People of the Philippines vs. Ascencion Olarte

People of the Philippines vs. Ascencion Olarte June 30, 1960 Facts: Asuncion Olarte is charged with libel by Visitacion Meris after sending her several letters with libelous and contemptuous accusations. The letters started in February 24, 1954. On January 7, 1956, a libel case was filed with the provincial fiscal and on February 26 1956, filed the case with the Justice of Peace Court. On July 3, 1956, an information was filed in the Court of First Instance. The defendant then moved for the quashal of the info on the ground that it prescribed already. The Solicitor General on the other hand claims that the filing of the complaint in the Court of Justice of Peace interrupted the prescription period of the case. The defendant however claims that according to Article 360 of the Revised Penal Code: The criminal action and the civil action for damages in cases of written defamation, as provided in this chapter, may be filed simultaneously or separately with the court of first instance of the province wherein the libel was published, displayed or exhibited, regardless of the place where the same was written, printed or composed. This provision provides that interruption begins when the case is filed with the CFI. The lower court dismissed the complaint. Issue: Did the libel case prescribed already? Held: No. Act 277 was the old law on libel. Libel case were then in the jurisdiction of the Court of First Instance, regardless of the amount involved. Article 360 however specifically provides that the case is in the jurisdiction of the CFI. Act 194 on the other hand authorizes justices of the peace to make preliminary investigation of any crime alleged to have been committed within his municipality. The question is whether Act 277 is an exception to Act 194 in the jurisdiction of Justices of the peace. The Court answered this to the negative. 1) Nothing in Act 277 mentioned such intent. 2) Amendments by implication are frowned upon 3) Authority of the justices of peace to conduct prelim investigation is far from inconsistent with the authority of the CFI. Does the filing then of a libel case in the Court of Justice stop the running period of prescription? Jurisdiction to hear the case is different from authority to make preliminary investigation. The Courts of the Justice of Peace have jurisdiction to conduct preliminary investigation on libel cases. When it is instituted in such court, the prescriptive period is interrupted. Dissenting opinion: The law provides an express provision that jurisdiction is with the CFI. Framers of the RPC did not want the intervention of JPC. Some judges in the JPC are not lawyers, and such might be the intention of giving exclusive jurisdiction to CFI. Commencement of the judicial proceeding cannot start at the investigation of the JCP