Practice question
A person challenges a prosecutor-requested PHDO before an information is filed, arguing that Genuino abolished every possible departure restraint during preliminary investigation. The application invokes A.M. No. 18-07-05-SC, concerns a covered offense and is presented to the proper RTC for independent findings. Which is best?
- Genuino categorically abolished all judicial PHDOs
- The prosecutor may dispense with judicial findings
- The rule permits every private creditor to stop departure
- Genuino's invalidation of the executive circular must be distinguished from the court-based PHDO procedure
- Every application proves guilt beyond reasonable doubt
Legal references
- Genuino v. De Lima, G.R. No. 197930 et al., April 17, 2018, main opinion: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2018/apr2018/gr_197930_2018.html
- A.M. No. 18-07-05-SC, August 7, 2018, Rule on Precautionary Hold Departure Order, Sections 1-5, quoted in Garcia v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. Nos. 205904-06, October 17, 2018, main opinion: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2018/oct2018/gr_205904-06_2018.html
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.