Back

JUAN PONCE ENRILE, PETITIONER, VS. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, HON. AMPARO M. CABOTAJE-TANG, HON. SAMUEL R. MARTIRES, AND HON. ALEX L. QUIROZ OF THE THIRD DIVISION OF THE SANDIGANBAYAN, RESPONDENTS. [SEPARATE CONCURRING OPINION PERLAS-BERNABE, J.]

JUAN PONCE ENRILE, PETITIONER, VS. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, HON. AMPARO M. CABOTAJE-TANG, HON. SAMUEL R. MARTIRES, AND HON. ALEX L. QUIROZ OF THE THIRD DIVISION OF THE SANDIGANBAYAN, RESPONDENTS. [SEPARATE CONCURRING OPINION PERLAS-BERNABE, J.]

G.R. No. 213455 | 2015-08-11

SEPARATE CONCURRING OPINION

PERLAS-BERNABE, J.:

I concur with the ponencia that petitioner Juan Ponce Enrile’s (Enrile) motion for a bill of particulars should be partially granted on the matters herein discussed.
 
I.

The sufficiency of every Informationis ordained by criminal due process, more specifically under the right of the accused to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation against him stated under Section 14, Article III of the 1987 Philippine Constitution:
 
Section 14. (1) No person shall be held to answer for a criminal offense without due process of law.

(2) In all criminal prosecutions, the...