This case has been cited 1 times or more.
|
2008-04-30 |
CHICO-NAZARIO, J. |
||||
| (6) File, upon a verified complaint, or on its own initiative, petitions in court for inclusion or exclusion of voters; investigate and where appropriate, prosecute cases or violations of election laws, including acts or omissions constituting election frauds, offenses, and malpractices. This power to prosecute necessarily involves the power to determine who shall be prosecuted, and the corollary right to decide whom not to prosecute.[57] Evidently, must this power to prosecute also include the right to determine under which laws prosecution will be pursued. The courts cannot dictate the prosecution nor usurp its discretionary powers. As a rule, courts cannot interfere with the prosecutor's discretion and control of the criminal prosecution.[58] Its rationale cannot be doubted. For the business of a court of justice is to be an impartial tribunal, and not to get involved with the success or failure of the prosecution to prosecute.[59] Every now and then, the prosecution may err in the selection of its strategies, but such errors are not for neutral courts to rectify, any more than courts should correct the blunders of the defense.[60] | |||||