Practice question
A complainant files a substantially identical complaint with DOJ after COMELEC has already taken cognizance of and acted on it. The complainant invokes concurrency as an unrestricted right to obtain a second independent investigation until a preferred outcome appears. Which is best under Arroyo?
- Concurrency authorizes unlimited duplicate proceedings
- The first-cognizance principle described in Arroyo constrains the second office; concurrency is not that unrestricted forum choice
- The complainant may privately overrule the first body
- Every filing is automatically a conviction
- Both offices must always conduct conflicting proceedings
Legal references
- Arroyo v. DOJ, GR 199082 et al., July 23, 2013, main reconsideration resolution affirming September 18, 2012: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2013/jul2013/gr_199082_2013.html
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.