The novel of Turkish writer, Orhan Pamuk, “The Museum of Innocence,” speaks of the main character’s (Kemal) almost single-minded and seemingly eternal patient pursuit of his one and only love. Caught between the conservative, Muslim-oriented culture of his country and the seeping influence of the West, Kemal was initially entangled between the woman he was supposed to marry, the well-educated, middle-class professional Sibel, and the girl he truly loved, the poor but young virgin (at first), Fusun.
Hoping to get the best of both worlds, he lost both. Sibel, though forgiving and willing to give their relationship a second chance, eventually gave up once she realized the futility of it all. Why, he couldn’t even make to get “it” up for her!
In the meantime, Fusun completely disappeared; only for Kemal to find out later that she married a young, ambitious but also poor, film director. They were living in her parents’ house. And the charade began. Finding Fusun, Kemal was unrelenting, visiting her and dining with them almost every night.
Being a distant relative of Fusun, Kemal was able to escape from the prying eyes of neighbors and friends, including Fusun’s clueless husband as well as her father. Her mother though, was completely aware.
Since the day Fusun left him, he got the habit of picking up, even filching, objects that had been, one way or another, used by or belonged to Fusun, including cigarette butts stained with her lipstick. Eventually, those sundry objects found their way to Kemal’s museum, the “Museum of Innocence.” A gesture, a symbol, of his eternal love for Fusun.
Somehow, the novel reminds me of Gabriel Garcia Marquez’s “Love in the Time of Cholera,” primarily owing to the main characters’ resilience, and at the same time, unyielding quest, for that one, true love.
So what happened to Kemal and Fusun? Did they live happily, ever after?
To answer that would be to spoil the unfolding of a love story, devoid of Hollywood-esque cliché and certainty. Go find a copy and read. :-)
Saturday, February 26, 2011
Friday, February 25, 2011
Foreign corporations doing business without a license in the Philippines: penal sanctions
The Civil Code of the Philippines provides that, “Ignorance of the law excuses no one from compliance therewith.” (Art. 3) Thus, for foreigners about to do business, or who are already doing business without a license, in the country, consider this as a gentle reminder: doing so is punishable by fines and/or imprisonment.
Under the Corporation Code: “No foreign corporation transacting business in the Philippines without a license, or its successors or assigns, shall be permitted to maintain or intervene in any action, suit or proceeding in any court or administrative agency of the Philippines; but such corporation may be sued or proceeded against before Philippine courts or administrative tribunals on any valid cause of action recognized under Philippine laws.” (Sec. 133)
The Supreme Court has categorically declared that, "the prohibition against doing business without first securing a license is now given penal sanction which is also applicable to other violations of the Corporation Code under the general provisions of Section 144 of the Code." (Home Insurance Co. vs. Eastern Shipping Lines, G.R. No. L-34382, 20 July 1983)
Sec. 144 of the Corporation Code states, thus – “Violations of any of the provisions of this Code or its amendments not otherwise specifically penalized therein shall be punished by a fine of not less than one thousand (P1,000.00) pesos but not more than ten thousand (P10,000.00) pesos or by imprisonment for not less than thirty (30) days but not more than five (5) years, or both, in the discretion of the court. If the violation is committed by a corporation, the same may, after notice and hearing, be dissolved in appropriate proceedings before the Securities and Exchange Commission: Provided, That such dissolution shall not preclude the institution of appropriate action against the director, trustee or officer of the corporation responsible for said violation: Provided, further, That nothing in this section shall be construed to repeal the other causes for dissolution of a corporation provided in this Code.”
But what does doing business actually mean? The determination of whether a foreign corporation is doing business in the Philippines must be based on the facts of each case. (Rimbunan Hijau Group of Companies vs. Oriental Wood Processing Corporation, G.R. No. 152228, 23 September 2005)
According to the Supreme Court, to be doing or "transacting business in the Philippines" for purposes of Section 133 of the Corporation Code, the foreign corporation must actually transact business in the Philippines, that is, perform specific business transactions within the Philippine territory on a continuing basis in its own name and for its own account. Actual transaction of business within the Philippine territory is an essential requisite for the Philippines to acquire jurisdiction over a foreign corporation and thus require the foreign corporation to secure a Philippine business license. If a foreign corporation does not transact such kind of business in the Philippines, even if it exports its products to the Philippines, the Philippines has no jurisdiction to require such foreign corporation to secure a Philippine business license. (B. Van Zuiden Bros., Ltd. vs. GTVL Marketing Industries, Inc., G.R. No. 147905, 28 May 2007)
Under the Corporation Code: “No foreign corporation transacting business in the Philippines without a license, or its successors or assigns, shall be permitted to maintain or intervene in any action, suit or proceeding in any court or administrative agency of the Philippines; but such corporation may be sued or proceeded against before Philippine courts or administrative tribunals on any valid cause of action recognized under Philippine laws.” (Sec. 133)
The Supreme Court has categorically declared that, "the prohibition against doing business without first securing a license is now given penal sanction which is also applicable to other violations of the Corporation Code under the general provisions of Section 144 of the Code." (Home Insurance Co. vs. Eastern Shipping Lines, G.R. No. L-34382, 20 July 1983)
Sec. 144 of the Corporation Code states, thus – “Violations of any of the provisions of this Code or its amendments not otherwise specifically penalized therein shall be punished by a fine of not less than one thousand (P1,000.00) pesos but not more than ten thousand (P10,000.00) pesos or by imprisonment for not less than thirty (30) days but not more than five (5) years, or both, in the discretion of the court. If the violation is committed by a corporation, the same may, after notice and hearing, be dissolved in appropriate proceedings before the Securities and Exchange Commission: Provided, That such dissolution shall not preclude the institution of appropriate action against the director, trustee or officer of the corporation responsible for said violation: Provided, further, That nothing in this section shall be construed to repeal the other causes for dissolution of a corporation provided in this Code.”
But what does doing business actually mean? The determination of whether a foreign corporation is doing business in the Philippines must be based on the facts of each case. (Rimbunan Hijau Group of Companies vs. Oriental Wood Processing Corporation, G.R. No. 152228, 23 September 2005)
According to the Supreme Court, to be doing or "transacting business in the Philippines" for purposes of Section 133 of the Corporation Code, the foreign corporation must actually transact business in the Philippines, that is, perform specific business transactions within the Philippine territory on a continuing basis in its own name and for its own account. Actual transaction of business within the Philippine territory is an essential requisite for the Philippines to acquire jurisdiction over a foreign corporation and thus require the foreign corporation to secure a Philippine business license. If a foreign corporation does not transact such kind of business in the Philippines, even if it exports its products to the Philippines, the Philippines has no jurisdiction to require such foreign corporation to secure a Philippine business license. (B. Van Zuiden Bros., Ltd. vs. GTVL Marketing Industries, Inc., G.R. No. 147905, 28 May 2007)
Saturday, February 19, 2011
Can one assign or transfer unpaid shares of stocks?
While the Corporation Code provides that, “No share of stock against which the corporation holds any unpaid claim shall be transferable on the books of the corporation,” a stockholder may, subject to the corporation’s by-laws, assign and/or transfer his shares to a third party.
However, the transfer of shares which are not yet fully paid shall only be valid between the parties, “until it is recorded in the books of the corporation showing the names of the parties to the transaction, the date of the transfer, the number of the certificate or certificates and the number of shares transferred.” (Section 63) The recording is conditioned on the payment of said unpaid subscription by the assignee or transferee. Taxes, including documentary stamp tax, must also be paid.
In two old cases the Supreme Court said that a corporation cannot release an original subscriber from paying for his shares without a valuable consideration (Philippine National Bank vs. Bitulok Sawmill, Inc., L-24177-85, June 29, 1968, 23 SCRA 1366) or without the unanimous consent of the stockholders (Lingayen Gulf Electric Power Co., Inc. vs. Baltazar, 93 Phil 404).
Related to this, in 2004, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) issued Memorandum Circular No. 17 which states that: “…the recording of the Deed of Assignment of Shares of Stocks with the SEC does not give rise to any legal benefit to the corporation or the persons involved.” It continues that SEC shall no longer accept such deeds for acknowledgment or recording purposes unless they are being submitted as supporting documents to applications for registration.
However, the transfer of shares which are not yet fully paid shall only be valid between the parties, “until it is recorded in the books of the corporation showing the names of the parties to the transaction, the date of the transfer, the number of the certificate or certificates and the number of shares transferred.” (Section 63) The recording is conditioned on the payment of said unpaid subscription by the assignee or transferee. Taxes, including documentary stamp tax, must also be paid.
In two old cases the Supreme Court said that a corporation cannot release an original subscriber from paying for his shares without a valuable consideration (Philippine National Bank vs. Bitulok Sawmill, Inc., L-24177-85, June 29, 1968, 23 SCRA 1366) or without the unanimous consent of the stockholders (Lingayen Gulf Electric Power Co., Inc. vs. Baltazar, 93 Phil 404).
Related to this, in 2004, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) issued Memorandum Circular No. 17 which states that: “…the recording of the Deed of Assignment of Shares of Stocks with the SEC does not give rise to any legal benefit to the corporation or the persons involved.” It continues that SEC shall no longer accept such deeds for acknowledgment or recording purposes unless they are being submitted as supporting documents to applications for registration.
Sunday, February 13, 2011
President Aquino’s quest for normalcy amidst stress and chaos
A daughter of a former president once described Malacanang Palace a “snake pit.” Journalist Raissa Robles in an article refers to the presidency’s “lonely isolation” despite the pomp and power that goes with it.
It is in Malacanang where rivals and factions constantly wage battle for the President’s attention and seek presidential favors. At the same time, it is the place where the fate of the nation and the plight of the people hang in the balance, and can be decided with just a single stroke of a pen.
I am a distant observer claiming no semblance of closeness with PNoy. Neither do I pretend to be an apologist for a particular behavior of his.
However, I do understand his occasional desire to get away from it all: the exhilaration of early morning drives to Tarlac in his Porsche by himself, the spontaneous need to chill out and to dine in a restaurant or to go “malling,” even to play video games with his nephews. If indeed, these reports were all true, these are signs of a normal human being impervious to the trappings of the most powerful position in the land. And not, as his critics say, the ways of a rich, spoiled brat.
It is the feeling of being free, of being anonymous, of being playful and child-like, even. It liberates him from the stuffy, showy and pretentious world of realpolitik; ironically, a world he did not actively seek initially but was unavoidably pushed to it in part by people’s discontent and in part by destiny.
Known as an introvert, PNoy listens more than he talks. He must be processing his thoughts internally. He must be considering the consequences of any decision that he makes seriously. Seemingly trapped in a gilded cage, surrounded by noisy sycophants and lobbyists, with the enormous and tremendous pressure of steering the country’s history in the right course, the quest to be alone heightens and becomes more evident.
Thus, unless and until signs are showing that he loses the sense of normalcy of an ordinary human being (i.e., when he becomes involved in corruption like his predecessors, when he suppresses basic human rights, when he ignores the rule of law and foments injustice), it behooves that we, the citizenry, ought to leave him alone. For then, he must be doing something right.
It is in Malacanang where rivals and factions constantly wage battle for the President’s attention and seek presidential favors. At the same time, it is the place where the fate of the nation and the plight of the people hang in the balance, and can be decided with just a single stroke of a pen.
I am a distant observer claiming no semblance of closeness with PNoy. Neither do I pretend to be an apologist for a particular behavior of his.
However, I do understand his occasional desire to get away from it all: the exhilaration of early morning drives to Tarlac in his Porsche by himself, the spontaneous need to chill out and to dine in a restaurant or to go “malling,” even to play video games with his nephews. If indeed, these reports were all true, these are signs of a normal human being impervious to the trappings of the most powerful position in the land. And not, as his critics say, the ways of a rich, spoiled brat.
It is the feeling of being free, of being anonymous, of being playful and child-like, even. It liberates him from the stuffy, showy and pretentious world of realpolitik; ironically, a world he did not actively seek initially but was unavoidably pushed to it in part by people’s discontent and in part by destiny.
Known as an introvert, PNoy listens more than he talks. He must be processing his thoughts internally. He must be considering the consequences of any decision that he makes seriously. Seemingly trapped in a gilded cage, surrounded by noisy sycophants and lobbyists, with the enormous and tremendous pressure of steering the country’s history in the right course, the quest to be alone heightens and becomes more evident.
Thus, unless and until signs are showing that he loses the sense of normalcy of an ordinary human being (i.e., when he becomes involved in corruption like his predecessors, when he suppresses basic human rights, when he ignores the rule of law and foments injustice), it behooves that we, the citizenry, ought to leave him alone. For then, he must be doing something right.
Sunday, February 6, 2011
Living in Subic: Our small patch of heaven on Earth
It never occurred to me that when I visited Subic Bay Freeport for the first time 10 years ago, I would stay and eventually consider it my home.
It was in Subic where I found and married my gorgeous and charming wife and sired 2 handsome and smart boys. Through the years, I have developed some close friendships here, established a modest law practice, and maintained a simple and blissful life all the while.
Well, just to describe a typical week:
Early morning in Binictican Heights is so quiet it is broken only by the chirping of birds at 5 a.m., almost on the dot. I would brew myself a mug of coffee while checking emails or reading/drafting some pleadings. The mountain air remains cool (since December), considering that it’s now February. At the back of the house, the mango tree is already exploding with flowers (in time for green mangoes and bagoong [salted anchovies] come summer).
School for the boys is 10-12 minutes away by car; the missus’ office, 7 minutes. But she would always join me to school and I’d drop her off to her office on my way back to the house. Except when there is a court hearing or meeting, I prefer to stay and work in the house. The law office is in the city proper of Olongapo (travel time: 20 minutes), near the court house. For meetings actually, there are nearby coffee shops, including Starbucks. Before having breakfast and hitting the shower, I would walk-run for 7km-10km. Naptime is an hour after lunch.
When the boys are back in mid-afternoon, we would horse around and talk about whatever they have done or whatever it is that happens in school. They can watch TV as long as they do their assignments. Then I’m off to fetch their mom. At least once a week, before heading home, we would drop by a duty free shop for groceries. Occasionally, we would have our dinner-date in a restaurant, or enjoy a massage from a spa.
From the Central Business District (CBD), the church, restaurants, hotels, duty free shops, beaches, schools, a hospital, and the like, are within a 0-15 km radius. Motorists obey traffic lights and the “first stop, first to go” policy, barring a few deviants. The Law Enforcement guys, particularly the sentries, are courteous and nice.
I do feel lucky when, on my way to Binictican, some friendly Aetas sell halaan (clams), susó (snails), sweet potatoes, mushrooms, even mudfish and crabs, by the roadside. Mudfish and crabs may be a bit expensive but the rest you can get for Php20/tumpok (pile).
Weekends we spend just by hanging out in the house, although we do go to Manila on a weekend at least once a month. Occasionally, when the boys feel like it, we bring them to Remy Field for a game of football. Then it’s cheese pizza afterwards. Otherwise, I get to choose the restaurant – either by the bay or lagoon, and watch the sun setting down.
Well, most city folks may find this kind of life dull and boring, but to me and my family, this rather idyllic life is the ideal one.
It was in Subic where I found and married my gorgeous and charming wife and sired 2 handsome and smart boys. Through the years, I have developed some close friendships here, established a modest law practice, and maintained a simple and blissful life all the while.
Well, just to describe a typical week:
Early morning in Binictican Heights is so quiet it is broken only by the chirping of birds at 5 a.m., almost on the dot. I would brew myself a mug of coffee while checking emails or reading/drafting some pleadings. The mountain air remains cool (since December), considering that it’s now February. At the back of the house, the mango tree is already exploding with flowers (in time for green mangoes and bagoong [salted anchovies] come summer).
School for the boys is 10-12 minutes away by car; the missus’ office, 7 minutes. But she would always join me to school and I’d drop her off to her office on my way back to the house. Except when there is a court hearing or meeting, I prefer to stay and work in the house. The law office is in the city proper of Olongapo (travel time: 20 minutes), near the court house. For meetings actually, there are nearby coffee shops, including Starbucks. Before having breakfast and hitting the shower, I would walk-run for 7km-10km. Naptime is an hour after lunch.
When the boys are back in mid-afternoon, we would horse around and talk about whatever they have done or whatever it is that happens in school. They can watch TV as long as they do their assignments. Then I’m off to fetch their mom. At least once a week, before heading home, we would drop by a duty free shop for groceries. Occasionally, we would have our dinner-date in a restaurant, or enjoy a massage from a spa.
From the Central Business District (CBD), the church, restaurants, hotels, duty free shops, beaches, schools, a hospital, and the like, are within a 0-15 km radius. Motorists obey traffic lights and the “first stop, first to go” policy, barring a few deviants. The Law Enforcement guys, particularly the sentries, are courteous and nice.
I do feel lucky when, on my way to Binictican, some friendly Aetas sell halaan (clams), susó (snails), sweet potatoes, mushrooms, even mudfish and crabs, by the roadside. Mudfish and crabs may be a bit expensive but the rest you can get for Php20/tumpok (pile).
Weekends we spend just by hanging out in the house, although we do go to Manila on a weekend at least once a month. Occasionally, when the boys feel like it, we bring them to Remy Field for a game of football. Then it’s cheese pizza afterwards. Otherwise, I get to choose the restaurant – either by the bay or lagoon, and watch the sun setting down.
Well, most city folks may find this kind of life dull and boring, but to me and my family, this rather idyllic life is the ideal one.
Friday, February 4, 2011
Subic and Clark launch 14-day business registration process
Good news for potential locators and investors in the Subic Bay Freeport and Clark Freeport Corridor.
Both the Subic Bay Metropolitan Authority (SBMA) and the Clark Development Corp. (CDC) have simplified and streamlined the business registration process into a tight 14-day timeline, to wit:
STAGE 1
Day 1
• The applicant shall submit a Letter of Intent, Business Proposal and other necessary documents to the Business & Investment Departments (BIDs)/Marketing Department
STAGE 2
Day 2, 3, 4, 5
• The BIDs/Marketing Department, in coordination with other concerned departments shall evaluate the documents.
• The BIDs/Marketing Department shall facilitate the signing of Letter of Conformity (LOC) between the applicant and the Freeport Authority. The LOC shall contain the area, location, lease rate and terms and conditions agreed upon.
• The BIDs/Marketing Department shall submit its recommendation to the CEO based on existing policies, rules and regulations.
• In case of disapproval the BIDs/Marketing Department shall state the specific reason/s for the same and the applicant may file for reconsideration.
STAGE 3
Day 6, 7, 8
• Upon the approval of the proposal by the CEO, based on the favorable recommendation of the BIDs/Marketing Department, a 30-Day Business Permit may be issued. In case of disapproval, the same shall be stated in writing, and the applicant shall be allowed to re-submit appropriated requirements for consideration and approval.
STAGE 4
Day 9, 10, 11
• The Applicant shall submit other documentary requirements and clearances necessary for the issuance of CRTE/RC.
STAGE 5
Day 12, 13, 14
• The applicant and Freeport Zone Authority shall sign the Lease Agreement provided that the lessee has already acquired juridical personality either from Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) or the Department of Trade and Industry (DTI), in case of local companies; or license from SEC in case of foreign-registered corporation.
• The applicant shall pay the necessary fees.
• The Freeport Authority shall issue the CRTE/RC. (From the SBMA website)
The application for SEC registration may be pursued once the SBMA or CDC issues an endorsement which is usually given during Stage 2, after an initial evaluation of the documents has been done. Kudos to both Freeport managements!
Both the Subic Bay Metropolitan Authority (SBMA) and the Clark Development Corp. (CDC) have simplified and streamlined the business registration process into a tight 14-day timeline, to wit:
STAGE 1
Day 1
• The applicant shall submit a Letter of Intent, Business Proposal and other necessary documents to the Business & Investment Departments (BIDs)/Marketing Department
STAGE 2
Day 2, 3, 4, 5
• The BIDs/Marketing Department, in coordination with other concerned departments shall evaluate the documents.
• The BIDs/Marketing Department shall facilitate the signing of Letter of Conformity (LOC) between the applicant and the Freeport Authority. The LOC shall contain the area, location, lease rate and terms and conditions agreed upon.
• The BIDs/Marketing Department shall submit its recommendation to the CEO based on existing policies, rules and regulations.
• In case of disapproval the BIDs/Marketing Department shall state the specific reason/s for the same and the applicant may file for reconsideration.
STAGE 3
Day 6, 7, 8
• Upon the approval of the proposal by the CEO, based on the favorable recommendation of the BIDs/Marketing Department, a 30-Day Business Permit may be issued. In case of disapproval, the same shall be stated in writing, and the applicant shall be allowed to re-submit appropriated requirements for consideration and approval.
STAGE 4
Day 9, 10, 11
• The Applicant shall submit other documentary requirements and clearances necessary for the issuance of CRTE/RC.
STAGE 5
Day 12, 13, 14
• The applicant and Freeport Zone Authority shall sign the Lease Agreement provided that the lessee has already acquired juridical personality either from Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) or the Department of Trade and Industry (DTI), in case of local companies; or license from SEC in case of foreign-registered corporation.
• The applicant shall pay the necessary fees.
• The Freeport Authority shall issue the CRTE/RC. (From the SBMA website)
The application for SEC registration may be pursued once the SBMA or CDC issues an endorsement which is usually given during Stage 2, after an initial evaluation of the documents has been done. Kudos to both Freeport managements!
Wednesday, February 2, 2011
Inquest and Warrantless Arrest, Know Your Rights
Understanding inquest proceeding and how it differs with preliminary investigation may spell the difference between liberty and a night or two behind bars.
The Supreme Court in a 2006 administrative case clarifies that preliminary investigation is a proceeding distinct from an inquest. A preliminary investigation is "an inquiry or proceeding to determine whether there is sufficient ground to engender a well-founded belief that a crime has been committed and the respondent is probably guilty thereof, and should be held for trial."
An inquest is "a summary inquiry conducted by a prosecutor for the purpose of determining whether the warrantless arrest of a person was based on probable cause."
Where the penalty prescribed by law for an offense is at least four years, two months and one day of imprisonment without regard to the fine, a preliminary investigation must be conducted before the filing of a complaint or information for such offense. The conduct of an inquest investigation does not fulfill the requirement for the conduct of a preliminary investigation before the filing of an information or complaint involving any such offenses, except when the accused was lawfully arrested without a warrant. (Enriquez case)
The DOJ Manual for Prosecutors defines inquest as an “informal and summary investigation conducted by the public prosecutor in criminal cases involving persons arrested and detained without the benefit of a warrant of arrest issued by the court for the purpose of determining whether or not such persons should remain under custody and correspondingly be charged in court.”
Under the Rules of Court, Rule 113, Section 5, a warrantless arrest is lawful under three circumstances:
1. When, in the presence of the policeman, the person to be arrested has committed, is actually committing, or is attempting to commit an offense;
2. When an offense has just been committed, and he has probable cause to believe, based on personal knowledge of facts or circumstances, that the person to be arrested has committed it; and
3. When the person to be arrested is a prisoner who has escaped from a penal establishment.
Under the said DOJ Manual, the City or Provincial Prosecutor usually assigns fiscals as inquest officers on a rotation basis. The list of their names and schedule is given to the chief of police for proper coordination.
The inquest proceedings starts when the inquest officer receives from the arresting officers the following: affidavit of arrest, the investigation report, the affidavits of the complainant and his witnesses, and other evidence gathered at the course of investigation. As a general rule, the arrested person must be made physically present.
The inquest officer may order the release of the detained person when the documents are incomplete (and the lacking documents are not submitted on time), or recommend his release when there is no valid warrantless arrest or when there is no probable cause.
The Supreme Court in a 2006 administrative case clarifies that preliminary investigation is a proceeding distinct from an inquest. A preliminary investigation is "an inquiry or proceeding to determine whether there is sufficient ground to engender a well-founded belief that a crime has been committed and the respondent is probably guilty thereof, and should be held for trial."
An inquest is "a summary inquiry conducted by a prosecutor for the purpose of determining whether the warrantless arrest of a person was based on probable cause."
Where the penalty prescribed by law for an offense is at least four years, two months and one day of imprisonment without regard to the fine, a preliminary investigation must be conducted before the filing of a complaint or information for such offense. The conduct of an inquest investigation does not fulfill the requirement for the conduct of a preliminary investigation before the filing of an information or complaint involving any such offenses, except when the accused was lawfully arrested without a warrant. (Enriquez case)
The DOJ Manual for Prosecutors defines inquest as an “informal and summary investigation conducted by the public prosecutor in criminal cases involving persons arrested and detained without the benefit of a warrant of arrest issued by the court for the purpose of determining whether or not such persons should remain under custody and correspondingly be charged in court.”
Under the Rules of Court, Rule 113, Section 5, a warrantless arrest is lawful under three circumstances:
1. When, in the presence of the policeman, the person to be arrested has committed, is actually committing, or is attempting to commit an offense;
2. When an offense has just been committed, and he has probable cause to believe, based on personal knowledge of facts or circumstances, that the person to be arrested has committed it; and
3. When the person to be arrested is a prisoner who has escaped from a penal establishment.
Under the said DOJ Manual, the City or Provincial Prosecutor usually assigns fiscals as inquest officers on a rotation basis. The list of their names and schedule is given to the chief of police for proper coordination.
The inquest proceedings starts when the inquest officer receives from the arresting officers the following: affidavit of arrest, the investigation report, the affidavits of the complainant and his witnesses, and other evidence gathered at the course of investigation. As a general rule, the arrested person must be made physically present.
The inquest officer may order the release of the detained person when the documents are incomplete (and the lacking documents are not submitted on time), or recommend his release when there is no valid warrantless arrest or when there is no probable cause.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)