G.R. Nos. 233061-62 - THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, VS. THE HONORABLE FOURTH DIVISION, SANDIGANBAYAN AND RAUL Y. DESEMBRANA.D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library

Ruling

WHEREFORE, premises considered, the undersigned maintain that respondent Raul Desembrano y Yazon be held liable for the crime of Direct Bribery defined and penalized under Article 210 of the Revised Penal Code. Further, it is hereby recommended that an information for violation of Section 3(e) of Republic Act No. 3019 is hereto attached be filed in lieu of the Information docketed as SB-14-CRM-0427, for violation of Section 7 (d) in relation to Section 11 of Republic Act No. 6713. Consequently, the Information docketed as SB-14-CRM-0427 is hereby recommended withdrawn. [10] Private respondent filed his Motion for Reconsideration dated November 9, 2015 with the OSP. [11] On November 10, 2015, the OSP submitted the foregoing Resolution with the Sandiganbayan. As narrated by the Sandiganbayan, the following series of events transpired: On November 10, 2015 , in compliance with the July 8, 2015 Resolution of the Court, the prosecution filed it's a "Compliance with Omnibus Motion (for Withdrawal of Information docketed as SB-14-CRM-0427) and for the Lifting of the Resolution, dated July 8, 2015," appending thereto the Resolution of the Office of the Ombudsman dated September 29, 2015 as approved by the Honorable Ombudsman on October 21, 2015. On November 24, 2015 , the Court directed accused Desembrana to file his comment on the prosecution's motion. Accordingly, on December 3, 2015, the accused filed a "Comment (On the Compliance with Omnibus Motion filed by the Office of the Special Prosecutor dated November 10, 2015)," praying for the Court to hold in abeyance any action on the prosecution's motion pending final resolution of the motion for reconsideration he filed on November 9, 2015 with respect to the September 29, 2015 Resolution of the [Office of the Special Prosecutor]. Subsequent to this, the prosecution filed its "Reply (to Comment, dated December 2, 2015)" on January 12, 2016 , while the accused filed a "Rejoinder (To Reply, dated January 8, 2016 filed by the Office of the Special Prosecutor)" on January 27, 2016 . On December 5, 2016 , in the interest of justice, the Court resolved to admit the prosecution's Reply as well as the accused's Rejoinder and submitted the prosecution's Compliance with Omnibus Motion for resolution. On January 20, 2017 , the Court issued a Resolution sustaining the position taken by the accused and holding in abeyance the resolution of the prosecution's "Compliance with Omnibus Motion (for Withdrawal of Information docketed as SB-14-CRM-0427 and for the Lifting of the Resolution, dated July 8, 2015)" until after the final resolution of accused Desembrana's motion for reconsideration before the Office of the Ombudsman. It then directed the prosecution to inform the Court once the reconsideration sought by the accused has been resolved. [12] In its Resolution dated January 20, 2017, the Sandiganbayan also directed the OSP to give an update on any incident pending with the Office of the Ombudsman relevant to the ca