THE Supreme Court ruled that the prescriptive period — or the time limit for prosecuting crimes — ceases to run once a complaint was filed before the Department of Justice (DOJ), not when the case was brought before the courts.

In a landmark decision penned by Associate Justice Henri Jean Paul Inting, the Supreme Court en banc reversed its previous rulings in the 2023 cases of Republic vs Desierto and Corpus Jr. vs People, which held that the prescriptive period was interrupted only upon the filing of an information in court.

The ruling comes amid significant reforms in summary criminal procedures, particularly with the introduction of the 2022 Rules on Expedited Procedures in the First Level Courts (Rules on Expedited Procedures).

These replaced the 1991 Revised Rules on Summary Procedure, which were designed to simplify judicial proceedings, minimize costs and ensure faster resolution of minor offenses.

Under the now-superseded Rules on Summary Procedure, the prescriptive period continued to run until an information was filed in court.

However, the Supreme Court found this unjust, especially in cases where delays in the DOJ's preliminary investigation process were beyond the victim's control.

"It is unjust to deprive the injured party of the right to obtain vindication on account of delays that are not under [their] control. All that the victim of the offense may do on [their] part to initiate the prosecution is to file the requisite complaint," the court said.

The decision affirms that under the current Rules on Expedited Procedures — which cover criminal cases punishable by up to one year of imprisonment and fines up to P50,000 — the prescriptive period stops running as soon as a complaint was filed before the DOJ and a summary investigation begins.

The ruling will be applied prospectively, ensuring consistency moving forward without affecting previous cases that relied on the old interpretation.

The court also addressed tax-related offenses in the same decision. It clarified that under Section 281 of the 1997 National Internal Revenue Code (NIRC), the prescriptive period for criminal tax offenses that are not immediately discovered begins only when the violation is uncovered. The clock stops ticking once a preliminary investigation was initiated.

This clarification stemmed from a criminal complaint against a taxpayer accused of failing to file a quarterly value-added tax return, in violation of the NIRC.

The Court of Tax Appeals and the Supreme Court both dismissed the case, ruling that the offense had already been prescribed.

The latest Supreme Court decision, however, sets a new standard for when the prescriptive period should be deemed interrupted.