4/10/2020 E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly the motion for reconsideration[31] that followed. The Petition The petitioner argues that he has a legal standing to assail the dismissal of the criminal case since he is the private complainant and a real party in interest who had been directly damaged and prejudiced by the respondents’ illegal acts; respondent Alamil has no legal standing to seek any relief from the RTC since she is a fugitive from justice. The Case for the Respondents The respondents[32] submit that the petitioner lacks a legal standing to assail the dismissal of the criminal case since the power to prosecute lies solely with the State, acting through a public prosecutor; the petitioner acted independently and without the authority of a public prosecutor in the prosecution and appeal of the case. The Issue The case presents to us the issue of whether the CA committed a reversible error in dismissing outright the petitioner’s Rule 65 petition for certiorari for lack of legal personality to file the petition on behalf of the People of the Philippines. Our Ruling The petition lacks merit. The petitioner has no legal personality to assail the dismissal of the criminal case It is well-settled that “every action must be prosecuted or defended in the name of the real party in interest[,]” “who stands to be benefited or injured by the judgment in the suit, or by the party entitled to the avails of the suit.”[33] Interest means material interest or an interest in issue to be affected by the decree or judgment of the case, as distinguished from mere interest in the question involved.[34] By real interest is meant a present substantial interest, as distinguished from a mere expectancy, or a future, contingent, subordinate or consequential interest.[35] When the plaintiff or the defendant is not a real party in interest, the suit is dismissible.[36] Procedural law basically mandates that “[a]ll criminal actions commenced by complaint or by information shall be prosecuted under the direction and control of a public prosecutor.”[37] In appeals of criminal cases before the CA and before this Court, the OSG is the appellate counsel of the People, pursuant to Section 35(1), Chapter 12, Title III, Book IV of the 1987 Administrative Code. This section explicitly provides: elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/55390 4/8