|
Friday, March 24, 2006
5 legislators ask for junking of rebellion raps
MANILA -- Lawyers for five party-list lawmakers charged with rebellion asked Thursday for the dismissal of the charges filed by the police's Criminal Investigation and Detection Group (CIDG) on grounds that the case has "fatal defects."
In Thursday's second preliminary investigation, respondent party-list Representatives Satur Ocampo, Teodoro Casiño and Joel Virador of Bayan Muna, Rafael Mariano of Anakpawis, and Liza Maza of Gabriela faced off with their hooded accuser, Jaime Beltran Fuentes, for the first time, this time without his dark glasses and hat.
The five arrived before 2 p.m. at the justice department from the House of Representatives, which has held them in custody for over three weeks, aboard a House service bus and escorted by the men of House sergeant-at-arms Bayani Favic, police personnel, and about a hundred supporters of the detained legislators.
Anakpawis party-list Representative Crispin Beltran, who arrived around 2:30 p.m. from the PNP General Hospital, was assisted by medical attendants and police escorts.
Defense lawyers accused the panel of prosecutors conducting the preliminary investigation of "railroading" the proceedings when it denied outright the motion to inhibit without asking the police to submit a comment or opposition to it.
Lawyer Romeo Capulong, lead counsel of the lawmakers, said some of the documents and affidavits submitted by the witnesses were duly subscribed and sworn to. These were "voluminous documents" submitted by the police but which are "totally irrelevant and inadmissible," Capulong said.
Attorney Jose Manuel Diokno, assistant counsel for the defense, noted the defects in the proceedings being conducted by the Department of Justice have in effect rendered the complaints "null and void."
He said the affidavits of the witnesses were subscribed and sworn not before the investigating panel of prosecutors but merely before a notary public, which is not authorized under the Rules of Court.
Diokno also said the pieces of evidence against his client Vicente Ladlad, executive director of the party-list group Bayan Muna and co-accused in the rebellion case, were drummed up from a previous case that had already been dismissed by the courts.
"We were not furnished with a copy of the complaint. We are at a loss on how we are going to respond. How can we come up with an intelligent counter-affidavit if we do not even know the identity of the supposed witness Jaime Fuentes," Diokno said.
Maza's lawyer Almie Foja also complained that her client was not provided with a copy of the complaints and other pertinent documents.
"We are completely at a loss. Although we tried to secure a copy from other sources but that is not official," Foja said.
Senior State Prosecutor Emmanuel Velasco, head of the panel that is investigating rebellion complaint, ordered the police to produce Fuentes and unmask him before the respondents.
Velasco said there is no more reason for Fuentes to keep his identity and that there are more than 1,500 policemen in Manila who could protect Fuentes from any attempts on his life.
"If he can't show his face, his affidavit will be disregarded. Respondents have the right to see the face of the witness. Otherwise they will not be able to file an intelligent counter-affidavit," he warned while threatening to send CIDG counsel Virgilio Pablico behind bars if he would not follow the panel's order.
In his statement before the justice department panel last March 13, the self-confessed former New People's Army (NPA) leader linked the respondent lawmakers and other civic personalities in alleged plots to oust President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo last February 24.
Coming in under heavy police security sans his head cover and dark shades, Fuentes was greeted with jeers by the crowd when he swore anew to his accusations.
Velasco ordered the defense lawyers to submit a formal motion to dismiss the case by Monday and gave the police three days to comment on the motion.
However, he told the defense lawyers that the panel had rejected their motion seeking to inhibit the panel, Chief State Prosecutor Jovencito Zuño, and Justice Secretary Raul Gonzalez Sr. from hearing and judging the case.
The motion was filed last March 20 alleging that the justice office had already prejudged the case based on its previous statements.
"We cannot answer for the secretary of justice and Chief Zuño, they are not the DOJ. As far as the members of the panel are concerned, we will not inhibit ourselves, we are impartial," Velasco maintained.
Meanwhile, the police's lawyer insisted anew that the five party-list representatives will be arrested if they leave the House premises.
Pablico made the statement after the lawmakers expressed their intention to return to their respective homes.
"We are tired and we would like to go home. Would there be a problem if we go home," Casino asked the six-member justice department panel, noting that they have been staying at the House for almost a month now to prevent the police from implementing a warrantless arrest against them for their involvement in the alleged plot to overthrow the Arroyo government.
Pablico told the panel that the police would oppose any order allowing the lawmakers to go home.
He noted that the group had signed a waiver of their rights under Article 125, accepting detention or the protective custody of the House pending the completion of the preliminary investigation on the rebellion case against them.
Capulong questioned at once the police lawyer's reply and branded as "patently illegal" the insistence of the police to arrest them once they leave the House.
"That is a totally erroneous position that they (five legislators) are now under detention or under arrest. Who arrested them? Is the House of Representatives a jail? Is the House speaker a jail warden? The waiver was for the purpose of seeking protective custody from warrantless arrest," Capulong said.
Velasco instructed the defense lawyers to also submit a manifestation seeking clarification from Police Director General Arturo Lomibao on whether they would be arrested if they leave the House. (ECV/Sunnex)
(March 24, 2006 issue)
Write letter to the editor. Click here.
Join the Sun.Star message board. Click here. |
|
|
|
[return to top]
[home]
|
|
