3. Who May Prosecute; Crimes that Cannot be Prosecuted De Oficio

Example of crimes where applicable:

• Falsification and use of falsified documents.
• False testimony and perjury.
• Indirect bribery.
• Death caused in a tumultuous affray (if it cannot be ascertained who actually killed the deceased)
• Inducing a minor to abandon his home.
• Adultery and Concubinage.
• Acts of lasciviousness.
• Consented abduction.

Under the Rules on Summary Procedure:

A complaint may be directly filed in the Municipal Trial Court, provided that in Metro Manila and in chartered cities, the criminal action may only be commenced by the filing of information, which means, only by the prosecutor, except when the offense cannot be prosecuted de oficio as in private crimes (Sec. 11, Revised Rules on Summary Procedure).

CRIMINAL ACTIONS, HOW INSTITUTED

WHO MAY FILE THEM, CRIMES THAT CANNOT BE PROSECUTED DE OFICIO

Persons Authorized to File an Information

• City or provincial prosecutor and their assistants
• Duly appointed special prosecutors (Rule 112, Sec. 4)

Exception: Offenses or crimes that cannot be prosecuted de oficio, such as:

• In private offenses (concubinage, adultery, seduction, abduction, acts of lasciviousness); and
• Defamations imputing any of the aforesaid offenses wherein a sworn written complaint is required in accordance with Section 5 of this Rule.

Prosecution in the Regional Trial Courts is always commenced by information.

A complaint containing private offenses and defamation must be filed by the offended party.

In case of variance between the complaint filed by the offended party and the information in crimes against chastity, the complaint controls. (People v. Oso, G.R. No. L-42571, 1935)

A defectively crafted information, such as that alleging multiple offenses in a single complaint or information transgresses Section 13, Rule 110 of the Rules of Court. The failure to make a timely objection to such defect however is deemed to be a waiver of the said objection. (People v. Santiago, G.R. No. 137281, 2001)

In upholding People v. Garfin, the court firmly instructs that the filing of an Information by an officer without the requisite authority to file the same constitutes a jurisdictional infirmity which cannot be cured by silence, waiver, acquiescence, or even by express consent. Hence, such ground may be raised at any stage of the proceedings (Quisay v. People G.R. No. 216920, 2016).

Private Prosecutor May Prosecute the Case in Case of:

• Heavy work schedule of the public prosecutor; or
• In the event of lack of public prosecutors (Rule 110, Sec. 5).

Appeal Procedure for Prosecution Before Court of Appeals and Supreme Court

General Rule: Only the SOLICITOR GENERAL may bring or defend actions in behalf of the Republic of the Philippines, or represent the People or State in criminal proceedings elevated before the Court of Appeals and the Supreme Court.

Exceptions:

• When the State and the offended party are deprived of due process because the prosecution is remiss in its duty to protect the interest of the State and the offended party; and
• When the private offended party questions the civil aspect of a decision of a lower court. (Heirs of Delgado v. Gonzalez, G.R. No. 184337, 2009)

The Solicitor General (SolGen) has control of appeals. It may abandon or discontinue the prosecution of the case in the exercise of its sound discretion and may even recommend the acquittal of an accused when it believes that the evidence does not warrant the accused’s conviction.

However, in all cases elevated to the Supreme Court by way of petition for review against decisions or final orders of the Sandiganbayan, it is the Office of the Ombudsman, through its Special Prosecutor, which shall represent the People of the Philippines pursuant to the second sentence, third to the last paragraph of Section 4 of P.D. No. 1606, as amended by R.A. No. 8249.

NOTE: A complaint for the prosecution of the crimes of adultery, concubinage, seduction, abduction, rape, and acts of lasciviousness under Art. 344 of the RPC only starts the prosecution of the crime and does not confer jurisdiction on the court to try the case.

Even when a complaint is defective for being signed and filed by the chief of police and not by the complainant, the court may still acquire jurisdiction over the case. The complaint required in Article 344 of the RPC is but a condition precedent to the exercise by the proper authorities of the power to prosecute the guilty parties. The complaint simply starts the prosecutory proceeding but does not confer jurisdiction in the court to try the case.

Article 344 is not determinative of the jurisdiction of courts over private offenses because the same is governed by the Judiciary Law and not the RPC. (People v. Yparraguire, G.R. No. 124391, 2000)

Who Can Give Pardon

• Adultery and Concubinage – Only the offended spouse not otherwise incapacitated, can validly extend the pardon or consent contemplated therein.
• Seduction, abduction and acts of lasciviousness
• The offended minor, if with sufficient discretion can validly pardon the accused by herself if she has no parents or where the accused is her own father and her mother is dead;
• The parents, grandparents or guardian of the offended minor, in that order, cannot extend a valid pardon in said crimes without the conformity of the offended party, even if the latter is a minor;
• If the offended woman is of age and not otherwise incapacitated, only she can extend a valid pardon.

General Rule: The pardon refers to pardon BEFORE filing of the criminal complaint in court. Pardon effected after the filing of the complaint in court does not prohibit the continuance of the prosecution of the offense (People v Dela Cerna, G.R. No. 136899-904, 2002)

Exception: In rape, marriage between the offender and the offended party would be effective as pardon even when the offender has already commenced serving his sentence.