SOLIVEN V. MACASIAR G.R. No. 82585 November 14, 1988
FACTS:
l In this three (3) consolidated cases it found petitioners guilty of libel.
l President Corazon Aquino, the highest official of the Republic and one who enjoys unprecedented public support asks for the prosecution of a newspaper columnist, the publisher and chairman of the editorial board, the managing editor, and the business manager in a not too indubitable a case for alleged libel.
l Petitioner Beltran argues that "the reasons which necessitate presidential immunity from suit impose a correlative disability to file suit." He contends that if criminal proceedings ensue by virtue of the President's filing of her complaint-affidavit, she may subsequently have to be a witness for the prosecution, bringing her under the trial court's jurisdiction. This, continues Beltran, would in an indirect way defeat her privilege of immunity from suit, as by testifying on the witness stand, she would be exposing herself to a possible contempt of court or perjury. In other words, the President cannot sue him because he is immune from suit and if he does, the President is exposing himself to suit.
l Petitioners also questioned the validity of the warrant of arrest. He averred that respondent RTC judge issued a warrant for his arrest without personally examining the complainant and the witnesses, if any, to determine probable cause.
l Furthermore, petitioners assert that to allow the libel case to proceed would produce a "chilling effect" on press freedom
ISSUE:
WON the President is allowed to sue the petitioners
WON the warrant of arrest was illegally secured.
HELD:
1. YES. The privilege of immunity from suit pertains to the President by virtue of the office and may be invoked only by the holder of the office; not by any other person in the President's behalf. Thus, an accused in a criminal case in which the President is complainant cannot raise the presidential privilege as a defense to prevent the case from proceeding against such accused.
Moreover, there is nothing in our laws that would prevent the President from waiving the privilege. Thus, if so minded the President may shed the protection afforded by the privilege and submit to the court's jurisdiction. The choice of whether to exercise the privilege or to waive it is solely the President's prerogative. It is a decision that cannot be assumed and imposed by any other person.
The President cannot just stand by helplessly bereft of legal remedies if somebody vilifies or maligns him or her.
2. YES. This constitutional provision does not mandatorily require the judge to personally examine the complainant and her witnesses. Instead, he may opt to personally evaluate the report and supporting documents submitted by the prosecutor or he may disregard the prosecutors report and require the submission of supporting affidavits of witnesses.
Sound policy dictates the procedure laid down in Circular No. 12, setting down guidelines for the issuance of warrants of arrest, otherwise, judges would be unduly laden with the preliminary examination and investigation of criminal complaints instead of concentrating on hearing and deciding cases filed before their courts.