“x x x.
COMMENT/OPPOSITION
(To: “Motion
For Issuance of
Hold
Departure Order”)
THE
ACCUSED, by counsel, respectfully moves for the denial and/or the expunction of the pending “Motion For Issuance of Hold Departure Order” filed by the Private
Prosecutor, for the reason that First-Level
Courts in the country, such as this Honorable Court, have no legal power and
authority to issue Hold Departure Orders (HDOs) under existing Supreme Court
resolutions, administrative orders, and/or circulars.
For instance in the case of “RE: HOLD-DEPARTURE ORDER
ISSUED BY JUDGE AGUSTIN T. SARDIDO, MTC, KORONADAL,
SOUTH COTABATO IN CRIMINAL CASE NO. 19418, A.M. No. 01-9-245-MTC, December 5,
2001”, the Supreme Court, citing Circular No. 39-97, held
that “hold-departure orders shall be
issued only in criminal cases within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Regional
Trial Courts”; that “clearly then, Municipal Trial Courts do not have
jurisdiction to issue hold-departure orders”, and that “it was an error on the
part of MTC Judge Sardido to have issued one in the instant case”.
The
resolution of the Supreme Court in the said case is reproduced en toto
hereinbelow, thus:
RE: HOLD-DEPARTURE ORDER
ISSUED BY JUDGE AGUSTIN T. SARDIDO, MTC, KORONADAL,
SOUTH COTABATO IN CRIMINAL CASE NO. 19418, A.M. No. 01-9-245-MTC, December 5,
2001.
RESOLUTION
KAPUNAN, J.:
This
refers to an undated indorsement of Honorable Hernando B. Perez, Secretary of
the Department of Justice, concerning a hold-departure order issued by Judge
Agustin T. Sardido, Municipal Trial Court of Koronadal, South Cotabato in
Criminal Case No. 19418 titled "People of the Philippines v. Jinky A.
Besorio" for estafa. The said judge granted the motion of the private
complainants and ordered the Bureau of Immigration to cause the issuance of a
hold-departure order against the accused.
When
required to comment on the matter, herein judge explained that at the time he
issued the hold-departure order, he was unaware that he had no authority to do
so. He further explained that he issued the questioned order based on his
belief that he was authorized to do so.
Deputy
Court Administrator Jose P. Perez, after finding that MTC Judge Sardido erred
in issuing the subject hold-departure order, recommended that he be (a)
reprimanded with a warning that a repetition of the same or similar acts in the
future will be dealt with more severely, and (b) advised to keep himself
abreast with the latest issuances of the Court.
The
recommendation of the Deputy Court Administrator is well-taken.
Circular
No. 39-97 provides that hold-departure orders shall be issued only in
criminal cases within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Regional Trial Courts.
Clearly then, Municipal Trial Courts do not have jurisdiction to issue
hold-departure orders and it was an error on the part of MTC Judge Sardido to
have issued one in the instant case.
To
ensure the strict implementation of the Circular, the following guidelines.
were promulgated:
In
order to avoid the indiscriminate issuance of Hold-Departure Orders resulting
in inconvenience to the parties affected, the same being tantamount to an
infringement on the right and liberty of an individual to travel and to ensure
that the Hold-Departure Orders which are issued contain complete and accurate
information, the following guidelines are hereby promulgated:
1.
Hold-Departure Orders shall be issued only in criminal cases within the
exclusive jurisdiction of the Regional Trial Courts;
2.
The Regional Trial Courts issuing the Hold-Departure Order shall furnish the
Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA) and the Bureau of Immigration (BI) of the
Department of Justice with a copy each of the Hold-Departure Order issued
within twenty-hour (24) hours from the time of issuance and through the fastest
available means of transmittal;
3.
The Hold-Departure Order shall contain the following information:
a.
The complete name (including the middle name), the date and place of birth and
the place of last residence of the person against whom a Hold-Departure Order
has been issued or whose departure from the country has been enjoined;
b.
The complete title and the docket number of the case in which the
Hold-Departure Order was issued;
c.
The specific nature of the case; and
d.
The date of the Hold-Departure Order.
If
available, a recent photograph of the person against whom a Hold-Departure
Order has been issued or whose departure from the country has been enjoined
should also be included.
4.
Whenever (a) the accused has been acquitted; (b) the case has been dismissed,
the judgment of acquittal or the order of dismissal shall include therein the
cancellation of the Hold-Departure Order issued. The courts concerned shall
furnish the Department of Foreign Affairs and the Bureau of Immigration with a
copy each of the judgment of acquittal promulgated or the order of dismissal
twenty-four (24) hours from the time of promulgation/issuance and through the
fastest available means of transmittal.
All
Regional Trial Courts which have furnished the Department of Foreign Affairs
with their respective lists of active Hold-Departure Orders are hereby directed
to conduct an inventory of the Hold-Departure Orders included in the said lists
and inform the government agencies concerned of the status of the Orders
involved.
Canon
3, Rule 3.01 of the Code of Judicial Conduct exhorts judges to be
"faithful to the law and maintain professional competence." The
Court, in exercising administrative supervision of all lower courts, has time
and again reminded the members of the bench to exert due diligence in keeping
abreast with the developments in law and jurisprudence. Besides, Circular No.
39-97 is not a new circular. It was circularized in 1997 and has been the
subject of numerous cases before the Court. Herein judge, therefore, cannot be
excused for his infraction.
In
recent cases1 involving similar violations, this Court imposed
the penalty of reprimand on erring judges. Hence, the same penalty should be
imposed on Judge Sardido.
WHEREFORE, Judge Agustin T. Sardido is
hereby REPRIMANDED with the warning that a repetition of the
same or similar acts in the future will be dealt with more severely.1âwphi1.nêt
SO ORDERED.
X x x.”
WHEREFORE, in the interest of justice, it is respectfully prayed
that the private prosecutor’s pending “Motion for Issuance of Hold Departure
Order” be denied and/or expunged outright from the record.
Las Pinas City, June 16, 2014.
LASERNA
CUEVA-MERCADER
LAW OFFICES
Counsel for Both Accused
Unit 15, Star Arcade, CV Starr Ave.
Philamlife Village, Las Pinas City 1740
Tel. Nos. 8725443 & 8462539
X x x.”
