|
Wednesday, December 08, 2004
Does arrest still count as hot pursuit?
By Grecar Nilles & Karlon N. Rama
Sun.Star Staff Reporters
THE law allows arrests without a warrant when a criminal is caught while committing a crime or after a hot pursuit by policemen who have personal knowledge of a recently committed offense.
But what if the crime happened over a week ago?
The question came up yesterday as the Criminal Investigation and Detection Group (CIDG) 7 filed a murder complaint against Bara-ngay Lorega resident Edgar Belandres for the Nov. 27, 2004 killing of photojournalist Allan Dizon.
Supreme Court justices were asked the same question in July 1990. In what has become the Nazareno doctrine, they ruled: “The power to arrest without warrant is without limitation as long as the requirements of Section 5, Rule 113 (personal knowledge), are met.”
But lawyer Gloria Lastimosa-Dalawampu is concerned that the warrantless arrest of Belandres might be used later by the defense.
Former Lapu-Lapu City prosecutor Celso Espinosa also said the Supreme Court (SC) should set a definite timeframe on the police’s “hot pursuit” practice.
Too late
In the case of Rolito Go vs. Court of Appeals, the SC invalidated the arrest of murder suspect Go, who went to the police station six days after allegedly committing a crime.
The High Tribunal ruled that the arrest, six days after the crime was committed, could no longer be “reasonably regarded” as within the scope of the “has just been committed” stipulation.
Rule 113, section 5, paragraphs a to c of the Revised Rules of Court in the Philippines, states that a person can only be arrested without a warrant:
* when, in his presence, the person to be arrested has committed, is actually committing, or is attempting to commit an offense;
* when an offense has just been committed and he has probable cause to believe based on personal knowledge of facts or circumstances that the person to be arrested has committed it; and
* when the person to be arrested is a prisoner who has escaped from a penal establishment or place where he is serving final judgment or is temporarily confined while his case is pending, or has escaped while being transferred from one confinement to another.
Probable cause
According to Belandres’ lawyer, no hot pursuit operation was conducted because, two days before the arrest, the CIDG still had no idea who the suspect in the killing was.
“We know the media is demanding for justice. But will their search for justice be given more weight than a man’s rights under the Constitution?” said lawyer Danilo Yap.
The Nazareno doctrine also favors Belandres.
The doctrine stems from the Muntinlupa Regional Trial Court conviction of Narciso Nazareno and Ramil Regala for the Dec. 14, 1988 murder of Romulo Molet Bunye II.
They were arrested without a warrant 14 days after Bunye’s death and were each slapped with 20 to 40 years imprisonment.
They appealed the conviction before the SC, hence the ruling.
And, in a habeas corpus petition filed in conjunction to the case that set off the Nazareno ruling, the SC further clarified that having personal knowledge does not simply mean knowledge that the person arrested is indeed guilty of committing some crime.
Rather, it should include “probable cause” to “validly compel the peace officers, in the performance of their duties and in the interest of public order, to conduct an arrest without warrant.”
(December 8, 2004 issue)
Write letter to the editor.Click here.
Join the Sun.Star message board.Click here. |
|
[return to top]
[home]
[network page]
|
LOCAL NEWS
BUSINESS
OPINION
SPORTS
LIFESTYLE
FEATURE
SUPERBALITA
WEEKEND
|
