Sec. 16. Intervention of
the offended party in criminal action.—Where the civil action for recovery of civil liability is
instituted in the criminal action pursuant to Rule 111, the offended party may
intervene by counsel in the prosecution of the offense.
GENERAL
RULE: Offended party has the right to intervene by counsel in the
prosecution of the criminal action, where the civil action for recovery of
civil liability is instituted in the criminal action pursuant to Rule 111.
EXCEPTIONS:
1) When from the nature of the crime and the law
defining and punishing it, no civil liability arises in favor of a
private offended party, and;
2) Where the offended party has WAIVED his right to
civil indemnity or has expressly RESERVED his right to institute a civil action
or has already INSTITUTED said action.
●
The reason of the law in not permitting the offended party to intervene in the
prosecution of a criminal case, if he has waived his right to institute a civil
action arising from the criminal act, or has reserved the right to institute a
separate action, or a fortiori, already instituted the said civil action, is
that he has no special interest in the prosecution of the criminal action. (Gorospe vs. Gatmaitan, G.R. No. L-9609,
March 9, 1956)
●
Where the offended party withdrew a reservation to file a separate civil
action, the private prosecutor may still intervene in the prosecution of the
criminal case, by conducting the examination of witnesses under the control of
the prosecutor.
However,
once the offended party has filed a separate civil action arising from the
crime, he may not withdraw such civil case in order to intervene in the
criminal prosecution. He loses the right
to intervene. He no longer has any
standing in the criminal case, except to be a prosecution witness.
Why is the offended
party has the right to intervene in the prosecution of the criminal action?
The
reason for this rule is because of Article 100 of the RPC which provides that
every person criminally liable shall also be civilly liable and also because
there are certain offenses which cannot be prosecuted except upon complaint of
the offended party.
Can the offended
party file a civil action for certiorari in his own name if the RTC dismisses
an information?
Yes. In case of grave abuse of discretion
amounting to lack of jurisdiction, the petition may be filed by the offended
party because the offended party has an interest in the civil aspect of the
case.
When
the trial court acquits the accused or dismisses the case on the ground of lack
of evidence to prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt, the
civil action is not automatically extinguished since liability under such an
action can be determined based on mere preponderance of evidence. The offended
party may peel off from the terminated criminal action and appeal from the
implied dismissal of his claim for civil liability. (Heirs of Burgos vs CA, G.R. No. 169711, February 8, 2010)
Do the offended
parties have the right to move for the dismissal of a case?
No. The right belongs only to the government
prosecutor who is the representative of the complainant.
Where a criminal
action has been provisionally dismissed upon motion of the prosecutor, can the
case be revived upon motion of the offended party?
No,
because the offended party or complaining witness cannot act for the
prosecutor.
Do the offended
parties in a criminal have the legal standing to seek, in their personal
capacities and without the Solicitor General’s intervention, reversal of the
trial court’s order granting bail to the accused on the ground of absence of
strong evidence of guilt?
No.
The question of granting bail to the accused is but an aspect of the criminal
action, preventing him from eluding punishment in the event of conviction. The grant of bail or its denial has no
impact on the civil liability of the accused that depends on conviction by
final judgment. Trial and judgment, with award for civil liability when
warranted, could proceed even in his absence. (Heirs of Burgos vs CA, G.R. No. 169711, February 8, 2010)
Cases:
●
An offended party may intervene in the prosecution of a crime, except in the
following instances: (1) when from the nature of the crime and the law defining
and punishing it, no civil liability arises in favor of a private offended
party, and; (2) when from the nature of the offense, the offended parties are
entitled to civil indemnity, but (a) they waive the right to institute a civil
action, (b) expressly reserve the right to do so, or; (c) the suit has already
been instituted. In any of these
instances, the private complainant’s interest in the case disappears and
criminal prosecution becomes the sole function of the public prosecutor. (Rodriguez vs. Ponferrada. G.R. No.
155531-34, 7/29/2005)
●
It is well-settled that in criminal cases where the offended party is the
State, the interest of the private complainant or the private offended party is
limited to the civil liability. Thus, in the prosecution of the offense, the
complainant's role is limited to that of a witness for the prosecution. If a
criminal case is dismissed by the trial court or if there is an acquittal, an
appeal therefrom on the criminal aspect may be undertaken only by the State
through the Solicitor General. Only the Solicitor General may represent the
People of the Philippines on appeal. The
private offended party or complainant may not take such appeal. However, the
said offended party or complainant may appeal the civil aspect despite the
acquittal of the accused.
In
a special civil action for certiorari filed under Section 1, Rule 65 of the
Rules of Court wherein it is alleged that the trial court committed a grave
abuse of discretion amounting to lack of jurisdiction or on other
jurisdictional grounds, the rules state that the petition may be filed by the
person aggrieved. In such case, the aggrieved parties are the State and the
private offended party or complainant. The complainant has an interest in the
civil aspect of the case so he may file such special civil action questioning
the decision or action of the respondent court on jurisdictional grounds. In so
doing, complainant should not bring the action in the name of the People of the
Philippines. The action may be prosecuted in name of said complainant. [Bangayan, Jr. vs. Bangayan, G.R. Nos.
172777 & 172792, October 19, 2011
citing People v. Santiago, 255 Phil. 851, 861-862 (1989)]
●
Under Section 16, Rule 110 of the Rules of Criminal Procedure, the offended
party may intervene in the criminal action personally or by counsel, who will
act as private prosecutor for the protection of his interests and in the
interest of the speedy and inexpensive administration of justice. A separate action for the purpose would only
prove to be costly, burdensome and time-consuming for both parties and further
delay the final disposition of the case.
The multiplicity of suits must be avoided. With the implied institution
of the civil action in the criminal action, the two actions are merged into one
composite proceeding, with the criminal action predominating the civil. The prime purpose of the criminal action is
to punish the offender in order to deter him and others from committing the
same or similar offense, to isolate him from society, reform and rehabilitate
him or, in general, to maintain social order. On the other hand, the sole
purpose of the civil action is for the resolution, reparation or
indemnification of the private offended party for the damage or injury he
sustained by reason of the delictual or felonious act of the accused. (Ramiscal vs Sandiganbayan, G.R. Nos.
140576-99. December 13, 2004)
0
Comments
