The Sandiganbayan has the jurisdiction to hear and try the case against

Senator de Lima.
- It is clear from the information itself that the commission of the crime charged was
due to de Lima taking advantage of her public office.
o Note that the RA 10660 or the Sandiganbayan Act provides in Section 4(b)
that the Sandiganbayan shall exercise exclusive jurisdiction over offenses or
felonies, whether simple or complexed with other crimes committed by the
public officials and employees mentioned in Section 4(a) in relation to their
office.
Section 4(a)(2): Members of Congress and officials thereof classified as
SG 27 and higher under the Compensation and Position Classification
Act of 1989.
- While it is mentioned under RA 9165, Section 90, that jurisdiction over dangerous
drugs cases shall be exclusively exercised by RTCs, it must be noted that the
Sandiganbayan Act is a specific law which covers, among others, offenses
committed by officials with SG 27 and above, such as then-Secretary of Justice de
Lima, whose salary was SG 31 at the time of the commission of the offense.
o It is an elementary rule in statutory construction that a special rule shall
prevail over a general one, in cases of conflict between the two; the special
rule must be considered an exception to the general rule provided for.

Senator de Lima may file a motion to quash at this stage of the proceedings.
- As a general rule, the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure (Rule 117, Section 1)
provides that a motion to quash must be filed before an accused enters his plea.
o As held in Cruz, Jr. v CA and People v Nitafan, it is then true that a person
who does not move to quash a complaint or information until he has pleaded
is deemed to have waived all objections.
- However, Section 9 of the same Rule has provided for the recognized exceptions in
relation to the general rule.
o Section 9 provides that a motion to quash could be filed even after the
entering of plea, if the same is grounded on:
The failure to charge an offense
Lack of jurisdiction over the offense charged
Extinguishment of criminal action or liability
Jeopardy
- In the present case before us, one of the exceptions is clearly applicable, since this
court (RTC) clearly has no jurisdiction over the offense charged.
o The crime being committed by reason of her public office, and her salary
being above SG 27, the Sandiganbayan clearly should have jurisdiction over
the offense.
- In Marcos v Sandiganbayan, the Court ruled that it is not improper to file a motion
to quash even after arraignment, provided that it falls on the exceptions provided
for by the Rules on Criminal Procedure.

Senator de Lima is allowed to post bail in the present case.

- The UDHR and the ICCPR both ensure the fundamental human rights as well as the
value of the dignity of every person.
o Since one of the fundamental rights protected includes the fundamental right
to liberty, the right to bail should be granted as it falls under one of the
aspects of security.
- With the present case not falling within the jurisdiction of the RTC, but rather with
the Sandiganbayan, the right to bail must be granted to Senator de Lima for her
temporary liberty pending the issue of jurisdiction.
o Enrile v Sandiganbayan, citing Leviste v CA: In this manner, bail acts as a
reconciling mechanism to accommodate both the accuseds interest in her
provisional liberty before or during the trial, and the societys interest in
assuring the accuseds presence at trial.