UNDERSTANDING INQUEST

II. INQUEST, MEANING AND CONCEPT

INQUEST PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION

- Shall be terminated within - Shall be terminated within 60 days

the period under Art. 125 of
Revised Penal Code - drug cases within 30 days

If there is a waiver of Art.

125, shall be terminated
within 15 days

Reinvestigation
Motion to be filed after the accused learns that the Information has been
filed, within 5 days from knowledge (Rule 112, Sec. 6, par. 3 of the Rules of
Court)

INQUEST REINVESTIGATION

Resolution of the prosecutor Resolution of the prosecutor is subject

determines whether or not the to the final approval of the Court
detained person arrested without
warrant should be charged in
Court

Office of the Ombudsman – shall conduct inquest of complaints for crimes

cognizable by the Sandiganbayan. If crimes committed outside NCJR, may be
conducted by the City/Provincial Prosecutor who are authorized to approve
and file the Information before the respective RTC Clerk of Courts
(Ombudsman Adm. Order No. 11-94)

If during Inquest, there is an allegation that the case is agrarian in nature or

an agrarian dispute and one of them is a farmer, farmworker or tenant, or
involves the implementation of the CARP, the inquest prosecutor shall
immediately refer the case to the PARO and release the respondent for further
preliminary investigation. The allegations must be written, made under oath
and the party making such allegations must sign the Minutes of Inquest.

May the COMELEC officials conduct inquest proceedings of election cases?

Under Sec. 43 of R.A. No. 9369 is quoted as follows:
“The Commission shall, through its duly authorized legal officers,
have the power, concurrent with other prosecuting arms of the government, to
conduct preliminary investigation of all election offenses punishable under this
Code, and prosecute the same.”

Hence, the COMELEC’s power is limited merely to preliminary

investigations of election offenses. Only prosecutors can conduct inquest
proceedings of election offenses.
 III. ROLE OF THE PAO AND DSWD DURING INQUEST
A lawyer from the Public Attorney’s Office (PAO) may be called upon to assist
an accused who wants to execute the waiver under Art. 125 of the RPC.
(Sections 2 & 3 of R.A. 7438 “An act defining certain rights of person arrested,
detained, or under custodial investigation as well as the duties of the arresting,
detaining and investigating officers, etc.”)

Art. IV, Section 4, PAO Office Order No. 137, Series of 2010 (Also mentioned in
PAO Memorandum Circular No. 07, Series of 2007) provides legal assistance
extended by PAO to a CICL during custodial investigation:

“Section 4. During Custodial Investigation –

4.1 Representation of the CICL – Upon information of the taking of a
CICL into custody, the Public Attorney shall, at all times, be present while the
CICL is under investigation by the authorities, and shall assist in the
protection of his/her rights under Section 2 of R.A. No. 7438.

4.2 Remedy in case of violation – In case of any violation by the

investigating officer in the conduct of the custodial investigation, the Public
Attorney shall immediately make proper manifestation before the concerned
office to which the erring investigating officer belongs, and/or file the
appropriate civil, criminal or administrative action against the said officer.”

Section 19 on preliminary investigation also requires that the CICL be

assisted by a private lawyer or if none, a lawyer from the PAO.

As for inquest proceedings involving a CICL, it bears to note that under

Sec. 51 of the Prosecutor’s Manual on Handling Child-Related cases, only a
child charged with an offense punishable by more than six (6) years of
imprisonment may be subject of an inquest proceedings.

Art. IV, Section 5 of PAO Office Order No. 137, Series of 2010 (see also
PAO Memorandum Circular No. 07, Series of 2007) provides the legal assistance
of the PAO to a CICL during inquest proceedings and preliminary investigation.

Section 5. During Inquest Proceedings and Preliminary Investigation

5.1 Claim of torture or ill-treatment. Action to be taken – During the
conduct of inquest proceedings or preliminary investigation, where an
allegation of torture or ill-treatment was made at the time of the arrest or
detention of the CICL, the Public Attorney shall immediately make the proper
manifestation and recommend the investigation of the same to the prosecutor.

5.2 Responsibility during inquest proceedings or preliminary investigation

- In the event that diversion procedures fall, and the prosecutor conducts
inquest proceedings or preliminary investigation because: (a) the CICL does
not qualify for diversion; (b) when the CICL, his/her parents or guardians do
not agree to diversion x x x (c) when the prosecutor, x x x, determines
that diversion is not appropriate for the CICL, the Public Attorney, upon having
been informed of the service of the subpoena and the accompanying
documents, shall:

i. Obtain copy of the records and other documents relevant to the

case;
 ii. Prepare the counter-affidavit and affidavit/s of his/her
witness/es, and other supporting documents;
iii. Obtain a copy of the birth certificate of the CICL from the Civil
Registrar of the locality where the child was born, or the NSO;
iv. Assist in the preparation of the Waiver required under Art. 125
of the RPC, when the circumstances surrounding the case and the defense of
the CICL justify the conduct of a preliminary investigation;
v. Make immediate and constant verification from the handling
prosecutor of the status of the case, in order that it be given preferential
attention in its resolution;
vi. Ensure the observance of procedural requirements during the
investigation;
vii. Appear as counsel for the CICL during clarificatory conference,
if necessary, to ensure the protection of his rights.

5.3 Dismissal of the case in the absence of criminal responsibility -

When proper, the Public Attorney shall move for the dismissal of the case for
which the CICL is undergoing inquest proceedings or preliminary investigation,
under Sections 6 & 58 of RA No. 9344.

ROLE OF DSWD in Inquest Proceedings:

Discernment is preliminarily determined by a social worker and finally by
the court in case of a child charged with a non-serious offense. In all other
cases, discernment is determined by the court.
In cases of warrantless arrest involving a CICL who is above 15 but below
18 years of age, and within 8 hours from arrest, the law enforcement concerned
shall turn over custody of the child to the Local Social Welfare Development
Officer (LSWDO) for the determination by the latter of the presence or absence
of discernment of the child.
The subsequent custody of the LSWDO of the child shall not be
considered a detention. A fortiori, in cases of warrantless arrests involving a
CICL, Art. 125 of the RPC finds no application.
Where the law enforcement officer erroneously files cases involving CICL
for inquest investigation, the case shall be dismissed without prejudice to its
re-filing, if so warranted.
Where the case of a CICL above 15 but below 18 years of age is not
proper for inquest because the penalty for the offense is not more than 6 years,
the said case may only be re-filed for regular preliminary investigation.
Otherwise, if the case is proper for inquest because penalty for the offense
exceeds 6 years, it may be revived for inquest proceedings.

The finding of discernment or lack of it on the part of the LSWDO is

merely preliminary. An appeal is allowed by the complainant/offended party in
case the LSWDO finds the absence of discernment. Such appeal is to be made
before the prosecutor within 15 days from notice, otherwise, the finding attains
finality and the CICL shall be subjected to an intervention program.
Nonetheless, the finding of lack of discernment is deemed to be automatically
appealed in cases punishable with reclusion perpetua or higher.
The offended party/complainant must file a notice to contest the finding
of lack of discernment with the LSWDO within 5 days, otherwise, the LSWDO
shall cause the release of the child from custody.

R.A. 10630 amending RA 9344

Sec. 7. Section 22 of RA 9344 is hereby amended to read as follows:
 “SEC. 22. Duties During Initial Investigation - The law enforcement
officer shall, in his/her investigation, determine where the case involving the
child in conflict with the law should be referred.

“The taking of the statement of the child shall be conducted in the

presence of the following:
(1) child’s counsel of choice or in the absence thereof, a lawyer
from the Public Attorney’s Office;
(2) the child’s parents, guardian, or nearest relative, as the case
may be; and
(3) the local social welfare and development officer.
In the absence of the child’s parents, guardian, or nearest relative,
and the local social welfare and development officer, the investigation, shall be
conducted in the presence of a representative on an NGO, religious group, or
member of the BCPC.”

IV. INQUEST COVERAGE, COMMENCEMENTD AND

PROCEDURE
What offenses are covered by inquest proceedings?

a. All offenses where the penalty prescribed by law is at least 4 years, 2

months and 1 day.
b. Where the respondent is a minor, the inquest investigation shall cover
only offenses punishable by imprisonment of not less than 6 years and one
day, provided that no inquest investigation shall be conducted unless the child-
respondent shall have first undergone the requisite proceedings before the
LSWDO pursuant to the Rules on Inquest Respect to CICL.

Cases punishable by imprisonment of not more than 6 years may be

refiled not for inquest but for regular preliminary investigation. On the other
hand, cases punishable by imprisonment of more than 6 years may still be
revived for inquest proceedings.

Are criminal cases covered by the Rules on Summary Procedure proper for
Inquest Proceedings?
No. Rule 112, Section 6 of the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure
expressly provides that inquest is applicable only in cases wherein a person is
lawfully arrested without warrant involving an offense that requires preliminary
investigation. Cases covered by the Rules on Summary Procedure do not
require preliminary investigation and there not proper for inquest.

In inquest cases for crimes covered by the Rules on Summary Procedure, the
inquest prosecutor shall recommend the release of the arrested person and
prepare the Information for filing with the court.

Is Violation of RA 9262 proper for Inquest Proceedings?

Yes, as long as the offender commits any of the punishable acts provided
under RA 9262, Section 5 and he is arrested in accordance with Rule 113,
Section 5 of the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure.
The complaint / referral documents must first be submitted to the inquest
officer by the law enforcement authorities before commencing the inquest
proceedings.

Inquest proceedings is commenced only upon receipt of the complaint / referral

by the Inquest Officer from the law enforcement officers and upon instruction
by the City or Provincial Prosecutor to render an inquest duty. (Disregard of
this basic rule amounts to serious misconduct, grave abuse of authority and
gross ignorance of the well-established rules which is subject to disciplinary
action.)

When is inquest proper?

The SC held that inquest proceedings are proper only when the accused
has been lawfully arrested without warrant.

What is the initial duty of the inquest prosecutor?

The inquest prosecutor must initially determine if the warrantless arrest
is lawful. It should fall within the ambit of Sec. 5, pars. (a) and (b), Rule 113 of
the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure.

If the inquest prosecutor determines that the warrantless arrest is not lawful,
what is the proper course of action?
The inquest prosecutor should no longer proceed with the inquest
proceedings. Instead, he should recommend the release of the detained
person, note down the disposition on the referral slip, prepare a minute
resolution indicating the reason for the action he took and forward the records
to the City or Provincial Prosecutor for proper action.

What will happen in case the recommendation for the release of the detained
person of the inquest prosecutor is approved by the City or Provincial
Prosecutor, but the evidence warrants the conduct of a regular preliminary
investigation?
In this case, the order of release shall be served on the officer having
custody of said detainee and shall direct the said officer to serve upon the
detainee the subpoena or notice of preliminary investigation, together with the
copies of the charge sheet or complaint, affidavit or sworn statements of the
complainant and his witnesses and other supporting evidence.

If the Chief State Prosecutor or City/Provincial Prosecutor disagrees with the

recommendation of the inquest prosecutor, the decision of the former prevails.

REMEDIES BEFORE THE FILING OF COMPLAINT OR INFORMATION IN

COURT:

The accelerated process of inquest, owing to its summary nature and the
attendant risk of running against Art. 125, ends with either the prompt filing of
an information in court or the immediate release of the arrested person.
Notably, the rules on inquest do not provide for a motion for reconsideration.

In cases subject of inquest, the private party should first avail of a preliminary
investigation or reinvestigation, if any, before elevating the matter to the DOJ
Secretary.

In case the inquest proceedings yield no probable cause, the private

complainant may pursue the case through the regular course of a preliminary
investigation.
REMEDIES ONCE A COMPLAINT OR INFORMATION IS FILED IN COURT.
The accused may ask for a preliminary investigation within 5 days from
the time he learns of its filing.
The private complainant can move for reinvestigation.

All criminal actions commenced by a complaint or information shall be

prosecuted under the direction and control of the private prosecutor.
In cases where the private complainant is allowed to intervene by counsel in
the criminal action, and is granted the authority to prosecute, the private
complainant, by counsel and with the conformity of the public prosecutor, can
file a motion for reinvestigation.

The submission of a counter-affidavit by the arrested person is not required

nor allowed in inquest cases, unless the detained person would demand the
exercise of his right to a preliminary investigation in which case he has to
execute a waiver of the provisions of Art. 125 of the RPC.

V. WARRANTLESS ARREST AND SEIZURE