Back

Cagang vs. Sandiganbayan [DISSENTING OPINION, CAGUIOA, J.]

CESAR MATAS CAGANG, Petitioner, vs. SANDIGANBAYAN, FIFTH DIVISION, QUEZON CITY; OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN; and PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Respondents. x--------------------------------------------x G.R. Nos. 210141-42 CESAR MATAS CAGANG, Petitioner, vs. SANDIGANBAYAN, FIFTH DIVISION, QUEZON CITY; OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN; and PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Respondents. Present: CARPIO, Acting, CJ, VELASCO, JR., LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, PERALTA,* BERSAMIN, DEL CASTILLO, PERLAS-BERNABE, LEONEN, JARDELEZA,* CAGUIOA, MARTIRES, * TIJAM, REYES, JR., and GESMUNDO, JJ. *

G.R. Nos. 206438 and 206458 | 2018-07-31

DISSENTING OPINION
 
CAGUIOA, J.:
 
Citing Dela Pena v. Sandiganbayan1 (Dela Pena), the ponencia holds that "the failure x x x to invoke the right of speedy disposition even when [he] or she has already suffered or will suffer the consequences of delay constitutes a valid waiver of that right."2 On this basis, the ponencia resolves to deny the Petitions, since "petitioner [Cesar Matas Cagang (petitioner)] has not shown that he asserted his rights [from 2003 to 2011], choosing instead to wait until the information was filed against him with the Sandiganbayan."3
 
With due respect, I disagree.
 
For the...