Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 435 views

    Quarto Vs Ombudsman Digest (Updated)

    Uploaded by

    angelsu04
    The DPWH investigated alleged anomalous transactions involving vehicle repairs from March to December 2001 that resulted in P143 million in losses. Charges were filed against high-ranking DPWH officials and employees, including the petitioner and respondents. The respondents admitted irregularities occurred and offered to testify against others involved in exchange for immunity from prosecution. The court ruled that immunity statutes can satisfy the state's interest in securing testimony while respecting an individual's right against self-incrimination by protecting witnesses from prosecution.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Quarto Vs Ombudsman Digest (Updated)

    Uploaded by

    angelsu04
    435 views1 page
    The DPWH investigated alleged anomalous transactions involving vehicle repairs from March to December 2001 that resulted in P143 million in losses. Charges were filed against high-ranking DPWH officials and employees, including the petitioner and respondents. The respondents admitted irregularities occurred and offered to testify against others involved in exchange for immunity from prosecution. The court ruled that immunity statutes can satisfy the state's interest in securing testimony while respecting an individual's right against self-incrimination by protecting witnesses from prosecution.

    Original Description:

    Consti 2

    Original Title

    Quarto vs Ombudsman Digest (Updated)

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The DPWH investigated alleged anomalous transactions involving vehicle repairs from March to December 2001 that resulted in P143 million in losses. Charges were filed against high-ranking DPWH officials and employees, including the petitioner and respondents. The respondents admitted irregularities occurred and offered to testify against others involved in exchange for immunity from prosecution. The court ruled that immunity statutes can satisfy the state's interest in securing testimony while respecting an individual's right against self-incrimination by protecting witnesses from prosecution.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    435 views1 page

    Quarto Vs Ombudsman Digest (Updated)

    Uploaded by

    angelsu04
    The DPWH investigated alleged anomalous transactions involving vehicle repairs from March to December 2001 that resulted in P143 million in losses. Charges were filed against high-ranking DPWH officials and employees, including the petitioner and respondents. The respondents admitted irregularities occurred and offered to testify against others involved in exchange for immunity from prosecution. The court ruled that immunity statutes can satisfy the state's interest in securing testimony while respecting an individual's right against self-incrimination by protecting witnesses from prosecution.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    Quarto vs Ombudsman

    G.R. No. 169042,


    October 5, 2011
    Facts: On January 9, 2002, DPWH Secretary Simeon Datumanong created a committee to investigate
    alleged anomalous transactions involving the repairs and/or purchase of spare parts of DPWH service
    vehicles in 2001. The committee designated the DPWH Internal Audit Service (IAS) to conduct the actual
    investigation. In the course of the investigation, the DPWH-IAS discovered that from March to December
    2001, several emergency repairs and/or purchase of spare parts of hundreds of DPWH service vehicles,
    which were approved and paid by the government, did not actually take place, resulting in government
    losses of approximately P143 million for this ten-month period alone. Charges of Plunder, Money
    Laundering, Malversation, and violations of RA No. 3019 and the Administrative Code were filed before
    the Office of the Ombudsman against several high-ranking DPWH officials and employees including
    the petitioner, the respondents, and other private individuals who purportedly benefited from the
    anomalous transactions. The petitioner denied the allegations against him, claiming that he merely relied
    on his subordinates when he signed the job orders and the inspection reports. In contrast, the respondents
    admitted the existence of irregularities in the repairs and/or purchase of spare parts of DPWH service
    vehicles, and offered to testify and to provide evidence against the DPWH officials and employees
    involved in the anomaly in exchange for their immunity from prosecution.
    Issue: Do immunity statutes satisfy state interest while respecting the individuals constitutional right
    against self-incrimination?
    Ruling: Yes. Immunity statutes seek a rational accommodation between the imperatives of an individuals
    constitutional right against self-incrimination (considered the fount from which all statutes granting
    immunity emanate) and the legitimate governmental interest in securing testimony. By voluntarily
    offering to give information on the commission of a crime and to testify against the culprits, a person
    opens himself to investigation and prosecution if he himself had participated in the criminal act. To secure
    his testimony without exposing him to the risk of prosecution, the law recognizes that the witness can be
    given immunity from prosecution. In this manner, the state interest is satisfied while respecting the
    individuals constitutional right against self-incrimination.

    You might also like