JANUARY 11, 2017 Je Rey

Share this:

G.R. No. 213847, Aug. 18, 2015

Juan Ponce Enrile

vs.

Sandiganbayan ( 3rd division ) and People of the Philippines

Facts:

Year 2014, Sen. Enrile was charged with plunder before the Sandiganbayan for their
alleged involvement in the diversion and misuse of appropriation under the PDAF.
When his warrant was issued, Sen. Enrile voluntarily surrendered to the CIDG and
was later conned and detained at the PNP General Hospital, he then led a motion
to x bail where he argued that:

1. He should be allowed to post bail as a matter of right;

2. Although charged with plunder his penalty would only be reclusion temporal
considering that there are two mitigating circumstances, his voluntary
surrender and that he is already at the age of 90;
3. That he is not a ight risk and his medical condition must be seriously
considered.

The Sandiganbayan however, denied his motion on the grounds that:

1. He is charged with a capital o ense;

2. That it is premature for the Court to x the amount of his bail because the
prosecution have not yet presented its evidences.

Sen. Enrile then led a certiorari before the Supreme Court.

Issue:

Whether or not the Sandiganbayan acted with grave abuse of discretion amounting to
lack or excess of jurisdiction for denying his motion to x bail?

Ruling:
Yes, the Supreme Court held that the Sandiganbayan arbitrarily ignored the objective
of bail and unwarrantedly disregarded Sen. Enriles fragile health and advanced age.
Bail is a matter right and is safeguarded by the constitution, its purpose is to ensure
the personal appearance of the accused during trial or whenever the court requires
and at the same time recognizing the guarantee of due process which is the
presumption of his innocence until proven guilty. The Supreme Court further
explained that Bail for the provisional liberty of the accused, regardless of the crime
charged should be allowed independently of the merits charged, provided his
continued incarceration is injurious to his health and endanger his life. Hence, the
Sandiganbayan failed to observe that if Sen. Enrile be granted the right to bail it will
enable him to have his medical condition be properly addressed and attended, which
will then enable him to attend trial therefore achieving the true purpose of bail.

Viewed using Just Read