CRESCENTE Y. LLORENTE, JR., PETITIONER, VS. SANDIGANBAYAN AND PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, RESPONDENTS.

Llorente versus Sandiganbayan

The Case

This is the case of Crescente Y. Llorente, Junior versus the Sandiganbayan and the People of the Philippines. Llorente, who was then the municipal mayor of Sindangan, Zamboanga del Norte, brought a special civil action for certiorari to challenge the jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan over two criminal cases filed against him for violations of Republic Act Number 3019, the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act. The question is whether a new law that redefined the Sandiganbayan's jurisdiction took away from that court the power to try a municipal mayor. The case matters because it fixes a rule every bar candidate must know: the salary grade of a public official, and not the salary he actually receives, determines whether the Sandiganbayan or the ordinary trial courts have exclusive jurisdiction.

Procedural History

The Office of the Special Prosecutor filed the first information with the Sandiganbayan in August 1993, and the Office of the Ombudsman filed the second information in March 1995. Llorente and his co-accused were arraigned and pleaded not guilty, but trial had not yet begun. After Congress enacted Republic Act Number 7975 in May 1995, Llorente moved before the Sandiganbayan to dismiss the first case or transfer it to the Regional Trial Court of Sindangan, Zamboanga, and to refer the second case to the same court. The First Division of the Sandiganbayan denied the motion to refer the second case, and later denied his motion for reconsideration. The Third Division likewise denied the motion to transfer the first case. Llorente then filed petitions for certiorari with the Supreme Court, which consolidated them. The Court gave due course to the petitions in September 1999.

Facts

Crescente Y. Llorente, Junior was elected municipal mayor of Sindangan, Zamboanga del Norte in 1988 and again in 1992. In 1995 he ran for congressman in the second district of Zamboanga del Norte and was elected.

In August 1993, the Office of the Special Prosecutor filed an information with the Sandiganbayan charging Llorente, a police sergeant, and a private individual with violation of Section 3, paragraph e of Republic Act Number 3019. The charge alleged that in June 1989 they conspired and, acting with evident bad faith, seized 930 sawn knockdown wooden boxes owned by Godofredo M. Diamante without a search and seizure warrant and without issuing a receipt of seizure. In March 1995, the Office of the Ombudsman filed a second information, this time for violation of Section 3, paragraph f of the same law, alleging that Llorente, with grave abuse of authority, refused to issue a mayor's permit to the ice plant and resawmill of R. F. Diamante and family without sufficient justification.

In May 1995, Congress enacted Republic Act Number 7975, amending the jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan. Llorente then argued that the new law divested the Sandiganbayan of jurisdiction over criminal cases against municipal mayors receiving a salary lower than that corresponding to Salary Grade 27. The Sandiganbayan refused to transfer the cases, and Llorente went to the Supreme Court.

Issues

• Whether or not Republic Act Number 7975 divested the Sandiganbayan of its jurisdiction over violations of Republic Act Number 3019 committed by municipal mayors.
• Whether or not the salary actually received by a public official determines his salary grade for purposes of the Sandiganbayan's jurisdiction.

Applicable Provisions

Section 4 of Presidential Decree Number 1606, as amended by Republic Act Number 7975, provides:

SEC. 4. Jurisdiction – The Sandiganbayan shall exercise original jurisdiction in cases involving: a. Violations of Republic Act No. 3019, as amended, otherwise known as the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act, Republic Act 1379, and Chapter II, Section 2, Title VII of the Revised Penal Code, where one or more of the principal accused are officials occupying the following positions in the government, whether in a permanent, acting or interim capacity, at the time of the commission of the offense: (1) Officials of the executive branch occupying the positions of regional director or higher, otherwise classified as Grade "27" and higher, of the Compensation and Position Classification Act of 1989 (Republic Act No. 6758), specifically including: (a) Provincial governors, vice governors, members of the sangguniang panlalawigan, and provincial treasurers, assessors, engineers, and other provincial department heads; (b) City mayors, vice mayors, members of the sangguniang panglungsod, city treasurers, assessors, engineers, and other city department heads; (c) Officials of the diplomatic service occupying the position of consul and higher; (d) Philippine army and air force colonels, naval captains, and all other officials of higher rank; (e) PNP chief superintendent and PNP officers of higher rank; (f) City and provincial prosecutors and their assistants, and officials and prosecutors in the Office of the Ombudsman and special prosecutor; (g) Presidents, directors, or trustees, or managers of government-owned or controlled corporations, state universities or educational institutions of foundations. (2) Members of Congress and officials thereof classified as Grade "27" and up under the Compensation and Position Classification Act of 1989; (3) Members of the judiciary without prejudice to the provisions of the Constitution; (4) Chairmen and members of Constitutional Commissions, without prejudice to the provisions of the Constitution; and (5) All other national and local officials classified as Grade "27" and higher under the Compensation and Position Classification Act of 1989. b. Other offenses or felonies committed by the public officials and employees mentioned in subsection (a) of this section in relation to their office. c. Civil and criminal cases filed pursuant to and in connection with Executive Order Nos. 1, 2, 14 and 14-A. In cases where none of the principal accused are occupying positions corresponding to salary grade "27" or higher, as prescribed in the said Republic Act No. 6758, or PNP officers occupying the rank of superintendent or higher, or their equivalent, exclusive jurisdiction thereof shall be vested in the proper Regional Trial Court, Metropolitan Trial Court, Municipal Trial Court, and Municipal Circuit Trial Court, as the case may be, pursuant to their respective jurisdiction as provided in Batas Pambansa Blg. 129.

This provision is the very text on which the whole dispute turns, because it makes Salary Grade 27 the dividing line between the Sandiganbayan and the ordinary courts.

Section 444, paragraph d of the Local Government Code provides:

the municipal mayor shall receive a minimum monthly compensation corresponding to Salary Grade twenty-seven (27) as prescribed under Republic Act No. 6758 and the implementing guidelines issued pursuant thereto.

This provision settles that the municipal mayor is, by law, a Salary Grade 27 official, and so falls within the Sandiganbayan's exclusive jurisdiction.

Ruling

On the first issue, the Court held that Republic Act Number 7975 did not divest the Sandiganbayan of jurisdiction over violations of Republic Act Number 3019 committed by municipal mayors. The Court noted that it had already resolved this issue in recent cases, ruling that the Sandiganbayan has jurisdiction over such violations.

On the second issue, the Court rejected Llorente's claim that the salary a public official actually receives dictates his salary grade. The Court said, and this is the line to remember:

On the contrary, it is the official's grade that determines his or her salary, not the other way around.

The Court explained that to determine whether an official falls within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan, reference should be made to Republic Act Number 6758 and the Index of Occupational Services, Position Titles and Salary Grades. An official's grade is not a matter of proof but a matter of law, which the court must take judicial notice of. The Court then pointed to Section 444, paragraph d of the Local Government Code, which fixes the municipal mayor's compensation at Salary Grade 27, and noted that both the 1989 and 1997 versions of the Index list the municipal mayor under Salary Grade 27. Consequently, the cases against Llorente as municipal mayor for violations of Republic Act Number 3019 are within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan.

Doctrine

First, the Sandiganbayan has exclusive original jurisdiction over violations of Republic Act Number 3019 where one or more of the principal accused are officials occupying positions classified as Salary Grade 27 or higher under Republic Act Number 6758. Second, the municipal mayor is a Salary Grade 27 official by express provision of Section 444, paragraph d of the Local Government Code, and is listed as such in the Index of Occupational Services. Third, it is the official's salary grade that determines his salary, and not the other way around; the grade is a matter of law that the court takes judicial notice of, not a matter of proof. Where none of the principal accused occupy positions corresponding to Salary Grade 27 or higher, exclusive jurisdiction lies with the proper Regional Trial Court, Metropolitan Trial Court, Municipal Trial Court, or Municipal Circuit Trial Court, as the case may be.

Disposition

The Supreme Court dismissed the consolidated petitions for lack of merit, with no costs, thereby sustaining the Sandiganbayan's jurisdiction over the criminal cases against Llorente.

Remember This

Memorize the rule that it is the official's grade that determines his salary, not the other way around, and that the municipal mayor is Salary Grade 27 by law. Examiners use this case to test jurisdiction over graft cases against local officials, and to trap candidates who argue from the salary actually received rather than from the salary grade fixed by law.