|
Thursday, June 16, 2005
San Pedro: The fruits of a poisonous tree
By Art San Pedro
STUDENTS of law, in their study on the subject of evidence, are advised to caution themselves in arguing their cases using the "fruits of a poisonous tree".
In layman's terms, fruits of a poisonous tree teach that any kind of evidence that is illegally obtained is inadmissible in judicial quasi-judicial and legislative bodies. This explains why confessions or admissions obtained by the use of force, threat or intimidation cannot be adduced in evidence because it has no probative value. Many convictions in lower courts have been reversed on appeal because they turn out to be fruits of a poisonous tree.
I have been reminded about this postulate law because of the controversial bugging of a private telephone conversation between the President and an alleged election officer. I am coming out with this article not to defend the President but to uphold the inviolability of communication and correspondence. No one is at a liberty to interfere in privileged communications, much more when the person involved is no less than the President of the Philippines. What they did to the President does not only violate the law on wiretapping or bugging, but also the rule on evidence as regards the inadmissibility of illegally obtained evidence.
The Anti-Wiretapping Law criminalizes the bugging or recording of a private conversation primarily because of the constitutional mandate on the inviolability of private communication and correspondence. Moreover, it is a basic in remedial law that illegally obtained evidence is not admissible.
Can this recording of an alleged private conversation between the President and a Comelec official be used as evidence to impeach the President or to clamor for her resignation from office? My answer is No! Why? The recording is the "fruit of a poisonous tree". It was illegally obtained. It does not tell any story and it does not divulge any information. It is a worthless piece of junk. It's a garbage! It is bereft of probative value. Whether one is a critic of the President, a destabilizer or human rights crusader, there is no way we can legitimize the fruit of a poisonous tree. Not even Congress can pass a law validating the fruits of a poisonous tree. A person cannot commit actionable wrong or punishable offense where there was bugging or wiretapping.
There are so many legal luminaries and bright minds in the political opposition. I am sure this alleged conversation had been known to them for quite some time now. But how come no one of them dared to come out in the open court and sue the President? The answer is obvious. They are only too aware that any legal action based on illegally obtained evidence will not prosper. That is the whole truth. It will not take-off at all and they will never hit the ground running. It cannot stand judicial scrutiny because it stands on feet of clay.
I do not think that the House committee on justice should even entertain an impeachment resolution based on evidence sourced from a poisonous tree. The committee is not a carnival to showcase political vaudeville. Congress is not a staging area for thoughtless political stunts. You can never prosecute and much more indict or impeach a president using a tape recording obtained through wiretapping. I would accuse the political opposition of wholesale mental dishonesty is they lure the public mind into believing that they can hold the president accountable because of the videotape conversation. Either they are ignorant of the law or are fooling the people.
The issue of this controversial tape is not whether its contents are true or spurious. The contents of the tape do not prove anything. The only use it serves is to crucify innocent people by a vicious trial by publicity which is no trial at all, legally speaking. I pity President Arroyo for being subjected to this unconscionable mockery, perpetuated by vindictive and power-hungry people whose only concern are their narrow personal interests but never the greater interest of the nation. There are several legal ways to pin down and entrap an erring president, but wiretapping is out of the question. It is not legally correct and morally upright to subject the President to this indignity. You cannot violate the law to prove its violation.
I beg to disagree with critics of President Arroyo who call this incident as another Watergate scandal. Study history my friends! In the Watergate case, a sitting President Richard M. Nixon ordered the bugging of the Democratic Party Headquarters, housed at the Watergate Apartments. President Arroyo's case is the reverse because she was the one bugged. It's her privacy of communications that was invaded.
Rather than go after the neck of the President or wish her head rolls from the chopping block, we should run after the culprits and perpetrators of the wiretapping incident. This is the correct course to pursue. I rise in defense of an innocent President this time.
PGMA, lumaban ka!
(June 16, 2005 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
|
