In the
issuance of a warrant of arrest against a person criminally charged in court, the following vital
matters need to be kept in mind, to wit:
"First . . . the determination of [the existence of] probable cause by
the prosecutor is for a purpose different from that which is to be made by the
judge. Whether there is reasonable ground to believe that the accused is
guilty of the offense charged and should be held for trial is what the
prosecutor passes upon. The judge, on the other hand, determines whether a
warrant of arrest should be issued against the accused, i.e.
whether there is a necessity for placing him under immediate custody in order
not to frustrate the ends of justice. .
.
"Second, since their objectives are
different, the judge
cannot rely solely on the report of the prosecutor in finding probable cause to
justify the issuance of a warrant of arrest. Obviously and
understandably, the contents of the prosecutor's report will support his own
conclusion that there is reason to charge the accused of an offense and hold
him for trial. However, the
judge must decide independently. Hence, he must have supporting evidence, other than
the prosecutor's bare report, upon which to legally sustain his own
findings on the existence (or nonexistence) of probable cause to issue an
arrest order. This responsibility of determining personally and
independently the existence or nonexistence of probable cause is lodged in him
by no less than the most basic law of the land. Parenthetically, the prosecutor
could ease the burden of the judge and speed up the litigation process by
forwarding to the latter not only the information and his bare resolution
finding probable cause, but also so much of the records and the evidence on
hand as to enable His Honor to make his personal and separate judicial finding
on whether to issue a warrant of arrest.
"Lastly, it is not required that the complete
or entire records of the case during the preliminary investigation be
submitted to and examined by the judge. . . What is required, rather, is that
the judge must have sufficient supporting documents (such as the
complaint, affidavits, counter-affidavits, sworn statements of witnesses or
transcripts of stenographic notes, if any) upon which to make his independent
judgment or, at the very least, upon which to verify the findings of the
prosecutor as to the existence of probable cause. The point is: he cannot rely solely and
entirely on the prosecutor's recommendation. . ." (Ho vs. People, G.R. No. 106632, October 9, 1997)
No comments:
Post a Comment