Ha Datu Tawahig v. Cebu City Prosecutor

On November 14, 2006, Lorriane Fe P. Igot filed a rape complaint against Roderick D. Sumatra, known as Ha Datu Tawahig, a tribal leader of the Higaonon Tribe. The Cebu City Prosecutor found probable cause, and an information was filed with RTC Branch 12, Cebu City. Judge Estela Alma Singco issued a warrant in 2007, but Sumatra was not arrested until July 2, 2013. He moved to quash, invoking Sections 15 and 65 of the IPRA and arguing that the matter was an intra-community dispute governed by customary law and the NCIP. Judge Singco denied the motions. She later noted without action a "Motion to Release the Indigenous Person" filed by a self-styled "customary lawyer" who had not shown authority to appear. Sumatra then filed a petition for mandamus directly with the Supreme Court. He asked that the judge and prosecutors be compelled to honor a January 3, 2007 resolution of the "Dadantulan Tribal Court", which had cleared him of criminal, civil and administrative liability, and to end his prosecution.

1. 1Whether direct resort to the Supreme Court was proper despite the hierarchy of courts
2. 2Whether mandamus lies to compel the judge and prosecutors to desist from the rape prosecution on the strength of the IPRA and the tribal court's resolution

The petition was denied. Relief was equally available in the Court of Appeals, but the Court took cognizance to settle the novel question of whether the IPRA removes courts' jurisdiction over criminal cases involving indigenous peoples. It held that it does not. Mandamus under Rule 65, Section 3 requires a clear legal right and a correlative ministerial duty that has been unlawfully neglected. Neither existed. Section 65 of the IPRA (primacy of customary laws) must be read with Section 15. Section 15 allows indigenous justice systems only "within their respective communities" and only "as may be compatible with the national legal system and with internationally recognized human rights." The Court traced the shift from integration under earlier regimes to preservation under the 1987 Constitution (Article II, Section 22; Article XII, Section 5; Article XIV, Section 17). It stressed that the State recognizes indigenous rights "within the framework of national unity and development." A crime is an offense against the State and the People, prosecuted by the public prosecutor as an exercise of police power. Yielding prosecution to customary processes would disregard the State as the offended party. "Customary laws cannot work to undermine penal statutes designed to address offenses that are an affront to sovereignty." Nothing in the IPRA directs courts to abandon criminal jurisdiction, and the RTC need not defer to the tribal court's exculpatory pronouncements. Disposition: the petition was denied and respondents were directed to proceed with dispatch in Criminal Case No. CBU-81130.