University of the Philippines COLLEGE OF LAW Constitutional Law 1 | Prof. Alberto Muyot CASE DIGEST for F2021 Topic
Administrative powers of the Judiciary Branch: Order a change of venue or place of trial to avoid miscarriage of justice
Doctrine Case No. Case Name
Ponente
G.R. No. L-41313 / 6 November 1975 ALIPIO MONDIGUING and ANDRES DUNUAN, petitioners vs. HON. FRANCISCO MEN ABAD, as Judge of the Court of First Instance of Ifugao; PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES; MARIANO PACTIW, alias Bugbug; DULMOG ABLUYEN and ANGEINA ABLUYEN, respondents AQUINO, J. (Second Division) RELEVANT FACTS
Petitioners Alipio Mondiguing and Andres Dunuan, two of the ten defendants accused of double murder, frustrated murder and attempted murder in the Ifugao Court of First Instance, sought a transfer of the venue of the case to Baguio City or Quezon City, on the ground that they could not expect a fair and impartial trial in said court, because respondent Judge Francisco Men Abad is a protégée of the Ifugao Provincial Governor Gualberto Lumauig, one of the victims mentioned in the incident.
They further claimed that their witnesses are afraid to testify for fear of harassment and reprisals, and that their lives and those of their witnesses and lawyers are in grave danger in Ifugao because of the tensions and antagonisms spawned by the case and political rivalry between the Governor’s faction and that to which the petitioners belong. In fact, in an election case involving the Governor, the Supreme Court disqualified respondent Judge, who was found to be a political leader of, and was recommended to his present position by the governor and his brother. ISSUE
W/N Mondiguing’s plea for a change of venue is justified RATIO DECIDENDI
ISSUE W/N Mondiguing’s plea for a change of venue is justified
RATIO YES. The Court “possesses inherent power and jurisdiction to decree that the trial and disposition of a case pending in a Court of First Instance be transferred to another Court of First Instance within the same district whenever the interest of justice and truth so demand, and there are serious and weighty reasons to believe that a trial by the court that originally had jurisdiction over the case would not result in a fair and impartial trial and lead to a miscarriage of justice.” In the present case, it was shown that the accused might be liquidated by his enemies in the place where the trial was originally scheduled to be held.
University of the Philippines COLLEGE OF LAW Constitutional Law 1 | Prof. Alberto Muyot CASE DIGEST for F2021
RULING WHEREFORE, the petition of Alipio Mondiguing for the transfer of the venue of Criminal Case No. 140 of the Court of First Instance of Ifugao is granted. The said case should be transferred to the Circuit Criminal Court of the Second Judicial District so that it may be heard in Baguio City.
NOTES Grounds for transfer of venue: A change of the place of trial in criminal cases should not be granted for whimsical or flimsy reasons. The interests of the public require that, to secure the best results and effects in the punishment of crime, it is necessary to prosecute and punish the criminal in the very place as near as may be, where he committed his crime. RELEVANT CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISION (1973): Art. 10. The Supreme Court shall have the following powers: xxx Sec 5 (4). Order a change of venue or place of trial to avoid a miscarriage of justice. COUNTERPART IN THE 1987 CONSTITUTION: Art. 8. The Supreme Court shall have the following powers: xxx Sec 5 (4). Order a change of venue or place of trial to avoid a miscarriage of justice.