Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 110 views

    X Pimentel Vs Garchitorena

    Uploaded by

    Ivan Montealegre Conchas
    The Sandiganbayan suspended the provincial governor, provincial secretary, and private secretary of the province pendente lite based on criminal charges filed against them for falsifying records of provincial council meetings. The issue is whether their suspension was valid. The Supreme Court ruled that while their suspension was proper based on the charges, the suspension cannot exceed the 90 day maximum under the law. Since the petitioners had already been suspended for over 90 days, their suspension must be lifted.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    X Pimentel Vs Garchitorena

    Uploaded by

    Ivan Montealegre Conchas
    110 views1 page
    The Sandiganbayan suspended the provincial governor, provincial secretary, and private secretary of the province pendente lite based on criminal charges filed against them for falsifying records of provincial council meetings. The issue is whether their suspension was valid. The Supreme Court ruled that while their suspension was proper based on the charges, the suspension cannot exceed the 90 day maximum under the law. Since the petitioners had already been suspended for over 90 days, their suspension must be lifted.

    Original Description:

    Local Government Code case digest

    Original Title

    x Pimentel vs Garchitorena

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The Sandiganbayan suspended the provincial governor, provincial secretary, and private secretary of the province pendente lite based on criminal charges filed against them for falsifying records of provincial council meetings. The issue is whether their suspension was valid. The Supreme Court ruled that while their suspension was proper based on the charges, the suspension cannot exceed the 90 day maximum under the law. Since the petitioners had already been suspended for over 90 days, their suspension must be lifted.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    110 views1 page

    X Pimentel Vs Garchitorena

    Uploaded by

    Ivan Montealegre Conchas
    The Sandiganbayan suspended the provincial governor, provincial secretary, and private secretary of the province pendente lite based on criminal charges filed against them for falsifying records of provincial council meetings. The issue is whether their suspension was valid. The Supreme Court ruled that while their suspension was proper based on the charges, the suspension cannot exceed the 90 day maximum under the law. Since the petitioners had already been suspended for over 90 days, their suspension must be lifted.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    of 1

    GOVERNOR MARIANO J. PIMENTEL etal. vs JUSTICES FRANCIS E.

    GARCHITORENA, G.R. Nos. 98340-42. April 10, 1992

    Facts:
    Criminal cases were filed in Sandiganbayan against petitioners [provincial governor,
    provincial secretary and private secretary respectively] for having falsified or caused
    the falsification of the excerpts from the minutes of the regular sessions of the
    Sangguniang Panlalawigan, to the effect that several Resolutions were passed, but in
    truth no such resolution was approved and adopted by the Sanggunian. Upon motion by
    the prosecution, the Sandiganbayan suspended Governor Pimentel pendente lite
    pursuant to Section 13 of RA 3019. Hence, the petition for certiorari.

    Issue:
    Whether or not petitioners can be suspended. [YES]

    Ratio:
    Administrative law; public officers; preventive suspension; purpose: The
    purpose of the suspension order is to prevent the accused from using his position and
    the powers and prerogatives of his office to influence potential witnesses or tamper with
    records which may be vital in the prosecution of the case against him.

    Must not exceed the maximum period of ninety (90) days: In the aforementioned
    criminal cases, however, while the suspension of Governor Pimentel and the Provincial
    Secretary, Mrs. Salun-at, was proper because the informations against them charge
    "offense(s) involving fraud against the government or public funds or property . . ."
    (Sec. 13 of R.A. 3019), still, in the light of our decisions in Deloso v. Sandiganbayan,
    173 SCRA 409; Doromal v. Sandiganbayan, 177 SCRA 354; and Gonzaga v.
    Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 96131, September 6, 1991, such suspension may not exceed
    the maximum period of ninety (90) days fixed in Section 42 of P.D. No. 807. Since the
    petitioners were suspended from their positions on April 15, 1991, their suspension has
    already exceeded the maximum limit of ninety (90) days, hence, it should now be lifted.

    - Digested [14 November 2017, 12:23]

    You might also like