Flashcards Studio

An information is filed in RTC Branch 3, Bacolod City, charging a former university IT administrator with (i) unauthorized access and cyber extortion under RA 10175 and (ii) estafa by misappropriating funds from the university’s online payment system, arising from the same incident. The information designates the cybercrime counts as the principal offense and includes the estafa counts as ancillary offenses arising from the same act. The defense moves to dismiss or transfer, arguing that Special Commercial Courts handle only pure commercial actions and cannot try cybercrime, while the prosecution insists that cybercrime offenses must be tried in a Cybercrime Court and that the ancillary offenses may be included in the same information if joinder is permissible. Questions: (a) Which court has original subject-matter jurisdiction over the RA 10175 cybercrime offenses? (b) May the Cybercrime Court take cognizance of the information and try the cybercrime counts if it also charges non-cybercrime offenses? Explain the controlling rule and apply it to the facts.