OR EBeu2er4o Ra7o1 !a+ or .r. /y,
a+, Ja+e #oe a.>.a. #eB4a Ra=a1, "N# O!&ER JO&N #OES "N# J"NE
#OESM
%8( by ,4re824+5, or,er4+5 a+, 8o7<eBB4+5, FOR &IS )ERSON"* G"IN
"N# $ENEFI!, 26e Go3er+7e+2 Ser348e I+1ura+8e Sy12e7 %GSIS( !O
)/R-&"SE K51,8F8,000 S&"RES OF S!O-I .ORE OR *ESS, a+, 26e
So84aB Se8ur42y Sy12e7 %SSS(, K29,855,000 S&"RES OF S!O-I .ORE OR
*ESS, OF !&E $E**E -OR)OR"!ION IN !&E ".O/N! OF .ORE OR *ESS
ONE $I**ION ONE &/N#RE# !HO .I**ION NINE &/N#RE# SIL!Y FI'E
!&O/S"N# SIL &/N#RE# SE'EN )ESOS "N# FIF!Y -EN!"'OS
[)1,102,965,60F.50] "N# .ORE OR *ESS SE'EN &/N#RE# FOR!Y FO/R
.I**ION SIL &/N#RE# !HE*'E !&O/S"N# "N# FO/R &/N#RE# FIF!Y
)ESOS [)F44,612,450.00], RES)E-!I'E*Y, OR " !O!"* OF .ORE OR
*ESS ONE $I**ION EIG&! &/N#RE# FOR!Y SE'EN .I**ION FI'E
&/N#RE# SE'EN!Y EIG&! !&O/S"N# FIF!Y SE'EN )ESOS "N# FIF!Y
-EN!"'OS [)1,84F,5F8,05F.50]M "N# $Y -O**E-!ING OR RE-EI'ING,
#IRE-!*Y OR IN#IRE-!*Y, $Y &I.SE*F "N#GOR IN -ONNI'"N-E HI!&
JO&N #OES "N# J"NE #OES, -O..ISSIONS OR )ER-EN!"GES $Y
RE"SON OF S"I# )/R-&"SES OF S&"RES OF S!O-I IN !&E ".O/N!
OF ONE &/N#RE# EIG&!Y NINE .I**ION SE'EN &/N#RE# !&O/S"N#
)ESOS [)189,F00,000.00], .ORE OR *ESS, FRO. !&E $E**E
-OR)OR"!ION H&I-& $E-".E )"R! OF !&E #E)OSI! IN !&E
EO/I!"$*E9)-I $"NI /N#ER !&E "--O/N! N".E JOSE 'E*"R#EM
%,( by u+=u12By e+r4864+5 6471eB; FRO. -O..ISSIONS, GIF!S,
S&"RES, )ER-EN!"GES, II-I$"-IS, OR "NY FOR. OF )E-/NI"RY
?
$ENEFI!S, IN -ONNI'"N-E HI!& JO&N #OES "N# J"NE #OES, 4+ 26e
a7ou+2 o; .ORE OR *ESS !&REE $I**ION !HO &/N#RE# !&IR!Y
!&REE .I**ION ONE &/N#RE# FO/R !&O/S"N# ONE &/N#RE#
SE'EN!Y !&REE )ESOS "N# SE'EN!EEN -EN!"'OS
[)K,2KK,104,1FK.1F] "N# #E)OSI!ING !&E S".E /N#ER &IS "--O/N!
N".E JOSE 'E*"R#E "! !&E EO/I!"$*E9)-I $"NI.
C"NT,A,K T" >AI.
7anila for <ueLon City' +hilippines' /4 April %&&/6
0/%1
+etitioner;s contention that ,.A. No. 3&4& is unconstitutional as applied to him is
principally perched on the premise that the Amended $nformation char!ed him with only
one act or one o(ense which cannot constitute plunder. He then assails the denial of his
ri!ht to bail.
+etitioner;s premise is patently false. A careful eamination of the Amended
$nformation will show that it is divided into three B?C parts# B/C the frst para!raph char!es
former +resident )oseph E. Estrada with the crime of plunder to!ether with petitioner )ose
5)in!!oy6 Estrada' Charlie 5Aton!6 An!' Edward 2erapio' Kolanda ,icaforte and othersD B%C
the second para!raph spells out in !eneral terms how the accused conspired in
committin! the crime of plunderD and B?C the followin! four sub=para!raphs BaC to BdC
describe in detail the predicate acts constitutive of the crime of plunder pursuant to items
B/C to B9C of ,.A. No. 3&4&' and state the names of the accused who committed each act.
)er24+e+2 2o 26e 8a1e a2 bar 41 26e <re,48a2e a82 aBBe5e, 4+ 1ub9<ara5ra<6 %a(
o; 26e "7e+,e, I+;or7a24o+ which is of 5receivin! or collectin!' directly or
indirectly' o+ 1e3eraB 4+12a+8e1, money in the a!!re!ate amount of +:.:'&&&'&&&.&& for
ille!al !amblin! in the form of !ift' share' percenta!e' kickback or any form of pecuniary
beneft .6 $n this sub=para!raph BaC' <e2424o+er, in conspiracy with former +resident
Estrada' is char!ed with the act of receivin! or collectin! money from ille!al !amblin!
amountin! to +:.: million. Contrary to petitioner;s posture' the alle!ation is that he
received or collected money from ille!al !amblin! o+ 1e3eraB 4+12a+8e1. !6e <6ra1e
o+ 1e3eraB 4+12a+8e1 7ea+1 26e <e2424o+er 8o77422e, 26e <re,48a2e a82 4+
1er4e1. To insist that the Amended $nformation char!ed the petitioner with the
commission of only one act or o(ense despite the phrase 5several instances6 is to indul!e
in a twisted' nay' 5pretLel6 interpretation.
$t matters little that sub=para!raph BaC did not utiliLe the eact words 5combination6 or
5series6 as they appear in ,.A. No. 3&4&. For inE12ra,a 3. Sa+,45a+baya+,
0/?1
we held
that where these two terms are to be taken in their popular' not technical' meanin!' the
word 5series6 is synonymous with the clause 5on several instances.6 52eries6 refers to a
repetition of the same predicate act in any of the items in 2ection / BdC of the law. The
word 5combination6 contemplates the commission of at least any two di(erent predicate
acts in any of said items. )Ba4+By, 1ub9<ara5ra<6 %a( o; 26e "7e+,e, I+;or7a24o+
86ar5e1 <e2424o+er ?426 <Bu+,er 8o77422e, by a 1er4e1 o; 26e 1a7e <re,48a2e a82
u+,er Se824o+ 1 %,( %2( o; 26e Ba?.
2imilarly misleadin! is petitioner;s stand that in the "mbudsman ,esolution of April .'
%&&/ fndin! probable cause to char!e him with plunder to!ether with the other accused'
he was alle!ed to have received only the sum of +% million' which amount is way below
the minimum of +:& million required under ,.A. No. 3&4&. The submission is not borne out
by the April .' %&&/ ,esolution of the "mbudsman' recommendin! the flin! of char!es
a!ainst petitioner and his co=accused' which in pertinent part reads#
5

,espondent )ose E)in!!oy; Estrada' the present 7ayor of 2an )uan' 7etro 7anila' appears
to have also surreptitious collection of protection money from *ueten! operations in
Bulacan. This is !leaned from the statements of Gov. 2in!son himself and the fact that
7ayor Estrada' o+ a2 Bea12 2?o o88a14o+1,turned over to a certain Emma >im' an
emissary of the respondent !overnor' *ueten! haul totallin! +% million' i.e.' +/ million in
)anuary' %&&& and another +/ million in February' %&&&. An alle!ed 5listahan6 of *ueten!
recipients listed him as one 5)in!le Bell'6 as a-rmed by 2in!son 0T2N 4 M 8ec. %&&&
2$CtN/3 "ct. %&&& 2B,CN2C$1.6
0/.1
.
Hence' contrary to the representations of the petitioner' the "mbudsman made the
fndin! that +% million was delivered to petitioner as 5*ueten! haul6 on a2 Bea12 2?o
o88a14o+1. The +% million is' therefore' +o2 26e e+24re 1u7 with which petitioner is
specifcally char!ed. This is further confrmed by the conclusion of the "mbudsman that#
5

$t is clear that )oseph E*ercito Estrada' in confabulation with )ose E)in!!oy; Estrada' Atty.
Edward 2erapio and Kolanda ,icaforte' demanded and received' as bribe money' the
a!!re!ate sum of +:.: million from *ueten! collections of the operators thereof'
channeled thru Gov. >uis EChavit; 2in!son' in echan!e for protection from arrest or
interference by law enforcersD .6
0/:1
To be sure' it is too late in the day for the petitioner to ar!ue that the "mbudsman
failed to establish any probable cause a!ainst him for plunder. The respondent
2andi!anbayan itself has found probable cause a!ainst the petitioner for which reason it
issued a warrant of arrest a!ainst him. +etitioner then underwent arrai!nment and is now
on trial. The time to assail the fndin! of probable cause by the "mbudsman has lon!
passed. The issue cannot be resurrected in this petition.
II.
Net' petitioner contends that 5the plunder law does not provide su-cient and
complete standards to !uide the courts in dealin! with accused alle!ed to have
contributed to the o(ense.6
0/91
Thus' he posits the followin! questions#
5For eample' in an $nformation for plunder which cites at least ten criminal acts' what
penalty do we impose on one who is clearly involved in only one such criminal actO $s
it reclusion perpetuaO "r should it be a lesser penaltyO Ihat if another accused is shown
to have participated in three of the ten specifcations' what would be the penalty
imposable' compared to one who may have been involved in fve or seven of the
specifcationsO The law does not provide the standard or specify the penalties and the
courts are left to !uess. $n other words' the courts are called to say what the law is rather
than to apply what the lawmaker is supposed to have intended.6
0/31
+etitioner raises these hypothetical questions for he labors hard under the impression that#
B/C he is char!ed with only one act or o(ense and B%C he has not conspired with the other
accused named in sub=para!raphs BbC to BdC of the Amended $nformation' ergo, the
penalty imposable on him ou!ht to be di(erent from reclusion perpetua to death. ,.A. No.
3&4&' he bewails' is cloudy on the imposable penalty on an accused similarly situated as
he is. +etitioner' however' overlooks that the second para!raph of the Amended
$nformation char!es him to have conspired with former +resident Estrada in committin!
the crime of plunder. His alle!ed participation consists in the commission of the predicate
acts specifed in sub=para!raph BaC of the Amended $nformation. $f these alle!ations are
proven' the penalty of petitioner cannot be unclear. $t will be no di(erent from that of the
former +resident for in conspiracy' the act of one is the act of the other. The imposable
penalty is provided in 2ection % of ,.A. No. 3&4&' viz#
5Section 2. Any public o-cer who' by himself or 4+ 8o++43a+8e with the members of his
family' relatives by a-nity or consan!uinity' business associates' subordinates or other
persons' amasses' accumulates or acquires ill=!otten wealth throu!h a combination or
series of overt or criminal acts as described in 2ection /BdC hereof in the a!!re!ate
amount or total value of at least Fifty million pesos B+:&'&&&'&&&.&&C shall be !uilty of the
crime of plunder and 16aBB be <u+416e, by reclusion perpetua 2o ,ea26. Any person
who participated with the said public o-cer in the commission of an o(ense contributin!
to the crime of plunder shall likewise be punished for such o(ense. $n the imposition of
penalties' the de!ree of participation and the attendance of miti!atin! and etenuatin!
circumstances' as provided by the ,evised +enal Code' shall be considered by the court.6
III.
:
+etitioner also faults the respondent 2andi!anbayan for 5sustainin! the char!e a!ainst
petitioner for alle!ed o(enses and with alle!ed conspirators' with which and with whom he
is not even remotely connected P contrary to the dictum that criminal liability is personal'
not vicarious P results in the denial of substantive due process.6
0/41
The 2olicitor General ar!ues' on the other hand' that petitioner is char!ed not only
with the predicate act in sub=para!raph BaC but also with the other predicate acts in sub=
para!raphs BbC' BcC M BdC because he is indicted as a principal and as co=conspirator of the
former +resident. This is purportedly clear from the frst and second para!raphs of the
Amended $nformation.
0/J1
For better focus' there is a need to eamine a!ain the alle!ations of the Amended
$nformation vis--vis the provisions of ,.A. No. 3&4&.
The Amended $nformation' in its frst two para!raphs' char!es petitioner and his other
co=accused with the crime of plunder. The frst para!raph names all the accused' while
the second para!raph describes in !eneral how plunder was committed and lays down
most of the elements of the crime itself. Sub9<ara5ra<61 %a( 2o %,( ,e18r4be 4+ ,e2a4B
26e <re,48a2e a821 26a2 8o+1242u2e 26e 8r47e a+, +a7e 4+ <ar248uBar 26e 8o9
8o+1<4ra2or1 o; ;or7er )re14,e+2 E12ra,a 4+ ea86 <re,48a2e a82. !6e <re,48a2e
a821 aBBe5e, 4+ 26e 1a4, ;our 1ub9<ara5ra<61 8orre1<o+, 2o 26e 42e71
e+u7era2e, 4+ Se824o+ 1 %,( o; R.". No. F080. 2ub=para!raph BaC alle!ed the
predicate act of receivin!' on several instances' money from ille!al !amblin!' in
consideration of toleration or protection of ille!al !amblin!' and epressly names
petitioner as one of those who conspired with former +resident Estrada in committin! the
o(ense. This predicate act corresponds with the o(ense described in item 0%1 of the
enumeration in 2ection / BdC of ,.A. No. 3&4&. 2ub=para!raph BbC alle!ed the predicate act
of divertin!' receivin! or misappropriatin! a portion of the tobacco ecise ta share
allocated for the province of $locos 2ur' which act is the o(ense described in item 0/1 in the
enumeration in 2ection / BdC of the law. This sub=para!raph does not mention petitioner
but instead names other conspirators of the former +resident. 2ub=para!raph BcC alle!ed
two predicate acts = that of orderin! the Government 2ervice $nsurance 2ystem BG2$2C and
the 2ocial 2ecurity 2ystem B222C to purchase shares of stock of Belle Corporation' and
collectin! or receivin! commissions from such purchase from the Belle Corporation which
became part of the deposit in the 5)ose @elarde6 account at the Equitable=+C$ Bank. These
two predicate acts fall under items 0%1 and 0?1 in the enumeration of ,.A. No. 3&4&' and
was alle!edly committed by the former +resident in connivance with )ohn 8oes and )ane
8oes. Finally' sub=para!raph BdC alle!ed the predicate act that the former +resident
un*ustly enriched himself from commissions' !ifts' kickbacks' in connivance with )ohn 8oes
and )ane 8oes' and deposited the same under his account name 5)ose @elarde6 at the
Equitable=+C$ Bank. This act corresponds to the o(ense under item 091 in the enumeration
of 2ection / BdC of ,.A. No. 3&4&.
From the fore!oin! alle!ations of the Amended $nformation' it is clear that all the
accused named in sub=para!raphs BaC to BdC' thru their individual acts' 8o+1<4re, ?426
;or7er )re14,e+2 E12ra,a to enable the latter to amass' accumulate or acquire ill=
!otten wealth in the a!!re!ate amount of +.'&J3'4&.'/3?./3. As the Amended
$nformation 41 ?or,e,, however' it is not certain whether the accused in sub=para!raphs
BaC to BdC 8o+1<4re, ?426 ea86 o26er to enable the former +resident to amass the
sub*ect ill=!otten wealth. $n li!ht of this lack of clarity' petitioner cannot be penaliLed for
the conspiracy entered into by the other accused with the former +resident as related in
the second para!raph of the Amended $nformation in relation to its sub=para!raphs BbC to
BdC. Ie hold that petitioner can be held accountableo+By for the predicate acts he
alle!edly committed as related in sub=para!raph BaC of the Amended $nformation which
were alle!edly done in conspiracy with the former +resident whose desi!n was to amass
ill=!otten wealth amountin! to more than +. billion.
He 6a12e+ 2o a,,, 6o?e3er, 26a2 26e re1<o+,e+2 O7bu,17a+ 8a++o2 be
;auB2e, ;or 4+8Bu,4+5 26e <re,48a2e a821 aBBe5e, 4+ 1ub9<ara5ra<61 %a( 2o %,( o;
26e "7e+,e, I+;or7a24o+ 4+ o+e, a+, +o2 4+ ;our, 1e<ara2e I+;or7a24o+1. A study
of the history of ,.A. No. 3&4& will show that the law was crafted to avoid the mischief and
folly of flin! multiple informations. The Anti=+lunder >aw was enacted in the aftermath of
the .ar8o1 re547e where char!es of ill=!otten wealth were fled a!ainst former +resident
7arcos and his alle!ed cronies.Go3er+7e+2 <ro1e8u2or1 ;ou+, +o a<<ro<r4a2e Ba?
2o ,eaB ?426 26e 7uB242u,e a+, 7a5+42u,e o; 26e a821 aBBe5e,By 8o77422e, by
26e ;or7er )re14,e+2 2o a8Ju4re 4BBe5aB ?eaB26.
0%&1
They also found that under the
then eistin! laws such as the Anti=Graft and Corrupt +ractices Act' the ,evised +enal
9
Code and other special laws' the acts involved di(erent transactions' di(erent time and
di(erent personalities. E3ery 2ra+1a824o+ 8o+1242u2e, a 1e<ara2e 8r47e a+,
reJu4re, a 1e<ara2e 8a1e a+, 26e o3er9aBB 8o+1<4ra8y 6a, 2o be bro>e+ ,o?+ 4+2o
1e3eraB 8r474+aB a+, 5ra;2 86ar5e1. The preparation of multiple $nformations was a
le!al ni!htmare but eventually' thirty=nine B?JC separate and independent cases were fled
a!ainst practically the same accused before the 2andi!anbayan.
0%/1
,.A. No. 3&4& or the
Anti=+lunder >aw
0%%1
was enacted precisely to address this procedural problem. This is
pellucid in the Eplanatory Note to 2enate Bill No. 3??' viz#
5+lunder' a term chosen from other equally apt terminolo!ies like kleptocracy and
economic treason' punishes the use of hi!h o-ce for personal enrichment' committed thru
a series of acts done not in the public eye but in stealth and secrecy over a period of time'
that may involve so many persons' here and abroad' and which touch so many states and
territorial units. !6e a821 a+,Gor o74114o+1 1ou562 2o be <e+aB4Ee, ,o +o2 4+3oB3e
147<Be 8a1e1 o; 7aB3er1a24o+ o; <ubB48 ;u+,1, br4bery, eN2or24o+, 26e;2 a+, 5ra;2
bu2 8o+1242u2e <Bu+,er o; a+ e+24re +a24o+ re1uB24+5 4+ 7a2er4aB ,a7a5e 2o 26e
+a24o+aB e8o+o7y. The above=described crime does not yet eist in +hilippine statute
books. Thus' the need to come up with a le!islation as a safe!uard a!ainst the possible
recurrence of the depravities of the previous re!ime and as a deterrent to those with
similar inclination to succumb to the corruptin! inQuence of power.6
There is no denyin! the fact that the 5plunder of an entire nation resultin! in material
dama!e to the national economy6 is made up of a comple and manifold network of
crimes. I+ 26e 8r47e o; <Bu+,er, 26ere;ore, ,4Pere+2 <ar24e1 7ay be u+42e, by a
8o77o+ <ur<o1e. $n the case at bar' the di(erent accused and their di(erent criminal
acts have a commonalityRto help the former +resident amass' accumulate or acquire ill=
!otten wealth. 2ub=para!raphs BaC to BdC in the Amended $nformation alle!ed the di(erent
participation of each accused in the conspiracy. The 5ra3a7e+ o; 26e 8o+1<4ra8y
86ar5e' therefore' is +o2 that each accused a!reed to receive protection money from
ille!al !amblin!' that each misappropriated a portion of the tobacco ecise ta' that each
accused ordered the G2$2 and 222 to purchase shares of Belle Corporation and receive
commissions from such sale' nor that each un*ustly enriched himself from commissions'
!ifts and kickbacksD ra26er, 42 41 26a2 ea86 o; 26e7, by 26e4r 4+,434,uaB a821, a5ree,
2o <ar2484<a2e, ,4re82By or 4+,4re82By, 4+ 26e a7a114+5, a88u7uBa24o+ a+,
a8Ju41424o+ o; 4BB95o22e+ ?eaB26 o; a+,Gor ;or ;or7er )re14,e+2 E12ra,a.
I+ 26e "7er48a+ =ur41,4824o+' the presence of several accused in multiple
conspiracies commonly involves two structures# B/C the so=called 5wheel6 or 5circle6
conspiracy' in which there is a sin!le person or !roup Bthe 5hub6C dealin! individually with
two or more other persons or !roups Bthe 5spokes6CD and B%C the 5chain6 conspiracy'
usually involvin! the distribution of narcotics or other contraband' in which there is
successive communication and cooperation in much the same way as with le!itimate
business operations between manufacturer and wholesaler' then wholesaler and retailer'
and then retailer and consumer.
0%?1
From a readin! of the Amended $nformation' the case at bar appears similar to a
5wheel6 conspiracy. The hub is former +resident Estrada while the spokes are all the
accused' and the rim that encloses the spokes is the common !oal in the overall
conspiracy' i.e.' the amassin!' accumulation and acquisition of ill=!otten wealth.
I'.
2ome of our distin!uished collea!ues would dismiss the char!e a!ainst the petitioner
on the !round that the alle!ation of conspiracy in the Amended $nformation is too
!eneral. The fear is even epressed that it could serve as a net to ensnare the
innocent. Their dissents appear to be inspired by American law and *urisprudence.
He 16ouB, +o2 8o+;u1e our Ba? o+ 8o+1<4ra8y ?426 8o+1<4ra8y 4+ "7er48a+
8r474+aB Ba? a+, 4+ 8o77o+ Ba?. /+,er )64B4<<4+e Ba?, 8o+1<4ra8y 16ouB, be
u+,er12oo, o+ 2?o Be3eB1. "1 a 5e+eraB ruBe, 8o+1<4ra8y 41 +o2 a 8r47e 4+ our
=ur41,4824o+. I2 41 <u+416e, a1 a 8r47e o+By ?6e+ 26e Ba? DNe1 a <e+aB2y ;or 421
8o774114o+ 1u86 a1 4+ 8o+1<4ra8y 2o 8o7742 2rea1o+, rebeBB4o+ a+, 1e,424o+. I+
8o+2ra12, u+,er "7er48a+ 8r474+aB Ba?, 26e a5ree7e+2 or 8o+1<4ra8y 421eB; 41 26e
5ra3a7e+ o; 26e oPe+1e.
0%.1
The essence of conspiracy is the combination of two or
3
more persons' by concerted action' to accomplish a criminal or unlawful purpose' or some
purpose not in itself criminal or unlawful' by criminal or unlawful means.
0%:1
$ts elements
are# a!reement to accomplish an ille!al ob*ective' coupled with one or more overt acts in
furtherance of the ille!al purposeD and requisite intent necessary to commit the underlyin!
substantive o(ense.
0%91
" 12u,y o; 26e /+42e, S2a2e1 -o,e ou562 2o be 4+12ru8243e. I2 <r4+84<aBBy
<u+416e1 2?o %2( 8r47e1 o; 8o+1<4ra8y
0%31
Q conspiracy to commit any o(ense or to
defraud the Anited 2tates' a+, conspiracy to impede or in*ure o-cer. Conspiracy to
commit o(ense or to defraud the Anited 2tates is penaliLed under 18 /.S.-. Se8. KF1'
0%41
as follows#
5Sec. 371. Conspiracy to commit ofense or to deraud the !nited States. $f two or more
persons conspire either to commit any o(ense a!ainst the Anited 2tates' or to defraud the
Anited 2tates' or any a!ency thereof in any manner or for any purpose' and one or more
of such persons to any act to e(ect the ob*ect of the conspiracy' each shall be fned not
more than S/&'&&& or imprisoned not more than fve years' or both.
$f' however' the o(ense' the commission of which is the ob*ect of the conspiracy' is a
misdemeanor only' the punishment for such conspiracy shall not eceed the maimum
punishment provided for such misdemeanor.6
Conspiracy to impede or in*ure o-cer is penaliLed under 18 /.S.-. Se8. KF2' viz#
5Sec. 372. Conspiracy to impede or in"ure o#cer. $f two or more persons in any 2tate'
Territory' +ossession' or 8istrict conspire to prevent' by force' intimidation' or threat' any
person from acceptin! or holdin! any o-ce' trust or place of confdence under the Anited
2tates' or from dischar!in! any duties thereof' or to induce by like means any o-cer of
the Anited 2tates to leave the place' where his duties as an o-cer are required to be
performed' or to in*ure him in his person or property on account of his lawful dischar!e of
the duties of his o-ce' or while en!a!ed in the lawful dischar!e thereof' or to in*ure his
property so as to molest' interrupt' hinder' or impede him in the dischar!e of his o-cial
duties' each of such persons shall be fned not more than S:'&&& or imprisoned not more
than si years' or both.6
Se824o+ KF1 o; 18 /.S.-. punishes two acts# B/C conspiracy to commit any o(ense
a!ainst the Anited 2tatesD and B%C conspiracy to defraud the Anited 2tates or any a!ency
thereof. The conspiracy to 5commit any o(ense a!ainst the Anited 2tates6 refers to an act
made a crime by federal laws.
0%J1
$t refers to an act punished by statute.
0?&1
/+,oub2e,By,
Se824o+ KF1 ru+1 26e ?6oBe 5a7u2 o; /.S. Fe,eraB Ba?1, ?6e26er 8r474+aB or
re5uBa2ory.
0?/1
These laws cover criminal o(enses such as per*ury' white slave tra-c'
racketeerin!' !amblin!' arson' murder' theft' bank robbery' etc. and also include customs
violations' counterfeitin! of currency' copyri!ht violations' mail fraud' lotteries' violations
of antitrust laws and laws !overnin! interstate commerce and other areas of federal
re!ulation.
0?%1
Se824o+ KF1 <e+aB4Ee1 26e 8o+1<4ra8y 2o 8o7742 a+y o; 26e1e
1ub12a+243e oPe+1e1. !6e oPe+1e o; 8o+1<4ra8y 41 5e+eraBBy 1e<ara2e a+,
,4124+82 ;ro7 26e 1ub12a+243e oPe+1e,
0??1
hence' the court rulin!s that acquittal on the
substantive count does not foreclose prosecution and conviction for related conspiracy.
0?.1
The conspiracy to 5defraud the !overnment6 refers primarily to cheatin! the Anited
2tates out of property or money. $t also covers interference with or obstruction of its
lawful !overnmental functions by deceit' craft or trickery' or at least by means that are
dishonest.
0?:1
$t comprehends defraudin! the Anited 2tates in any manner whatever'
whether the fraud be declared criminal or not.
0?91
The ba148 ,4Pere+8e in the concept of conspiracy +o2?42612a+,4+5' a study of the
American case law on 6o? conspiracy should be alle!ed will reveal that it is +o2
+e8e11ary ;or 26e 4+,4827e+2 2o 4+8Bu,e <ar248uBar424e1 o; 247e, <Ba8e,
84r8u712a+8e1 or 8au1e1, 4+ 12a24+5 26e 7a++er a+, 7ea+1 o; ePe824+5 26e
ob=e82 o; 26e 8o+1<4ra8y. 2uch specifcity of detail falls within the scope of a bill of
particulars.
0?31
"+ 4+,4827e+2 ;or 8o+1<4ra8y 41 1u:84e+2 where it alle!es# B/C the
a!reementD B%C the o(ense=ob*ect toward which the a!reement was directedD and B?C the
overt acts performed in furtherance of the a!reement.
0?41
To alle!e that the defendants
conspired is' at least' to state that they a!reed to do the matters which are set forth as the
substance of their conspiracy. To alle!e a conspiracy is to alle!e an a!reement.
0?J1
!6e
5412 o; 26e 8r47e o; 8o+1<4ra8y 41 u+Ba?;uB a5ree7e+2, a+, ?6ere 8o+1<4ra8y 41
4
86ar5e,, 42 41 +o2 +e8e11ary 2o 1e2 ou2 26e 8r474+aB ob=e82 ?426 a1 5rea2 a
8er2a4+2y a1 41 reJu4re, 4+ 8a1e1 ?6ere 1u86 ob=e82 41 86ar5e, a1 a 1ub12a+243e
oPe+1e.
0.&1
I+ 1u7, 26ere;ore, 26ere 41 6ar,By a 1ub12a+24aB ,4Pere+8e o+ 6o? )64B4<<4+e
8our21 a+, "7er48a+ 8our21 ,eaB ?426 8a1e1 86aBBe+54+5 I+;or7a24o+1 aBBe54+5
8o+1<4ra8y o+ 26e 5rou+, 26a2 26ey Ba8> <ar248uBar424e1 o; 247e, <Ba8e,
84r8u712a+8e1 or 8au1e1. I+ our =ur41,4824o+, a1 a;ore12a2e,, 8o+1<4ra8y 8a+ be
aBBe5e, 4+ 26e I+;or7a24o+ a1 a 7o,e o; 8o774224+5 a 8r47e or 42 7ay be aBBe5e,
a1 8o+1242u243e o; 26e 8r47e 421eB;. H6e+ 8o+1<4ra8y 41 aBBe5e, a1 a 8r47e 4+
421eB;, 26e 1u:84e+8y o; 26e aBBe5a24o+1 4+ 26e I+;or7a24o+ 86ar54+5 26e oPe+1e
41 5o3er+e, by Se824o+ 6, RuBe 110 o; 26e Re341e, RuBe1 o; -r474+aB
)ro8e,ure. $t requires that the information for this crime must contain the followin!
averments#
5Sec. $. Su#ciency o complaint or inormation.= A complaint or information is su-cient if
it states the name of the accused' the desi!nation of the o(ense !iven by the statuteD 26e
a821 or o74114o+1 8o7<Ba4+e, o; a1 8o+1242u24+5 26e oPe+1eD the name of the
o(ended partyD the approimate date of the commission of the o(enseD and the place
where the o(ense was committed.
Ihen the o(ense was committed by more than one person' all of them shall be included
in the complaint or information.6
The complaint or information to be su-cient must state the name of the accused'
desi!nate the o(ense !iven by statute' 12a2e 26e a821 or o74114o+1 8o+1242u24+5 26e
oPe+1e' the name of the o(ended party' the approimate date of the commission of the
o(ense and the place where the o(ense was committed.
"ur rulin!s have lon! settled the issue on how the acts or omissions constitutin! the
o(ense should be made in order to meet the standard of su-ciency. Thus' the o(ense
must be desi!nated by its name !iven by statute or by reference to the section or
subsection of the statute punishin! it.
0./1
The information must also state the acts or
omissions constitutin! the o(ense' and specify its qualifyin! and a!!ravatin!
circumstances.
0.%1
The acts or omissions complained of must be alle!ed in such form as is
su-cient to enable a person of common understandin! to know what o(ense is intended
to be char!ed' and enable the court to pronounce proper *ud!ment.
0.?1
No information for a
crime will be su-cient if it does not accurately and clearly alle!e the elements of the
crime char!ed.
0..1
Every element of the o(ense must be stated in the information.
0.:1
Ihat
facts and circumstances are necessary to be included therein must be determined by
reference to the defnitions and essentials of the specifed crimes.
0.91
The requirement of
alle!in! the elements of a crime in the information is to inform the accused of the nature
of the accusation a!ainst him so as to enable him to suitably prepare his defense. The
presumption is that the accused has no independent knowled!e of the facts that
constitute the o(ense.
0.31
!o re42era2e, ?6e+ 8o+1<4ra8y 41 86ar5e, a1 a 8r47e, 26e a82 o; 8o+1<4r4+5
a+, aBB 26e eBe7e+21 o; 1a4, 8r47e 7u12 be 1e2 ;or26 4+ 26e 8o7<Ba4+2 or
4+;or7a24o+. For eample' the crime of 5conspiracy to commit treason6 is committed
when' in time of war' two or more persons come to an a!reement to levy war a!ainst the
Government or to adhere to the enemies and to !ive them aid or comfort' and decide to
commit it.
0.41
The elements of this crime are# B/C that the o(ender owes alle!iance to the
Government of the +hilippinesD B%C that there is a war in which the +hilippines is involvedD
B?C that the o(ender and other person or persons come to an a!reement to# BaC levy war
a!ainst the !overnment' or BbC adhere to the enemies' to !ive them aid and comfortD and
B.C that the o(ender and other person or persons decide to carry out the
a!reement. These elements must be alle!ed in the information.
!6e reJu4re7e+21 o+ 1u:84e+8y o; aBBe5a24o+1 are ,4Pere+2 ?6e+ 8o+1<4ra8y
41 +o2 86ar5e, a1 a 8r47e 4+ 421eB; bu2 o+By a1 26e 7o,e o; 8o774224+5 26e 8r47e
a1 4+ 26e 8a1e a2 bar. There is Be11 +e8e1142y of recitin! its particularities in the
$nformation be8au1e 8o+1<4ra8y 41 +o2 26e 5ra3a7e+ o; 26e oPe+1e 86ar5e,. The
conspiracy is si!nifcant only because it chan!es the criminal liability of all the accused in
the conspiracy and makes them answerable as co=principals re!ardless of the de!ree of
their participation in the crime.
0.J1
The liability of the conspirators is collective and each
participant will be equally responsible for the acts of others'
0:&1
for the act of one is the act
J
of all.
0:/1
$n )eo<Be 3. Ou42Bo+5,
0:%1
we ruled on how 8o+1<4ra8y a1 26e 7o,e o;
8o774224+5 26e oPe+1e should be alle!ed in the $nformation' viz#
5 . $n embodyin! the essential elements of the crime char!ed' the information must
set forth the facts and circumstances that have a bearin! on the culpability and liability of
the accused so that the accused can properly prepare for and undertake his defense. "ne
such fact or circumstance in a complaint a!ainst two or more accused persons is that of
conspiracy. <uite unlike the omission of an ordinary recital of fact which' if not ecepted
from or ob*ected to durin! trial' may be corrected or supplied by competent proof' a+
aBBe5a24o+, 6o?e3er, o; 8o+1<4ra8y, or o+e 26a2 ?ouB, 47<u2e 8r474+aB B4ab4B42y 2o
a+ a88u1e, ;or 26e a82 o; a+o26er or o26er1, 41 4+,41<e+1abBe 4+ or,er 2o 6oB,
1u86 <er1o+, re5ar,Be11 o; 26e +a2ure a+, eN2e+2 o; 641 o?+ <ar2484<a24o+,
eJuaBBy 5u4B2y ?426 26e o26er or o26er1 4+ 26e 8o774114o+ o; 26e 8r47e. Ihere
conspiracy eists and can ri!htly be appreciated' the individual acts done to perpetrate
the felony becomes of secondary importance' the act of one bein! imputable to all the
others B+eople v. $lano' ?/? 2C,A ..%C. @erily' an accused must know from the information
whether he faces a criminal responsibility not only for his acts but also for the acts of his
co=accused as well.
" 8o+1<4ra8y 4+,4827e+2 +ee, +o2, o; 8our1e, a3er aBB 26e 8o7<o+e+21 o;
8o+1<4ra8y or aBBe5e aBB 26e ,e2a4B1 26ereo;, B4>e 26e <ar2 26a2 ea86 o; 26e <ar24e1
26ere4+ 6a3e <er;or7e,, 26e e34,e+8e <ro34+5 26e 8o77o+ ,e145+ or 26e ;a821
8o++e824+5 aBB 26e a88u1e, ?426 o+e a+o26er 4+ 26e ?eb o; 26e
8o+1<4ra8y. Ne426er 41 42 +e8e11ary 2o ,e18r4be 8o+1<4ra8y ?426 26e 1a7e ,e5ree
o; <ar248uBar42y reJu4re, 4+ ,e18r4b4+5 a 1ub12a+243e oPe+1e. I2 41 e+ou56 26a2
26e 4+,4827e+2 8o+2a4+1 a 12a2e7e+2 o; ;a821 reB4e, u<o+ 2o be 8o+1242u243e o;
26e oPe+1e 4+ or,4+ary a+, 8o+841e Ba+5ua5e, ?426 a1 7u86 8er2a4+2y a1 26e
+a2ure o; 26e 8a1e ?4BB a,742, 4+ a 7a++er 26a2 8a+ e+abBe a <er1o+ o; 8o77o+
u+,er12a+,4+5 2o >+o? ?6a2 41 4+2e+,e,, a+, ?426 1u86 <re8414o+ 26a2 26e
a88u1e, 7ay <Bea, 641 a8Ju422aB or 8o+34824o+ 2o a 1ub1eJue+2 4+,4827e+2 ba1e,
o+ 26e 1a7e ;a821. $t is said' !enerally' that an indictment may be held su-cient 5if it
follows the words of the statute and reasonably informs the accused of the character of
the o(ense he is char!ed with conspirin! to commit' or' followin! the lan!ua!e of the
statute' contains a su-cient statement of an overt act to e(ect the ob*ect of the
conspiracy' or alle!es both the conspiracy and the contemplated crime in the lan!ua!e of
the respective statutes defnin! them B/:A C.).2. 4.%=4..C.


. Conspiracy arises when two or more persons come to an a!reement concernin! the
commission of a felony and decide to commit it. Conspiracy comes to life at the very
instant the plotters a!ree' epressly or impliedly' to commit the felony and forthwith to
actually pursue it. 'er4By, 26e 4+;or7a24o+ 7u12 12a2e 26a2 26e a88u1e, 6a3e
8o+;e,era2e, 2o 8o7742 26e 8r47e or 26a2 26ere 6a1 bee+ a 8o77u+42y o;
,e145+, a u+42y o; <ur<o1e or a+ a5ree7e+2 2o 8o7742 26e ;eBo+y a7o+5 26e
a88u1e,. Su86 a+ aBBe5a24o+, 4+ 26e ab1e+8e o; 26e u1uaB u1a5e o; 26e ?or,1
8o+1<4re, or 8o+;e,era2e, or 26e <6ra1e a824+5 4+ 8o+1<4ra8y, 7u12 a<2By
a<<ear 4+ 26e 4+;or7a24o+ 4+ 26e ;or7 o; ,eD+4243e a821 8o+1242u24+5
8o+1<4ra8y. I+ D+e, 26e a5ree7e+2 2o 8o7742 26e 8r47e, 26e u+42y o; <ur<o1e or
26e 8o77u+42y o; ,e145+ a7o+5 26e a88u1e, 7u12 be 8o+3eye, 1u86 a1 either by
26e u1e o; 26e 2er7 8o+1<4re or 421 ,er43a243e1 a+, 1y+o+y71 or by aBBe5a24o+1
o; ba148 ;a821 8o+1242u24+5 26e 8o+1<4ra8y. -o+1<4ra8y 7u12 be aBBe5e,, +o2 =u12
4+;erre,, 4+ 26e 4+;or7a24o+ o+ ?6486 ba141 a+ a88u1e, 8a+ a<2By e+2er 641 <Bea,
a 7a22er 26a2 41 +o2 2o be 8o+;u1e, ?426 or B4>e+e, 2o 26e a,eJua8y o; e34,e+8e
26a2 7ay be reJu4re, 2o <ro3e 42. $n establishin! conspiracy when properly alle!ed'
the evidence to support it need not necessarily be shown by direct proof but may
be inerred from shown acts and conduct of the accused.

.6
"5a4+, ;oBBo?4+5 26e 12rea7 o; our o?+ =ur41<ru,e+8e, 42 41 e+ou56 2o aBBe5e
8o+1<4ra8y a1 a 7o,e 4+ 26e 8o774114o+ o; a+ oPe+1e 4+ e426er o; 26e ;oBBo?4+5
7a++er0 B/C by use of the word 5conspire'6 or its derivatives or synonyms' such as
/&
confederate' connive' collude' etcD
0:?1
or B%C by alle!ations of basic facts constitutin! the
conspiracy in a manner that a person of common understandin! would know what is
intended' and with such precision as would enable the accused to competently enter a
plea to a subsequent indictment based on the same facts.
0:.1
!6e aBBe5a24o+ o; 8o+1<4ra8y 4+ 26e 4+;or7a24o+ 7u12 +o2 be 8o+;u1e, ?426
26e a,eJua8y o; e34,e+8e 26a2 7ay be reJu4re, 2o <ro3e 42. A conspiracy is proved
by evidence of actual cooperationD of acts indicative of an a!reement' a common purpose
or desi!n' a concerted action or concurrence of sentiments to commit the felony and
actually pursue it.
0::1
A statement of this evidence is not necessary in the information.
I+ 26e 8a1e a2 bar, 26e 1e8o+, <ara5ra<6 o; 26e "7e+,e, I+;or7a24o+ aBBe5e,
4+ 5e+eraB 2er71 6o? 26e a88u1e, 8o77422e, 26e 8r47e o; <Bu+,er. $t used the
words 5in connivanceNconspiracy with his co=accused.6 Followin! the rulin! in Ou42Bo+5'
these words are su-cient to alle!e the conspiracy of the accused with the former
+resident in committin! the crime of plunder.
'.
Ie now come to petitioner;s plea for bail. "n Au!ust /.' %&&%' durin! the pendency
of the instant petition before this Court' petitioner fled with respondent 2andi!anbayan an
5Ar!ent 2econd 7otion for Bail for 7edical ,easons.6 +etitioner prayed that he be allowed
to post bail due to his serious medical condition which is life=threatenin! to him if he !oes
back to his place of detention. The motion was opposed by respondent "mbudsman to
which petitioner replied.
For three days' i.e.' on 2eptember .' %& and %3' %&&/' respondent 2andi!anbayan
conducted hearin!s on the motion for bail. 8r. ,oberto @. Anastacio' a cardiolo!ist of
the 7akati 7edical Center' testifed as sole witness for petitioner.
"n 8ecember /4' %&&/' petitioner fled with the 2upreme Court an 5Ar!ent 7otion for
EarlyN$mmediate ,esolution of )ose E)in!!oy; Estrada;s +etition for Bail on
7edicalNHumanitarian Considerations.6 +etitioner reiterated the motion for bail he earlier
fled with respondent 2andi!anbayan.
0:91
"n the same day' we issued a ,esolution referrin! the motion to respondent
2andi!anbayan for resolution and requirin! said court to make a report' not later
than 4#?& in the mornin! of 8ecember %/' %&&/.
"n 8ecember %/' %&&/' respondent court submitted its ,eport. Attached to the ,eport
was its ,esolution dated 8ecember %&' %&&/denyin! petitioner;s motion for bail for 5lack
of factual basis.6
0:31
Basin! its fndin! on the earlier testimony of 8r. Anastacio' the
2andi!anbayan found that petitioner 5failed to submit su-cient evidence to convince the
court that the medical condition of the accused requires that he be confned at home and
for that purpose that he be allowed to post bail.6
0:41
The crime of plunder is punished by ,.A. No. 3&4&' as amended by 2ection /% of ,.A.
No. 39:J' with the penalty of reclusion perpetuato death. Ander our ,ules' o(enses
punishable by death' reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment are non=bailable when the
evidence of !uilt is stron!' to %it#
5Sec. 7. Capital ofense or an ofense punisha&le &y reclusion perpetua or lie
imprisonment, not &aila&le. P No person char!ed with a capital o(ense' or an o(ense
punishable by reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment' shall be admitted to bail when
evidence of !uilt is stron!' re!ardless of the sta!e of the criminal prosecution.6
0:J1
2ection 3' ,ule //. of the ,evised ,ules of Criminal +rocedure is based on 2ection /?'
Article $$$ of the /J43 Constitution which reads#
5Sec. 13. All persons' ecept those char!ed with o(enses punishable by reclusion
perpetua when evidence of !uilt is stron!' shall' before conviction be bailable by su-cient
sureties' or be released on reco!niLance as may be provided by law. The ri!ht to bail shall
not be impaired even when the privile!e of the writ of ha&eas corpus is
suspended. Ecessive bail shall not be required.6
//
The constitutional mandate makes the !rant or denial of bail in capital o(enses hin!e
on the issue of ?6e26er or +o2 26e e34,e+8e o; 5u4B2 o; 26e a88u1e, 41 12ro+5. This
requires that the trial court conduct bail hearin!s wherein both the prosecution and the
defense are a(orded su-cient opportunity to present their respective evidence. The
burden of proof lies with the prosecution to show stron! evidence of !uilt.
09&1
This Court is not in a position to !rant bail to the petitioner as the matter requires
evidentiary hearin! that should be conducted by the 2andi!anbayan. The hearin!s on
which respondent court based its ,esolution of 8ecember %&' %&&/ involved the reception
of medical evidence only and which evidence was !iven in 2eptember %&&/' fve months
a!o. The records do not show that evidence on petitioner;s !uilt was presented before the
lower court.
Apon proper motion of the petitioner' respondent 2andi!anbayan should conduct
hearin!s to determine if the evidence of petitioner;s !uilt is stron! as to warrant the
!rantin! of bail to petitioner.
IN 'IEH H&EREOF, the petition is dismissed for failure to show that the respondent
2andi!anbayan acted without or in ecess of *urisdiction or with !rave abuse of discretion
amountin! to lack of *urisdiction.
SO OR#ERE#.
/%