THE Sandiganbayan has issued a warning to four prosecutors of the Office of the Ombudsman over the issuance of a “confidential subpoena” to a doctor who signed a medical certificate for a defense counsel.
Atty. Lazaro Galindez Jr., counsel for a defendant in tax credit certificate scam cases, presented the medical certificate to secure a postponement of hearings on August 16, 2023 due to conjunctivitis.
While Prosecutor Joshua Tan objected and requested that the doctor be summoned before the court, he was overruled by the Seventh Division, which held that the medical certificate and its notarization are accorded a presumption of regularity.
But in a subsequent motion, Galindez asked the court to quash the subpoena issued by the Office of the Special Prosecutor and signed by Tan instructing his doctor to appear before him on August 23, 2023.
The defense lawyer questioned the validity of the subpoena, noting the prosecution’s motion to require the appearance of the doctor had been denied in open court.
In their manifestation, Prosecutor Tan, Assistant Ombudsman and acting Deputy Special Prosecutor Leilani Bernadette Cabras, Assistant Special Prosecutor A.D. Vincent Salvani IV, and Assistant Special Prosecutor Maricel Pintucan argued that Galindez should not have obtained a copy of the subpoena because it was “strictly confidential.”
They likewise invoked the authority of the Ombudsman to issue subpoenas in the exercise of its mandate under RA No. 6770.
The Seventh Division pointed out that the subpoena was not issued by the court, hence it was not subject to a motion to quash. However, it tagged the prosecution’s issuance of the subpoena as “an indirect act to circumvent” its ruling since Tan’s motion had already been denied.
Under pain of being cited in indirect contempt of court, the prosecution explained that they summoned the doctor “to bring out the truth for their peace of mind,” noting the distance between Galindez’s residence in Quezon City from the doctor’s clinic in Rodriguez, Rizal and the office of the notary public in Malakas Street, Quezon City.
The court, however, said the decision to subpoena the doctor was a “clear circumvention” of its ruling and “plainly demonstrates Prosecutor Tan’s lack of respect and willful disobedience to the court’s order.”
“Given that the request for subpoena had previously been denied, it appears that the prosecution’s action was carried out clandestinely in the expectation that such disobedience would not be discovered by the court,” the Sandiganbayan said.
The court, however, said it interprets the prosecution’s action as a “result of their zeal in prosecuting the case.”
“They are, however, reminded to focus on the core issues rather than distract themselves with matters that deviate from the speedy disposition of these cases. Future commission of the same or similar acts will not be tolerated, and this court will not hesitate to impose the appropriate sanctions,” it added.
