Mrs. W supplies the Philippine National Police (PNP) with uniforms every year. Last month, he and two (2) other officers of the PNP conspired to execute a “ghost purchase”, covered by five (5) checks amounting to ₱200,000.00 each, or a total of ₱1,000,000.00. An investigating committee within the PNP, which was constituted to look into it, invited Mrs. W, among others, for an inquiry regarding the anomalous transaction. Mrs. W accepted the invitation but during the committee hearing, she stated that she will not answer any question unless she be provided with the assistance of a counsel. The PNP officials denied her request; hence, she no longer participated in the investigation.
(a) What is a custodial investigation? Under the 1987 Constitution, what are the rights of a person during custodial investigation? (3%)
(b) Was the PNP’s denial of Mrs. W’s request violative of her right to counsel in the proceedings conducted before the PNP? Explain.(2%)
(a) Under jurisprudence, custodial investigation involves any questioning initiated by law enforcement authorities after a person is taken into custody or otherwise deprived of his freedom of action in any significant manner. Custodial investigation also refers to the critical pre-trial stage when the investigation ceases to be a general inquiry into an unsolved crime but has begun to focus on a particular person as a suspect.
Under the 1987 Constitution, the following are the rights of a person during custodial investigation:
1) Right to be ready their Miranda rights;
2) Right to remain silent;
3) Right to be assisted by competent and independent counsel, preferably of his own choice;
4) Right against torture, force, violence, threat, intimidation, or any other means to vitiate the free will shall be used against him;
5) Right against secret detention places, solitary, incommunicado, or other similar forms of detention;
6) Right against void extrajudicial confessions.
(b) No. Answer
Under the 1987 Constitution and jurisprudence, the right to counsel is mandatory in cases involving custodial investigation. Rule
In the case at bar, Mrs. W was not placed under custodial investigation. Rather, she was the subject of an administrative investigation which is not a covered or within the definition of a custodial investigation. Apply
Thus, the PNP’s denial of Mrs. W’s request is not violative of her right to counsel in the proceedings conducted before the PNP. Conclusion