Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Enrile V Sandiganbayan
Enrile V Sandiganbayan
Enrile V Sandiganbayan
Facts: Enrile filed his Motion to Fix Bail. In support of the motion, Enrile argued that
he should be allowed to post bail because: (a) the Prosecution had not yet
established that the evidence of his guilt was strong; (b) although he was charged
with plunder, the penalty as to him would only be reclusion temporal, not reclusion
perpetua (due to presence of two (2) mitigating circumstances – voluntary
surrender and over 70 years of age; and (c) he was not a flight risk, and his age
and physical condition must further be seriously considered.
Ruling: Yes.
In this case, his social and political standing and his having immediately
surrendered to the authorities upon his being charged in court indicate that the
risk of his flight or escape from this jurisdiction is highly unlikely. His personal
disposition from the onset of his indictment for plunder, formal or otherwise, has
demonstrated his utter respect for the legal processes of this country.
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall be presumed innocent until the
contrary is proved. The presumption of innocence is rooted in the guarantee of
due process and is safeguarded by the constitutional right to be released on bail,
and further binds the court to wait until after trial to impose any punishment on
the accused.
It is worthy to note that bail is not granted to prevent the accused from
committing additional crimes. The purpose of bail is to guarantee the
appearance of the accused at the trial, or whenever so required by the trial court.
The amount of bail should be high enough to assure the presence of the accused
when so required, but it should be no higher than is reasonably calculated to fulfill
this purpose. Thus, bail acts as a reconciling mechanism to accommodate both
the accused’s interest in his provisional liberty before or during the trial, and the
society’s interest in assuring the accused’s presence at trial.
The general rule is, therefore, that any person, before being convicted of any
criminal offense, shall be bailable, unless he is charged with a capital offense, or
with an offense punishable with reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment, and the
evidence of his guilt is strong. Hence, from the moment he is placed under arrest,
or is detained or restrained by the officers of the law, he can claim the guarantee
of his provisional liberty under the Bill of Rights, and he retains his right to bail unless
he is charged with a capital offense, or with an offense punishable with reclusion
perpetua or life imprisonment, and the evidence of his guilt is strong. Once it has
been established that the evidence of guilt is strong, no right to bail shall be
recognized.
Such discretion may be exercised only after the hearing called to ascertain the
degree of guilt of the accused for the purpose of whether or not he should be
granted provisional liberty.” Bail hearing with notice is indispensable. The hearing
should primarily determine whether the evidence of guilt against the accused is
strong.