top of page

Motion to quash warrant, pinapayagan kahit walang pagsuko

  • Writer: BULGAR
    BULGAR
  • Mar 26
  • 2 min read

ni PAO Chief Persida Rueda-Acosta @Magtanong Kay Attorney | March 26, 2026



Magtanong Kay Atty. Persida Acosta


Dear Chief Acosta,


May maaari bang gawing legal na hakbang ang isang tao na mayroong warrant of arrest nang hindi kinakailangan na sumuko agad sa mga otoridad? – Dylan





Dear Dylan,


Sa mga kasong kriminal kung saan ang warrant of arrest ay inilalabas laban sa akusado, minamandato ng batas na dapat mayroon munang hurisdiksyon ang korte sa nasasakdal bago ito makalapit at magsagawa ng ligal na hakbang upang protektahan at ipagtanggol ang sarili. Ang korte ay nagkakaroon ng hurisdiksyon sa akusado kapag siya ay naaresto o kung siya ay boluntaryong sumuko sa mga awtoridad. Ibig bang sabihin nito ay walang maaaring gawin ang isang tao kundi ang sumuko kung sakali siya ay magkaroon ng nasabing warrant? Ito ang binigyang kasagutan ng Kataas-taasang Hukuman sa kaso na Allen C. Padua et al. vs. People of the Philippines, et al. (G.R. No. 220913, February 04, 2019, sa panulat ni Honorable Chief Justice Diosdado M. Peralta). 


The subject Omnibus Motion Ex-Abundante Ad Cautelam (to Quash Warrant of Arrest and to Fix Bail) is distinct and separate from an application for bail where custody of law is required. A motion to quash is a consequence of the fact that it is the very legality of the court process forcing the submission of the person of the accused that it is the very issue. Its prayer is precisely for the avoidance of the jurisdiction of the court which is also as an exception to the rule that filing pleadings seeking affirmative relief constitutes voluntary appearance, and the consequent submission of one's person to the jurisdiction of the court.


Thus, in filing the subject Omnibus Motion Ex-Abundante Ad Cautelam (to Quash Warrant of Arrest and to Fix Bail), petitioners are questioning the court's jurisdiction with precaution and praying that the court fix the amount of bail because they believed that their right to bail is a matter of right, by operation of law. They are not applying for bail, therefore, custody of the law, or personal appearance is not required. To emphasize, custody of the law is required before the court can act upon the application for bail but it is not required for the adjudication of other reliefs sought by the accused, as in the instant omnibus motion to quash warrant of arrest and to fix bail.


Mula sa nabanggit, ang kasagutan sa iyong katanungan ukol sa iligal na hakbang na maaaring gawin, na hindi kinakailangan ng pagsuko mula sa akusado, ay ang pagsasampa ng motion to quash warrant, na naglalayon na kuwestyunin ang hurisdiksyon ng korte at mapawalang-bisa ang inilabas na warrant of arrest. 


Sana ay nabigyan namin ng linaw ang iyong katanungan. Ang payong aming ibinigay ay base lamang sa mga impormasyon na iyong inilahad at maaaring magbago kung mababawasan o madaragdagan ang mga detalye ng iyong salaysay.


Maraming salamat sa iyong patuloy na pagtitiwala.


Comments


Disclaimer : The views and opinions expressed on this website or any comments found on any articles herein, are those of the authors or columnists alike, and do not necessarily reflect nor represent the views and opinions of the owner, the company, the management and the website.

RECOMMENDED
bottom of page