Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 1K views

    02 People v. Henry Go - G.R. 168539

    Uploaded by

    Denise
    1. Henry Go filed a motion to quash criminal charges against him for allegedly entering into a grossly disadvantageous contract for the government and conspiring with then-Secretary Arturo Enrile. 2. The Sandiganbayan ruled that while Enrile's death extinguished his criminal liability, it did not remove the basis for charging Go with conspiracy. A private individual can be charged alone for conspiring with a public official even if that official can no longer be prosecuted due to death. 3. The court also ruled that the Sandiganbayan has jurisdiction over Go as a private individual charged with conspiring with a public official, Secretary Enrile, despite Enrile's death prior to charges being

    Copyright:

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

    02 People v. Henry Go - G.R. 168539

    Uploaded by

    Denise
    1K views2 pages
    1. Henry Go filed a motion to quash criminal charges against him for allegedly entering into a grossly disadvantageous contract for the government and conspiring with then-Secretary Arturo Enrile. 2. The Sandiganbayan ruled that while Enrile's death extinguished his criminal liability, it did not remove the basis for charging Go with conspiracy. A private individual can be charged alone for conspiring with a public official even if that official can no longer be prosecuted due to death. 3. The court also ruled that the Sandiganbayan has jurisdiction over Go as a private individual charged with conspiring with a public official, Secretary Enrile, despite Enrile's death prior to charges being

    Original Description:

    People v Henry

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    1. Henry Go filed a motion to quash criminal charges against him for allegedly entering into a grossly disadvantageous contract for the government and conspiring with then-Secretary Arturo Enrile. 2. The Sandiganbayan ruled that while Enrile's death extinguished his criminal liability, it did not remove the basis for charging Go with conspiracy. A private individual can be charged alone for conspiring with a public official even if that official can no longer be prosecuted due to death. 3. The court also ruled that the Sandiganbayan has jurisdiction over Go as a private individual charged with conspiring with a public official, Secretary Enrile, despite Enrile's death prior to charges being

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    1K views2 pages

    02 People v. Henry Go - G.R. 168539

    Uploaded by

    Denise
    1. Henry Go filed a motion to quash criminal charges against him for allegedly entering into a grossly disadvantageous contract for the government and conspiring with then-Secretary Arturo Enrile. 2. The Sandiganbayan ruled that while Enrile's death extinguished his criminal liability, it did not remove the basis for charging Go with conspiracy. A private individual can be charged alone for conspiring with a public official even if that official can no longer be prosecuted due to death. 3. The court also ruled that the Sandiganbayan has jurisdiction over Go as a private individual charged with conspiring with a public official, Secretary Enrile, despite Enrile's death prior to charges being

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    People of the Philippines v. Henry T.

    Go
    G.R. 168539
    March 25, 2014
    Facts:

    An information was filed against Henry Go for alleged violation of entering into a contract which is
    grossly and manifestly disadvantageous to the government and for having supposedly conspired with then
    DOTC Secretary Arturo Enrile.

    Henry Go filed a Motion to Quash the Information filed against him on the ground that the operative facts
    adduced therein do not constitute an offense under Section 3(g) of R.A. 3019. Respondent, citing the
    show cause order of the SB, also contended that, independently of the deceased Secretary Enrile, the
    public officer with whom he was alleged to have conspired, respondent, who is not a public officer nor
    was capacitated by any official authority as a government agent, may not be prosecuted for violation of
    Section 3(g) of R.A. 3019.

    Issue:
    1. Is Henry Go liable if death of Enrile in a crime extinguishes the Liability of his co-conspirators?

    2. Does Sandiganbayan have jurisdiction over a private person who was alleged to have conspired
    with a public official and that public official has died prior to the filing of the information?

    Ruling:
    1. Yes. It is true that by reason of death, there is no longer any public officer with whom
    respondent can be charged for violation of R.A. 3019. It does not mean, however, that the
    allegation of conspiracy between them can no longer be proved or that their alleged
    conspiracy is already expunged. The only thing extinguished by the death of public
    officer is his criminal liability. His death did not extinguish the crime nor did it remove
    the basis of the charge of conspiracy between him and private respondent. The law,
    however, does not require that such person must, in all instances, be indicted together
    with the public officer. If circumstances exist where the public officer may no longer be
    charged in court, as in the present case where the public officer has already died, the
    private person may be indicted alone.

    2. The SB is a special criminal court which has exclusive original jurisdiction in all cases involving
    violations of R.A. 3019 committed by certain public officers, as enumerated in P.D. 1606 as
    amended by R.A. 8249. This includes private individuals who are charged as co-principals,
    accomplices or accessories with the said public officers. In the instant case, respondent is being
    charged for violation of Section 3(g) of R.A. 3019, in conspiracy with then Secretary Enrile.
    Ideally, under the law, both respondent and Secretary Enrile should have been charged before and
    tried jointly by the Sandiganbayan. However, by reason of the death of the latter, this can no
    longer be done. Nonetheless, for reasons already discussed, it does not follow that the SB is
    already divested of its jurisdiction over the person of its jurisdiction over the person of and the
    case involving herein respondent.

    You might also like