GREGORIO B.

HONASAN II
vs.
THE PANEL OF INVESTIGATING PROSECUTORS OF THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

FACTS:

On July 27, 2003, Capt. Gerardo Gambala, for and in behalf of the military rebels occupying
Oakwood, made a public statement aired on national television, stating their withdrawal of
support to the chain of command of the AFP and the Government of President Gloria Macapagal
Arroyo and that they are willing to risk their lives in order to achieve the National Recovery
Agenda of Sen. Honasan, which they believe is the only program that would solve the ills of
society. In subsequent to this, CIDG PNP/P Director Eduardo Matillano filed a complaint with
the Department of Justice against Senator Gringo Honasan II alleging that he committed the
crime of coup d’etat. When the Panel of Investigating Prosecutors of the Department of Justice
issued a subpoena for preliminary investigation, Sen. Honasan filed a Motion for Clarification
questioning DOJ’s jurisdiction over the case, asserting that the imputed acts he allegedly
committed is in relation to his public office, that it is the Office of the Ombudsman who has the
jurisdiction to conduct the corresponding preliminary investigation and if that should be filed in
court the Sandiganbayan shall legally take cognizance of the case considering that he belongs to
the group of public officials with Salary Grade 31.

Later on, Sen. Honasan was directed by the Panel of Investigating Prosecutors of the Department
of Justice to file a counter affidavit, but instead of filing the same he filed a petition for certiorari
under Rule 65 of the Rules of Court against the DOJ Panel and its members, CIDG-PNP-
P/Director Eduardo Matillano and Ombudsman Simeon V. Marcelo before the Supreme Court,
attributing grave abuse of discretion on the part of the DOJ Panel in issuing the aforequoted
Order on the ground that the DOJ has no jurisdiction to conduct the preliminary investigation.

ISSUE:

Whether or not the Department of Justice Panel of Investigators has jurisdiction to conduct
preliminary investigation over the charge of coup d'etat against Sen. Honasan?

HELD:

Yes, because under Section 15 (1) of Republic Act No. 6770 the Ombudsman has primary
jurisdiction over cases cognizable by the Sandiganbayan so that it may take over at any stage
from any investigatory agency of the government, the investigation of such cases. The authority
of the Ombudsman to investigate offenses involving public officers or employees is not
exclusive but is concurrent with other similarly authorized agencies of the government. Such
investigatory agencies referred to include the PCGG and the provincial and city prosecutors and
their assistants, the state prosecutors and the judges of the municipal trial courts and municipal
circuit trial court.

In other words the provision of the law has opened up the authority to conduct preliminary
investigation of offenses cognizable by the Sandiganbayan to all investigatory agencies of the
government including DOJ Panel investigators which is duly authorized to conduct a preliminary
investigation as provided under Section 2, Rule 112 of the 1985 Rules of Criminal Procedure
with the only qualification that the Ombudsman may take over at any stage of such investigation
in the exercise of his primary jurisdiction. Also, the fact that Sen. Honasan holds a Salary Grade
31 position does not by itself remove from the DOJ Panel Investigators the authority to
investigate the charge of coup d'etat against him