Monday, September 15, 2008 Lozadas failed to prove kidnapping, says CA
FOR lack of evidence to prove a threat to life, liberty and security, the Court of Appeals (CA) has denied the two petitions for the writ of amparo filed by the brother and the wife of ZTE deal whistleblower Rodolfo Noel “Jun” Lozada Jr.
The writ of amparo was filed in connection with Lozada’s alleged abduction last Feb. 5 upon his arrival at the Ninoy Aquino International Airport (Naia).
Lozada was a principal witness in the Senate’s investigation of the anomalous US$329-million National Broad Network (NBN) contract with Chinese firm ZTE Corp.
Upon his arrival from his Hong Kong trip, allegedly bankrolled by First Gentleman Mike Arroyo, he was reportedly picked up and forcibly taken by police in collusion with airport authorities to prevent him from testifying against the administration.
In a decision penned by Associate Justice Celia Librea-Leagogo, the CA’s former 17th Division found that the petitioners, Lozada’s wife Violeta and his brother Arturo, failed to prove that he had been taken against his will, or that his basic constitutional rights had been violated.
“The burden of proof needed by petitioner to establish his claim is substantial evidence. Regrettably, petitioner, despite the sincere efforts exerted by his volunteer lawyers in the instant amparo petition, failed to discharge said burden... Necessarily, petitioners’ application for the interim reliefs of temporary protection and production orders must perforce fail,” the Court ruled.
Concurrence
Concurring with the decision were Associate Justices Regalado Maambong and Sixto Marella Jr.
The CA said Lozada voluntarily went with his security escorts, headed by Naia Assistant General Manager for Security General Angel Atutubo and SPO4 Roger Valeroso, an agent of the Aviation Security Group of the Philippine National Police (PNP).
The court added that Lozada was still determined not to testify before the Senate on the NBN-ZTE scandal when he arrived on Feb. 5 and changed his mind only at 11 p.m. of Feb. 6 after talking with Manila Auxiliary Bishop Broderick Pabillo, who came to see him at the De La Salle Greenhills brothers’ house.
The appellate court said it was Lozada who requested Environment Sec. Joselito Atienza to provide him with security escorts upon his return from Hong Kong to evade possible arrest by Senate security personnel. An arrest warrant had been issued by the Senate for his failure to appear at the scheduled Senate hearing on the NBN-ZTE scandal.
In fact, the CA pointed out, Lozada even allowed his escort to remain at the de La Salle vicinity until Feb. 7 or before he held a press conference detailing his knowledge about the NBN-ZTE scandal.
Evidence
“This Court does not find any evidence on record that Rodolfo struggled or made an outcry for help when he was allegedly ‘grabbed’ or ‘abducted’ at the airport. Rodolfo even testified that nobody held him, and they were not hostile to him nor shouted at him,” its ruling read.
The CA further said the supposed announcement of respondent Police Chief Avelino Razon over the radio that Lozada was in the custody of the police cannot be construed as a threat to his life, liberty and security.
It also branded as “purely speculative” the claim of Lozada that the respondents could have been the ones who sent him threats through text messages as the police and the military organizations have their cyber group.
Neither did the CA give credence to the claim of Lozada that he was threatened by the presence of several motorcycle-riding men passing outside the de La Salle premises where he and his family are staying.
Even the filing of several criminal cases—graft charges, malversation and theft—against Lozada, according to the CA, cannot be considered threats as these cases are beyond the realm of the instant amparo petition filed against the respondents.
Petition
Named respondents in the amparo petitions were President Arroyo, for her role as commander-in-chief of the police and the Armed Forces of the Philippines; Executive Secretary Eduardo Ermita and Razon, among others.
In the habeas corpus petition, the other respondents impleaded were Philippine Air Force commanding general Pedrito Cadungog; Manila International Airport (MIA) assistant general manager Octavio Lina and Presidential Security Group Chief Romeo Prestoza.
Lozada was the chief executive officer of the Philippine Forestry Corp., a subsidiary of the state-owned Natural Resources Development Corp., where Romulo Neri used to sit as board member when he was still director of the National Economic and Development Authority. (ECV/Sunnex)
