Joseph Ejercito Estrada v. Sandiganbayan (2001) Ponente: Bellosillo, J. Former president Joseph Ejercito Estrada was charged with: Plunder (RA 7!, as amended "# RA 7$%&' under sec. in • relation to )ec. * (d' (*' (' +iolation o RA -*& (Antigrat and corrupt practices act' • +iolation o RA $7*- (/he code o conduct and ethical standards • or pu"lic oicials and emplo#ees' Perjur# (Art. *!-, RP0' • 1llegal 2se o an Alias (0A 3o. *4, as amended "# RA $!%' • 1n his motion to 5uash the inormation against him, Estrada alleged that RA 7! as amended "# RA 7$%& is unconstitutional or (a' +agueness, ("' dispensing with the 6reasona"le dou"t standard in criminal prosecutions, re5uiring less e+idence or pro+ing the predicate crimes o plunder, and (c' a"olishing the element o mens rea as a crime alread# punisha"le under the RP0. 8e said that it thus depri+es him o due process and the right to "e inormed o the nature and cause o the accusation against him.
1. Is RA 700! as a"ended by RA 7#$% vag&e' Estrada: /he law does not deine 6com"ination, 6series and 6pattern. )0: A statute is not rendered uncertain and +oid merel# "ecause general terms used therein are not deined. /here is no constitutional or statutor# command re5uiring the legislature to deine each and e+er# word in an enactment. 1t is not +ague as long as the legislati+e will is clear. /he principle is to use the words o a statute in their natural, plain and ordinar# signiication. From the ebsters *e+ ,o--egiate ictionary : 0om"ination 9the result or product o com"ining. /o "ring into such close relationship as to o"scure indi+idual characters )eries 9a num"er o things or e+ents o the same class coming one ater another in spatial an temporal succession From the -egis-ative de-iberations on the "ill: 0om"ination 9at least acts alling under dierent categories o enumeration pro+ided in )ec. *, par (d' )eries or more o+ert or criminal acts alling under the same categor# enumeration ound in )ec. *, par. (d' 8a the legislature intended a techinical or distincti+e meaning or 6com"ination and 6series, it would ha+e taen greater pains in speciicall# pro+iding or it in the law.
According to the Sandiganbayan to which the 0ourt agrees to: Pattern 9consists o at least a com"ination or series o o+ert or criminal acts enumerated in su"section (*' to ($' o )ec. * (d'. 1t is directd towards a common purpose or goal and there must "e an o+erall unlawul scheme or conspirac# to achie+e said common goal. 1 there is no such o+erall scheme or where the schemes or methods used "# multiple accused +ar#, the o+ert or criminal acts must orm part o a conspirac# to attain a common goal. hen is a stat&te vag&e' 1t is +ague when it lacs comprehensi"le standards that men o common intelligence must necessaril# guess at its meaning and dier in its application. hen a stat&te is vag&e! it is rep&gnant to the ,onstit&tion in 2 aspects/ *. 1t +iolates due process. . 1t lea+es law enorcers un"ridled discretion in carr#ing out its pro+isions and "ecomes an ar"itrar# le;ing o the
oid or vag&eness doctrine/ A statue which either or"ids or re5uires the doing o an act in terms so +ague that men o common intelligence must necessaril# guess at its meaning and dier as to its application +iolates the irst essential element o due process o law. 3verbreadth doctrine/ A go+ernmental purpose ma# not "e achie+ed "# means which sweep unnecessaril# "roadl# and there"# in+ade the area o protected reedoms. A acial challenge is allowed to "e made to a +ague statute and t one which is +er"road "ecause o possi"le 6chilling eect> upon unprotected speech. Rationa-e: /he possi"le harm to societ# in permitting some unprotected speech to go unpunished is outweighed "# the possi"ilit# that the protected speech o others ma# "e deterred and percei+ed grie+ances let to ester "ecause o possi"le inhi"itor# eects o o+erl# "road statutes. /he rationale does not appl# to penal statues. 1n the area o criminal law, the law cannot tae chances as in the area o ree speech. /he strict scrutin#, o+er"readth and +agueness doctrines ha+e special application onl# to ree speech cases. ?agueness challenges in the First Amendment conte;t, lie o+er"readth challenges t#picall# produce acial in+alidation, while statutes ound +ague as a matter o due process t#picall# are in+alidated onl# as applied to a particular deendant. . @oes the Plunder law dispense with reasona"le dou"t 3o. /he "urden still remains with the prosecution to pro+e "e#ond reason"ale ground e+er# element o the crime. =hat the prosecution needs to pro+e is the series or com"ination o acts which constitute a pattern and in+ol+ing an amount o at least P%,. -. 1s plunder malum in se es. 1t re5uires the proo o criminal intent, to "e pro+en "# the prosecution. /he application o mitigating and e;tenuating circumstances in the RP0 to the AntiPlunder Caw indicates that mens rea is an element o plunder. /he declaration in RA 7$%& that plunder is a heinous oense implies that it is a malum in se. Fallo: RA 7!, as amended "# RA 7$%& is 0D3)/1/2/1D3AC. Petition @1)1))E@ or lac o merit. endoa, J. concurs: (in addition to those discussed in the majorit# opinion' /he case against Estrada is under sec. , in relation to sec. * (d' (*' (' "ut what he wants is an 6on its ace a ttac on the whole law. 8owe+er, the other pro+isions in the AntiPlunder law are irrele+ant to the case. Estrada: /he statute should "e su"jected to strict scrutin#. 6/here ma# "e narrower scope or operation o the presumption o constitutionalit# when legislation on its ace to "e within a speciic prohi"ition o the 0onstitution... 2) +. 0arolene Products 0o. /he American 0ourt did not sa# that such legislation is not to "e presumed, much less that it is presumpti+el# in+alid, "ut onl# that a 6narrower scope will "e gi+en or the presumption o constitutionalit# in respect o such statutes. =hat the ootnote in 0arolene Products posits is a dou"le standard o judicial re+iew. )trict scrutin# is used in laws deal ing with the regulation o speech, gender or race, and acial challenges are allowed or this purpose. Rule o strict construction 9a rule o legal hermeneutics to determine the intent o the legislature )trict scrutin# 9a standard o judicial re+iew or determining the 5ualit# and amount o go+ernmental interest "rought to justi# the regulation o undamental reedoms. /he ocus is on the presence o compelling, rather than su"stantial, go+ernmental interest and on the a"sence o less restricti+e means or achie+ing that interest
@eerential re+iew 9laws are upheld i the# rationall# urther a legitimate go+ernmental interest, without courts seriousl# in5uiring into the su"stantialit# o such interest and e;amining the alternati+e means "# which the o"jecti+es could "e achie+ed 1ntermediate re+iew 9the su"stantialit# o the go+ernmental interest is seriousl# looed into and the a+aila"ilit# o less restricti+e alternati+es considered
As applied to Estrada, the AntiPlunder Caw presents onl# pro"lems o statutor# construction, not +agueness or o+er"readth. /he penalt# or plunder is not grossl# disproportionate to the penalties imposed or the predicate crimes. =hen special comple; crimes are created out o e;isting crimes, the penalt# or the new crime is hea+ier. (same with the majorit# opinion on other points'
0riminal laws cannot sur+i+e the test o strict scrutin# i it is used on them.
