Page 20 of 27

reasonable doubt. A preliminary investigation does not require a full and exhaustive
presentation of the parties' evidence. Precisely, there is a trial to allow the reception of
evidence for both parties to substantiate their respective claims.
- Burgundy Realty Corp. vs. Josefa C. Reyes, et al., G.R. No. 181021,
December 10, 2012
A preliminary investigation is the crucial sieve in the criminal justice system which spells
for an individual the difference between months if not years of agonizing trial and
possibly jail term, on the one hand, and peace of mind and liberty, on the other hand.
Thus, we have characterized the right to a preliminary investigation as not a mere formal
or technical right but a substantive one, forming part of due process in criminal justice. In
a preliminary investigation, the Rules of Court guarantee the petitioners basic due
process rights such as the right to be furnished a copy of the complaint, the affidavits,
and other supporting documents, and the right to submit counter-affidavits, and other
supporting documents in her defense.
Jose Miguel T. Arroyo vs. DOJ, et al., G.R. Nos. 199082, 199085 & 199118,
September 18, 2012

A preliminary investigation is held before an accused is placed on trial to secure the

innocent against hasty, malicious, and oppressive prosecution; to protect him from an
open and public accusation of a crime, as well as from the trouble, expenses, and
anxiety of a public trial, It is also intended to protect the state from having to conduct
useless and expensive trials. While the right is statutory rather than constitutional, it is a
component of due process in administering criminal justice. The right to have a
preliminary investigation conducted before being bound for trial and before being
exposed to the risk of incarceration and penalty is not a mere formal or technical right; it
is a substantive right. To deny the accused's claim to a preliminary investigation is to
deprive him of the full measure of his right to due process.
Jose Miguel T. Arroyo vs. DOJ, et al., G.R. Nos. 199082, 199085 & 199118,
September 18, 2012 citing Uy v. Office of the Ombudsman, G.R. Nos, 150399-
400, June 27, 2008

SECTION 2. Officers authorized to conduct preliminary investigations. — The following

may conduct a preliminary investigations:
(a) Provincial or City Prosecutors and their assistants;
(b) National and Regional State Prosecutors; and
(c) Other officers as may be authorized by law.
Their authority to conduct preliminary investigations shall include all crimes cognizable
by the proper court in their respective territorial jurisdictions. (2a)
The function of determining whether there is sufficient ground for the filing of the
information is executive in nature and rests with the prosecutor. It is the prosecutor alone
who has the quasi-judicial discretion to determine whether or' not a criminal case should
be filed in court.
Ernesto Marcelo, Jr., et al. vs. Rafael R. Villordon, G.R. No. 173081, December
15, 2010
- Pablo B. Mabini vs. Lorinda B. Toledo-mupas, A.M. No. MTJ-03-1506, August
28, 2003
- Jaime E. Contreras vs. Eddie P. Mon; crate, A.M.- No. MTJ-02-1437, August
20, 2003
Mario W. Chilagan vs. Ernelina L. Cattiling, A.M. No. MTJ-01-1382, November 16,
2001

SECTION 3. Procedure. ..... The preliminary investigation shall be conducted in the

following manner:

(a) The complaint shall state the address of the respondent and shall be
accompanied by the affidavits of the complainant and his witnesses, as well as other
supporting documents to establish probable cause. They shall be in such number of