Kailan may “K” ang akusado na magpiyansa?

ni Atty. Persida Rueda-Acosta - @Magtanong Kay Attorney | January 10, 2022

Nakapaloob sa ating Saligang Batas, partikular ng Artikulo 3, Seksiyon 13, Lipon ng mga Karapatan, ang mga sumusunod na probisyon:

“SEK. 13. Ang lahat ng mga tao, maliban sa mga nahahabla sa mga paglabag na pinarusahan ng reclusion perpetua kapag matibay ang ebidensiya ng pagkakasala, bago mahatulan ay dapat mapiyansahan ng sapat na piyador o maaaring palayain sa bisa ng panagot ayon sa maaaring itadhana ng batas. Hindi dapat bawalan ang karapatan sa piyansa kahit suspendido ang prebilehiyo ng writ of habeas corpus. Hindi dapat kailanganin ang malabis na piyansa.”

Sa kasong pinamagatang Enrile versus Sandiganbayan (G.R. No. 213847, August 18, 2015) na isinulat ng dating Punong Mahistrado Lucas P. Bersamin, sinabi ng Korte Suprema na:

“Bail protects the right of the accused to due process and to be presumed innocent. In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall be presumed innocent until the contrary is proved.

The presumption of innocence is rooted in the guarantee of due process, and is safeguarded by the constitutional right to be released on bail, and further binds the court to wait until after trial to impose any punishment on the accused.

It is worthy to note that bail is not granted to prevent the accused from committing additional crimes. The purpose of bail is to guarantee the appearance of the accused at the trial, or whenever so required by the trial court. The amount of bail should be high enough to assure the presence of the accused when so required, but it should be no higher than is reasonably calculated to fulfill this purpose. Thus, bail acts as a reconciling mechanism to accommodate both the accused’s interest in his provisional liberty before or during the trial, and the society’s interest in assuring the accused’s presence at trial.”

Kung ating pagninilayan ang nakasaad na probisyon sa itaas na binigyang-interpretasyon ng Korte Suprema, ang karapatan ng akusado na makapagpiyansa ay isang uri ng proteksiyon ng akusado laban sa walang makatarungang paglilitis. Ito ay sang-ayon sa sinasabi ng ating Saligang Batas na ang inaakusahan ay itinuturing na inosente hanggang sa ang kanyang pagkakasala ay napatunayan ng prosekusyon sa pamamagitan ng ebidensiya. Ang turing na inosente ang akusado ay nanggagaling sa kanyang karapatan na mabigyan ng patas na pagdinig at paglilitis at atasan ang hukuman na tapusin ang paglilitis bago patawan ng parusa ang akusado.

Ang layunin ng piyansa ay upang siguraduhing ang akusado ay sisipot sa mga araw ng kanyang paglilitis. Kaya naman, ang halaga ng piyansa ay mataas para pasiguraduhan ang presensiya ng akusado sa kanyang pagdinig at kung kinakailangan ang kanyang presensiya ng hukuman. Ito ay nagsisilbing mekanismo upang mapangalagaan ang parehong interes ng akusado na siya ay manatiling malaya habang dinidinig ang kanyang kaso at ng estado na naroon ang akusado sa araw ng kanyang pagdinig.

Subalit ang pagpapaunlak ng husgado ng aplikasyon para ang akusado ay makapagpiyansa ay depende kung gaano kabigat ang krimen na inaakusa sa kanya. Ito ay sa kadahilanang hindi sa lahat ng pagkakataon ay maaaring magpiyansa ang akusado. Nasusulat sa Saligang Batas na kapag ang akusado ay nahahabla sa mga paglabag na pinarurusahan ng reclusion perpetua at matibay ang ebidensiya ng pagkakasala, ang aplikasyon para magawaran ng karapatang magpiyansa ay sang-ayon sa diskresyon ng hukuman. Ito ay sinabi rin sa parehas na kaso ng dating Senador Juan Ponce Enrile na nabanggit sa itaas kung saan sinabi ng Korte Suprema na:

“Bail may be granted as a matter of right or of discretion

The right to bail is expressly afforded by Section 13, Article III (Bill of Rights) of the Constitution, viz.:

x x x All persons, except those charged with offenses punishable by reclusion perpetua when evidence of guilt is strong, shall, before conviction, be bailable by sufficient sureties, or be released on recognizance as may be provided by law. The right to bail shall not be impaired even when the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus is suspended. Excessive bail shall not be required.

This constitutional provision is repeated in Section 7, Rule 114 of the Rules of Court, as follows:

Section 7. Capital offense or an offense punishable by reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment, not bailable. — No person charged with a capital offense, or an offense punishable by reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment, shall be admitted to bail when evidence of guilt is strong, regardless of the stage of the criminal prosecution.

A capital offense in the context of the rule refers to an offense that, under the law existing at the time of its commission and the application for admission to bail, may be punished with death.

The general rule is, therefore, that any person, before being convicted of any criminal offense, shall be bailable, unless he is charged with a capital offense, or with an offense punishable with reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment, and the evidence of his guilt is strong. Hence, from the moment he is placed under arrest, or is detained or restrained by the officers of the law, he can claim the guarantee of his provisional liberty under the Bill of Rights, and he retains his right to bail unless he is charged with a capital offense, or with an offense punishable with reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment, and the evidence of his guilt is strong. Once it has been established that the evidence of guilt is strong, no right to bail shall be recognized.”