5. The Sandiganbayan (PD 1606, as amended)

Appellate jurisdiction

The Sandiganbayan has exclusive appellate jurisdiction over RTC decisions in cases covered by Section 4 of P.D. No. 1606, as amended. RTC original jurisdiction includes cases involving officials outside the Sandiganbayan’s position-based coverage and, under R.A. No. 10660, specified cases where the amount of damage to the government or bribery does not exceed ₱1 million.

The Sandiganbayan has exclusive appellate jurisdiction over RTC judgments, resolutions, and orders in cases covered by Section 4 of P.D. No. 1606, as amended, whether the RTC exercised original or appellate jurisdiction. Pursuant to R.A. 8249, the Sandiganbayan shall exercise exclusive appellate jurisdiction over final judgments, resolutions or orders of regional trial courts whether in the exercise of their own original jurisdiction or of their appellate jurisdictions as herein provided. (Filomena v. People, G.R. 188630, 2011).

While it is the Ombudsman who has the full discretion to determine whether or not a criminal case should be filed in the Sandiganbayan, once the case has been filed with said court, it is the Sandiganbayan, and no longer the Ombudsman, which has full control of the case so much so that the information may not be dismissed without the approval of said court. In this case, the Sandiganbayan ordered the Special Prosecutor to conduct a reinvestigation and subsequently granted his motion to withdraw the informations, after finding no probable cause against the latter on reinvestigation. The Sandiganbayan thus gave its approval to the withdrawal of the informations and ordered the dismissal of the cases. Since no appeal was taken by the Special Prosecutor from the order of dismissal within the reglementary period, the same had become final and executory. (City Government of Tuguegarao v. Ting, G.R. 192435·36, 2011).

In all cases elevated to the Sandiganbayan and from the Sandiganbayan to the Supreme Court, the office of the Ombudsman through its Special Prosecutor, shall represent the People, except in cases filed pursuant to Executive Order Nos. 1, 2, 14 and 14-A. A private complainant in a criminal case before the Sandiganbayan is allowed to appeal only the civil aspect of the criminal case after its dismissal by said court. (City Government of Tuguegarao v. Ting, G.R. ·J 92435-36, Sepl.14, 2011).

The special civil action of certiorari is not the proper remedy to challenge a judgment conviction rendered by the Sandiganbayan. Petitioner should have filed a petition for review on certiorari under Rule 45. Pursuant to Section 7 of Presidential Decree No. 1606, as amended by Republic Act No. 8249, decisions and final order of the Sandiganbayan shall be appealable to the Supreme Court by petition for review on Certiorari raising pure questions of law in accordance with Rule 45 of the Rules of Court. (Icdang v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 185960, January 25, 2012).

The Sandiganbayan has the authority to order the preventive suspension of an incumbent Senator charged with violation of the provisions of RA 3019 or the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act. (Santiago vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. 128055,2001).

Updated: Covered GOCC presidents, directors, trustees, and managers fall within Sandiganbayan jurisdiction regardless of how the GOCC was incorporated (Poro Exim Corporation v. Ombudsman, G.R. No. 256060-61, 27 June 2023).