OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN, petitioner,
vs.
ROLSON RODRIGUEZ, respondent.
G.R. No. 172700
July 23, 2010
Doctrines:
o The rule against forum shopping applies only to judicial cases or proceedings and
not to administrative cases.
o In administrative cases involving the concurrent jurisdiction of two or more
disciplining authorities, the body in which the complaint is filed first, and which
opts to take cognizance of the case, acquires jurisdiction to the exclusion of other
tribunals exercising concurrent jurisdiction.
Facts:
On 26 August 2003, the Ombudsman in Visayas received a complaint for abuse of
authority against respondent Rolson Rodriguez, Punong Barangay in Barangay
Binalbagan, Negros Occidental.
On 1 September 2003, the Sangguniang Bayan of Binalbagan received a similar
complaint against respondent.
Respondent filed a motion to dismiss the case filed both in Sangguniang Bayan
and Ombudsman on the grounds of forum shopping and litis pendentia,
respectively.
The complainants filed a motion to withdraw the complaint lodged in the
Sangguniang Bayan on the ground that they wanted to prioritize the complaint
filed in the Ombudsman.
The Ombudsman found respondent Rodriguez guilty of dishonesty and
oppression.
Petitioner contends that upon the filing of a complaint before a body vested with
jurisdiction, that body has taken cognizance of the complaint. Petitioner concludes
that consistent with the rule on concurrent jurisdiction, the Ombudsman’s exercise
of jurisdiction should be to the exclusion of the Sangguniang Bayan. Respondent
Rodriguez counters that when a competent body has acquired jurisdiction over a
complaint and the person of the respondent, other bodies are excluded from
exercising jurisdiction over the same complaint.
Issues:
Whether complainants violated the rule against forum shopping when they filed in
the Ombudsman and the Sangguniang Bayan identical complaints against
Rodriguez. (No)
Whether it was the Sangguniang Bayan or the Ombudsman that first acquired
jurisdiction. (Ombudsman)
Ruling:
The rule against forum shopping applies only to judicial cases or proceedings and
not to administrative cases. (Laxina, Sr. v. Ombudsman) Thus, even if
complainants filed in the Ombudsman and the Sangguniang Bayan identical
complaints against respondent, they did not violate the rule against forum
shopping because their complaint was in the nature of an administrative case.
Under Republic Act No. 7160 (Local Government Code), the Sangguniang
Panlungsod or Sangguniang Bayan has disciplinary authority over any
elective barangay official. Clearly, the Ombudsman has concurrent jurisdiction
with the Sangguniang Bayan over administrative cases against
1
elective barangay officials occupying positions below salary grade 27, such as
respondent in this case.
In administrative cases involving the concurrent jurisdiction of two or more
disciplining authorities, the body in which the complaint is filed first, and which
opts to take cognizance of the case, acquires jurisdiction to the exclusion of other
tribunals exercising concurrent jurisdiction. In this case, since the complaint was
filed first in the Ombudsman, and the Ombudsman opted to assume jurisdiction
over the complaint, the Ombudsman’s exercise of jurisdiction is to the exclusion
of the Sangguniang Bayan exercising concurrent jurisdiction.
Nota bene:
Forum shopping can be committed in several ways: (1) filing multiple cases based
on the same cause of action and with the same prayer, the previous case not
having been resolved yet (where the ground for dismissal is litis pendentia); (2)
filing multiple cases based on the same cause of action and the same prayer, the
previous case having been finally resolved (where the ground for dismissal is res
judicata); and (3) filing multiple cases based on the same cause of action but with
different prayers (splitting of causes of action, where the ground for dismissal is
also either litis pendentia or res judicata).
Concurrent jurisdiction is the power conferred upon different courts, whether of
the same or different ranks, to take cognizance at the same stage of the same case
in the same or different judicial territories. Where there is concurrent jurisdiction,
the court first taking cognizance of the case assumes jurisdiction to the exclusion
of the other courts.
The primary jurisdiction of the Ombudsman to investigate any act or omission of
a public officer or employee applies only in cases cognizable by
the Sandiganbayan.
Jurisdiction, once acquired, is not lost upon the instance of the parties but
continues until the case is terminated. When herein complainants first filed the
complaint in the Ombudsman, jurisdiction was already vested on the latter.
Jurisdiction could no longer be transferred to the sangguniang bayan by virtue of
a subsequent complaint filed by the same complainants.
