Republic of the Philippines

REGIONAL TRIAL COURT

National Capital Judicial Region
Branch

AAA,
Petitioner,

-versus- Civil Case No. 11111

For: Nullity of Marriage
BBB
Respondent.
x-----------------x

MANIFESTATION AND MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION

COMES NOW, Petitioner, through the undersigned counsel,

unto this Honorable Court, most respectfully states that:

1. On September 26, 2017, petitioner received a copy of the

Order dated September 4, 2017 stating that this case was dismissed
for failure of the parties to take positive steps in having this case heard.
Furthermore, the Order stated that the Public Prosecutor failed to
conduct a preliminary investigation for the purpose of determining
whether collusion exists between the parties considering the failure of
the parties to appear in the investigation despite due notice.

2. Petitioner respectfully manifests that she and her

undersigned counsel had not received any notice, written or otherwise,
from the Public Prosecutor as to the date and time to appear in his
office for the said preliminary investigation. The undersigned counsel’s
office number as well as her mobile number are written on each and
every pleading/motion filed with this Honorable Court and copy
furnished to the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) and the Office of
the Prosecutor, but no notice was given by the latter.

3. Moreover, Petitioner and counsel had not received a copy

of the Manifestation filed by the Public Prosecutor.

4. Section 9 of A.M. No. 01-11-10-SC state that:

“Section 9. Investigation report of public prosecutor. - (1)

Within one month after receipt of the court order mentioned
in paragraph (3) of Section 8 above, the public prosecutor
shall submit a report to the court stating whether the parties
 are in collusion and serve copies thereof on the parties
and their respective counsels, if any.

“(2) If the public prosecutor finds that collusion exists, he

shall state the on the finding of collusion within ten days from
receipt of a copy of a report. The court shall set the report for
hearing and If convinced that the parties are in collusion, it
shall dismiss the petition.

“(3) If the public prosecutor reports that no collusion exists,

the court shall set the case for pre-trial. It shall be the duty of
the public prosecutor to appear for the State at the pre-trial.”

5. In the interest of justice, Petitioner is earnestly asking from

this Honorable Court to reconsider the said Order and allow the
Petitioner to have the opportunity to participate in the conduct of the
preliminary investigation on collusion between the Parties, after due
notice from the Office of the Prosecutor for the date and time for such
purpose.

6. To have this case dismissed on the basis that the parties

had not taken positive steps to have this case heard without receiving
any notice from the Office of the Prosecutor for the conduct of
preliminary investigation to have the case move forward would be
tantamount to lack of due process.

7. Furthermore, it is highly unfair for Petitioner to have this

case dismissed as she has waited long enough for this case to
progress. Apparently, Petitioner is very much interested to have this
case move forward as she, through counsel, filed a motion for the
issuance of an order to investigation collusion between the parties.

8. Moreover, the Public Prosecutor has the duty as stated in

the above-quoted rules to furnish copies of his/her report to the parties
which is not present in the instant case. Since the Prosecutor had only
submitted a Manifestation and not a Report on collusion, he also has
the duty to furnish copies of the same to the parties in order for the
latter to know any progress involving this case.

9. Assuming that the Public Prosecutor had in fact given

notice on the date and time for the Parties to appear in his/her office
and copies of the Manifestation he/she had filed with this Court, we are
respectfully requesting them to show competent proof that notice had
in fact been given and copies were in fact furnished.
 WHEREFORE, Petitioner respectfully prays that this Honorable
Court reconsider the Order dated September 4, 2017 and allow
Petitioner to participate in the preliminary investigation to be conducted
by the Public Prosecutor after due notice of time and date thereof.

Other just and equitable reliefs are likewise prayed for.

Makati City for ___________, October 6, 2017.