ORIGINAL ~ '·::;J, .. ~ ?! , .. Republic of The Philippines ~ tda SUPREME COURT N ~ ,,. .II.' + :-·' ~-Ea En Banc .' .:..a:;...t;l"t".I > Manila a Q
0 JODY C. SALAS, ex rel Person "" Deprived of Liberty (POL) RODOLFO C. SALAS, SC G.R. SP PROC. No. Petitioner, 251693 -versus-
JCINSP. LLOYD GONZAGA, FOR: HABEAS CORPUS AND Warden of the Manila City Jail ALL OTHER LEGAL AND Annex. EQUITABLE REMEDIES Respondent. Pc:-&T6D -··-- x------x AND '± COPIES EXTREMELY URGENT EXLPARTE MOTION FOR SPECIAL AND IMMEDIATE RAFFLE'tl\'Tt\ tDl\\10
Petitioner, by counsel, respectfully states:
i. 1. On 20 February 2020, RTC Branch 32 of Manila (the "Manila RTC") issued an Order setting the case for arraignment and/ or pre-trial on 28 February 2020 at 8:30 in the morning until 4:30 in the afternoon of Mr. Rodolfo C. Salas on 28 February 2020 in People of the Philippines v. Jose Maria Sison, et.al. docketed as Criminal Cases Nos. 08-262163 (formerly H-1581) and 14-306533 -14-306546.
2. On 24 February 2020, herein Petitioner filed a Petition for the issuance of a writ of habeas coiyus dated 24 February 202Q. It includes a prayer for the immediate issuance of a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) restraining the Manila RTC from proceeding with the arraignment and pre-trial scheduled on 28 February 2020.
3. Briefly, it is respectfully submitted that Petitioner's application for a TRO be immediately considered as the criminal
1 1 \C(lt ~-a~, AD AiJ proceeding for fifteen (15) counts of murder serves as an ongoing 4 violation of Mr. Rodolfo Salas' constitutional rights.
4. Accordingly, in view of the extremely urgent need to restrain the Manila RTC from proceeding with arraignment and/ or pre-trial due to the foregoing and the other justification as mention in the Petition, there is a need for the Petition to be immediately and specially raffled, summons served on the Respondent, and the application for a TRO be set for hearing and resolved.
PRAYER
WHEREFORE, in view of the foregoing and in the substantial interest of justice and fair play, Jody C. Salas, through undersigned counsel, most respectfully prays that the Honorable Court upon receipt hereof, immediately conduct a special raffle of the Petition dated 24 February 2020.
Other reliefs just and equitable under the circumstances are likewise prayed for.
Quezon City for Manila City, 24 February 2020.
FREE LEGAL ASSISTANCE GROUP (FLAG) Counsel for Petitioner-Relafor RICHARD DE VELUZ 2nd Floor, Eastside Building 77 Malakas Street, Quezon City, PHL 1100
JOSE MANUEL I. DIOKNO, National Chairperson THEODORE 0. TE, Regional Coordinator for Metro Manila
BY:
Roll No. 35394 PTR No. 9668094/Feb. 4, 2020/Quezon City IBP Lifetime No. 00236/Feb. 9, 1995/Pasig City' MCLE Exemption No. VI-000914 (Valid until April 14, 2020) BM2012 Mandatory Legal Aid Service Exempt - Free Legal Assistance Group Email: [email protected]
2 THEODORE 0. TE 5 Roll of Attorneys No. 37142 PTR No. 7601766, January 25, 2019, Q.C. IBP No. 071683, January 31, 2019s, Makati City MCLE Exemption No. VI-001316 (Valid until 4-14-22) BM 2012 MLAS Exempt-Free Legal Assistance Group Tel No. 9205514 loc. 418/CP-09175202295 [email protected] 0 MICHAEL CHRISTO JRC. DE CASTRO Roll of Attom!1No. 68718 PTR No. 9343828/ January 6, 2020/Quezon City IBP No. 111122/January 20, 2020/Bicolandia/Masbate MCLE Compliance No. VI-0026337 /May 8, 2019-April 14, 2022 Email: [email protected] CP. No.: 0995 6512090
JOCEL ISIDRO S. DILAG Roll of Attorneys No. 69701 PTR No. 8131231, Makati City, January 10, 2020 IBP No. 109005, Laguna Chapter, January 10, 2020 MCLE Compliance No. VI-0007414 (Issued on 04-11-2018) TS [email protected]
i,
...,,.
...
3 G NOTICE OF HEARING:
THE CLERK OF COURT Supreme Court Padre Faura, Manila
Greetings:
Please submit the foregoing Motion for the consideration and approval of this Court immediately or at such time as may be available in this Court's calendar.
MICHAEL CHRISTO~R C. DE CASTRO
VERIFICATION
I, MICHAEL CHRISTOPHER C. DE CASTRO, of legal age, Filipino, under oath, depose and state that: I am the counsel for the Petitioner in the above-entitled case; and in said capacity, have prepared the foregoing EXTREMELY URGENT EX-PARTE MOTION FOR SPECIAL AND IMMEDIATE RAFFLE; and hereby affirm that the contents are true and correct, to the best of my own personal knowledge and based on allthentic records.
MICHAEL CHRISTOP~ C. DE CASTRO
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
Republic of the Philippines) Quezon City ) S.S. ~
BEFORE ME, a Notary Public, for and in Quezon this 24th day of February 2020, personally appeared MICHAEL CHRISTOPHER C. DE CASTRO presenting to me his competent evidence of identity his IBP ID valid until 13 September 2021, issued at Masbate; known to me to be same person who executed and signed the foregoing
4 7 signed the foregoing Motion and he acknowledged to me that the same is his free and voluntary act and deed.
WITNESS MY HAND AND SEAL at the place and on the date first above-written.
ATTY.J0 //1 _OP.CRISOLOGO ~Public Until Deeember 31, 2020 Doc.No.~(; Adm. Matter No. NP-023 (2020 .. 20~ 1) PTR No. 9270054-C / 01 ·02•20 Q,Q./ PageNo. ~ IBP Lifetime No, LRN-03680 Roll No. 49462 BookNo. 9(/f MCLE Vl-0017282 Valid Untll 4•14~2oaa Series of 2020. 11n No. 111-979•403•000 Add: 5 General de Jesus Heroes Hills Brgy. Sta. Cruz, Flshermall Q.C.
~
~
...
5 8
VERIFIED DECLARATION
I, ATTY. MICHAEL CHRISTOPHER C. DE CASTRO, hereby declare that the document hereto submitted electronically in accordance with the Efficient Use of Paper Rule are complete and true copy of the document filed with the Supreme Court.
) I ATTY. MICHAELI CHRI~ TOPHER C. DE CASTRO )Counsel r Petitioner 1 24 February 2020
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO before me this 24 February 2020, affiant exhibiting his competent evidence of identity, to wit: IBP ID No. 68718 valid until 13 September 2021 issued at Masbate.
i, ~ ATTY. ELISEO S. CALMA, JR. Doc. No. -
V,
.. .' ORfGlf\fAL 1 l.·c , · 1 ,,_L___·- Republic of The Philippines 9 .. :ElL·. C-::7..,?,:1~_, ' .I'~: .)_ - -Ly·-2-.:l)-- SUPREME COURT Manila
~ ~ En Banc ...;, -~ "'s:- -0 JODY C. SA.LAS, ex rel Person ::!'- Deprived of Liberty (POL) -';< •' RODOLFO C. SALAS, -0 Petitioner, SC G.R. SP PROC. No. 2'51693 -versus-
HON. THELMA BUNYI- FOR: HABEAS CORPUS, TRO MEDINA, Presiding Judge of the and INJUNCTION AND ALL Regional Trial Court of the City of OTHER LEGAL AND Manila, Branch 32, JCINSP. EQUITABLE REMEDIES LLOYD GONZAGA, Warden of the Manila City Jail Annex, and all
Jl,, those taking orders, instructions, p()5Tm .u: •. ,,.,., ~- , .§ !/.'·.:., ... ' --~-'; and directions from him, f, .• ~] ;i Respondents. OIUCINAL~ . :.,~. ~-t: x------x t,ND + COPIES . j' ~- PETITION WITH CD FILED i Petitioner, by counsel, respectfully states that:
PREFATORY STATEMENT
"How many times must a man look up Before he can see the sky? "1 ""'
...
1 "Blowin' in the Wind" by Bob Dylan. 1 0~?.!l~ 10 NATURE OF THE PETITION, PROPRIETY OF RESORT, AND URGENCY OF RELIEFS
1. This Petition is being filed under Rule 102 of the Rules of Court to free Mr. Rodolfo C. Salas from continuing illegal confinement, with application for a Temporary Restraining Order and Writ of Preliminary Injunction. Rodolfo is currently being detained by the Respondent in the City Jail of Manila without any legal justification, as will be demonstrated below.
2. There are no issues of fact that need to be threshed out in any of the lower courts as to preclude this Court's cognizance of this very urgent matter. For this reason, the observance of the first resort to trial courts may be dispensed with. Considering also the plea for immediate freedom from illegal detention under the circumstances narrated below, it is respectfully submitted that this matter may be acted upon by this Court.
3. CoRsidering the nature of the writ sought, it is respectfully submitted, finally, that no technical defects may and should be invoked towards defeating the remedies sought.
THE PARTIES
4. Petitioner JODY S. SALAS is a Filipino citizen, of legal age, and a resident of Unit 1706 Tower 1, Avida Cityflex Towers, 7th Ave cor Lane T, Bonifacio Global City, Taguig City. He is the son of RODOLFO C. SALAS ("PDL" or {Rodolfo"), a 72-year-old retiree based in Angeles City. He may be served with pleadings, notices and other processes through counsel at the address below.
5. Public respondent Respondent HON. THELMA BUNYI-MEDINA is the Presiding Judge of the Regional Trial Court of the City of Manila, Branch 32 and, in such capacity, issued the warrant of arrest subject of this petition. She may be served with pleadings, notices and other processes at her official station at the 5 /F, LRT Wing, Manila City Hall, Gat Antonio Villegas St., Ermita, V, City of Manila, Metro Manila. ·
6. Respondent JCINSP. LLOYD GONZi\.GA is the Warden of the Manila City Jail Annex and the public officer directly responsible for Rodolfo's confinement within the Manila City Jail Annex. He may be served with pleadings, notices and other processes at their official station at BJMP-NCR Compound, Camp
2 11 Bagong Diwa, General Santos Ave., Lower Bicutan Taguig City, Metro Manila.
ANTECEDENTS
7. On 2 October 1986, an Information for rebellion was filed against Rodolfo. The case was raffled to Branch 12 of the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Manila (the "Rebellion Case").
8. In a Decision dated 10 May 1991,2 RTC Branch 12 sentenced Rodolfo to a penalty of six (6) years and one (1) day of prision mayor, with accessory penalties, among others. The Decision likewise credited him with the full time during which he underwent preventive imprisonment.
9. The Decision in the Rebellion Case was based on the plea bargain between the prosecution and the accused Rodolfo Salas and Josefina Cruz-Salas. The said plea bargain was embodied in a Compromise Agreement dated 9 May 1991 that was appended to the Joint Manifestation and Motion (After Plea Bargaining)3 of even date, which states:
"x XX
2. That after serious discussions and extended deliberations, and after invoking the liberal application of the rules on plea bargaining, the accused, the defense counsel and the Public Prosecutor have mutually agreed to the implementation of the following measures and conditions:
XXX XXX XXX
(2-e) That both accused will be covered by the mantle of protection of the HERNANDEZ-ENRILE political offense doctrine against being charged and prosecuted for any common crune allegedly committed in furtherance of rebellion or surversion (sic);
XX x" ...
2 Annex "A". 3 Annex "B".
2 12 10. Rodolfo started serving his sentence for the crime of Rebellion from the promulgation of the Decision. Having been credited with the full time of his preventive detention at the New Bilibid Prisons where has was detained since his arrest on 29 September 1986, and upon having fully served his sentence, Rodolfo's release was ordered on 25 September 1992.
11. Since then, Rodolfo worked on re-building his life with his family. He, together with his live-in partner Ms. Jhoanna Lamigo, moved to Angeles City to establish their family home. He has since provided for his family as the only breadwinner and cared for Jhoanna who is sick with lupus and for their two (2) minor children, Janrudz Lamigo Salas, aged ten (11) and Jamela Roz Lamigo Salas, aged nine (9).
12. Unbeknownst to him, charges for murder in furtherance of rebellion were filed against him in 2007. As appearing from the Resolution dated 16 February 2007 issued by Assistant Provincial Prosecutor Viv~ro (the "Prosecutor's Resolution"),4 the indictment for the alleged murder is based on his alleged involvement as member of the CPP-NPA Central Committee, who allegedly directed and/ or ordered the implementation of "Operation Venereal Disease" (OPN-VD), which aimed to "cleanse" the ranks of the local and regional committees of the CPP-NPA of suspected enemies.
13. On 18 February 2020, at around 5:00 in the morning and while Rodolfo and his two (2) minor children were sound asleep, armed uniformed men barged in~ their family premises at 386 Dona Carmen St., Mountainview, Balibago, Angeles City, where he has been living publicly since the year 2009.
14. Upon confirming from Jhoanna whether Rodolfo was a resident of the house, armed uniformed men entered the house, went to the room where Rodolfo was sleeping and circled around him. The officers then arrested Rodolfo, pursuant to the warrant of arrest issued by Branch 32 of the RTC of Manila (the "Manila RTC"). ~ 15. Rodolfo was escorted out of the house and was taken to the vehicle. When Rodolfo has already left the house, the officers then conducted a search of the premises. However, no search warrant was shown to Jhoanna prior to, during and after the conduct of the search.
4 Annex "C".
3 ' tf· .' 13 16. Rodolfo is currently being illegally detained in the City Jail of Manila pursuant to the Commitment Order dated 20 February 2020. 5 No bail was recommended.
GROUNDS FOR THE PRIVILEGE OF THE WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS
The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus is the only speedy and effectual remedy where Constitutional Rights are being violated
17. The Constitution, the supreme law of the land, guards every person's fundamental right to due process in this wise:
ARTICLE III Bill of Rights
Section 1. No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law, nor shall any person be denied the equal protection of the laws.6 i
18. More explicitly, the Constitution commands in no uncertain terms that-
No person shall be held to answer for a criminal offense without due process of law. 7
19. Where liberty is the rule and restraint the exception,8 due process of law is the shield that ]"fOtects every person's rights to life, liberty, or property. This Honorable Court has repeatedly held that the essence of due process is simply an opportunity.. to be
5 Annex "D". 6 Sec. 1, Art III Bill of Rights, 1987 Constitution. 7 Sec. 14 (1), Art III Bill of Rights, 1987 Constitution. 8 Fay v. Noia, 372 U.S. 391, 83 S.Ct. 822, 9 L.Ed. 2d 837 (1963).
4 14 heard, or an opportunity to explain one's side or an opportunity to seek for a reconsideration of the action or ruling complained of.9
20. To satisfy the due process requirement, official action must not outrun the bounds of reason and result in sheer oppression. It is not a narrow or "technical conception with fixed content unrelated to time, place and circumstances," decisions based on such a clause requiring a "dose and perceptive inquiry into fundamental principles of our society."10 Courts must apply a conscientious and deliberate level of scrutiny so that the substantive right to liberty will not be further curtailed in the labyrinth of other processes.11
21. In Umil v. Ramos, this Court held that the function of the habeas corpus is not limited to a mere inquiry as to whether or not the court which issued the process, judgment or order of commitment or before whom the detained person is charged, had jurisdiction or not to issue the process, judgment or order or to take cognizance of the case. Rather, "in all petitions for habeas corpus the court must inquire into every phase and aspect of petitioner's detention - from the moment petitioner was taken into custody up to the moment the court passes upon the merits of the petition; and only after such a scrutiny can the court satisfy itself that the due process clause of our Constitution has in fact been satisfied."12
22. In Gumabon, et al. v. Director of the Bureau of Prisons,13 this Court found that where the detention complained of finds its origin in what has been judicially ordained, the range of inquiry in a habeas corpus proceeding is .,considerably narrowed. The fundamental exception, though, is that once a deprivation of a constitutional right is shown to exist, the court that rendered the judgment is deemed ousted of jurisdiction and habeas corpus is the appropriate remedy to assail the legality of the detention.
23. In In the Matter of the Petition for Habeas Corpus of Datukan Malang Saliba v. Warden of the Quezon City Jail Annex,14 this Court ruled that the writ of habeas corpus should be issued in favor of a ..,,,
9 Reyes v. Ombudsman, G.R. No. 208243, June 5, 2017 10 Ermita-Malate Hotel and Motel Operators Association, Inc. v. The Honorable City Mayor of Manila, 127 Phil. 306 (1967) . ... 11 In the Matter of the Petition for Habeas Corpus oJDatukan Malang Saliba v. Warden of the Quezon City Jail Annex, G.R. No. 197597, April 08, 2015, citing Gumabon, et al. v. Director of the Bureau of Prisons, 147 Phil. 362,367 (1971). 12 Umil v. Ramos, G.R. No. 81567, July 9, 1990. 13 G.R. No. L-30026, January 30, 1971. 14 G.R. No. 197597, April 8, 2015.
5 citizen who has shown that he was illegally deprived of liberty 15 without due process of law. Saliba involved a person who was charged with 57 counts of murder in relation to the Maguindanao massacre based on mistaken identity.
24. The subject of this petition, Mr. Rodolfo Salas, is being illegally detained in violation of: (1) his right to due process as a protection against hasty, malicious, and oppressive prosecutions, and (2) his right against being put twice in jeopardy of punishment for the same offense.
25. Only this Court's issuance of the Writ of Habeas Corpus and the grant of the Privilege of the Writ can remedy these continuing violations of Rodolfo's Constitutional rights.
The State Violated Rodolfo's ~onstitutional Right to Due Process
26. The right to preliminary investigation exists as a necessary component of due process in criminal procedure. It is not merely a formal or technical right; it is a substantive right because the accused in a criminal trial is inevitably exposed to prolonged anxiety, aggravation, humiliation, not to speak of expense, and the right to an opportunity to avoid a painful process is a valuable right.15 ;
27. The object or purpose of a preliminary investigation, or a previous inquiry of some kind, before an accused person is placed upon trial, is to secure the innocent against hasty, malicious, and oppressive prosecutions, and to protect him from an open and public accusation of crime, from the trouble, expense, and anxiety of a public trial, and also to protect the State from useless and expensive trials.16 The denial of this right is a grave irregularity which nullifies the proceedings beca.Jlse it violates the right to due process guaranteed by Section 1, Article III of our Constitution.17
28. The State swept all of these safeguards a.way when it hastily, maliciously, and oppressively filed the information for
15 Labay v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. Nos. 235937-40, July 23, 2018. 16 U.S. v. Grant, G.R. No. L-5786, December 29, 1910. 17 People v. Monton, G.R. No. L-23906, June 22, 1968. 6 fifteen (15) counts of murder without affording Rodolfo the 16 opportunity to participate and be heard in the preliminary investigation. At no point in the proceeding did Rodolfo receive any subpoena from the public prosecutor requiring him to answer. The first time he found out about it was in the news wherein he heard that there was a case filed against him in Leyte. By its very nature, the news is not a substitute for a subpoena requiring him to answer the charges against him.
29. The case of Sangalang v. People18 is apropos, to wit:
"This Court fails to see any plausible reason for the filing of the information in the present case, considering that the defense of double jeopardy is patently clear from the facts appearing on record. The law makes it a legal duty for prosecuting officers to file the charges against whomsoever the evidence may show to be responsible for an offense, but in the performance of their functions, they are equally duty bound to exercise a high degree of prudence and discrimination to the end that no one shall be twice put in jeopardy for the same offense. In this way, the danger, annoyance and vexation suffered by the accused after going through the process of being arrested, subjected to a preliminary investigation, arraigned and required to plead and stand trial may be ~aided."
30. Had Rodolfo been given the opportunity to be heard in the preliminary investigation, he would have more than adequately defended himself. The State saw to it that not even a whisper would be heard from him. And now Rodolfo finds himself once again in jail in the twilight of his years and without the possibility of posting bail.
~
The 1991 Plea Bargain for Rebellion Shields Rodolfo ... from Future Prosecution For
1s G.R. No. L-16160, October 31, 1960.
7 All Acts Committed In 17 Furtherance Thereof
31. In the landmark case of People v. Hernandez, 19 this Court held that both treason and rebellion include and absorb common crimes performed in the prosecution thereof (e.g. murder), to wit:
"x XX
Thus, insofar as treason is concerned, the opinion of this court, on the question whether said crime may be complexed with murder, when the former was committed through the latter, and it is so alleged in the information, had positively and clearly crystalized itself in the negative as early as January 29, 1948.
XXX XXX XXX
It is true that treason and rebellion are distinct and different from each other. This does not detract, however, from the rule that the ingredients of a crime form part and parcel thereof, and, hence, are absorbed by the same and cannot be punished either separately therefrom or by the application of Article 48 of the Revised Penal Code. Besides there is more reason to apply said. rule in the crime of rebellion than in that of treason, for the law punishing rebellion (Article 135, Revised Penal Code) specifically mentions the act of engaging in war and committing serious violence among its essential elements - thus clearly indicating that everything done in the prosecution of said war, as a means necessary therefor, is embraced therein - unlike the provision on
treason (Article 114, Revised....., Penal Code) which is less explicit thereon .
XX x"
19 G.R. Nos. L-6025-26, July 18, 1956.
8 18 32. In more explicit language, this Court explained in Hernandez that rebellion necessarily includes "serious violence" and "loss of life," viz:
11 X XX
One of the means by which rebellion may be committed, in the words of said Article 135, is by "engaging in war against the forces of the government" and "committing serious violence" in the prosecution of said "war". These expressions imply everything that war connotes, namely; resort to arms, requisition of property and services, collection of taxes and contributions, restraint of liberty, damage to property, physical injuries and loss of life, and the hunger, illness and unhappiness that war leaves in its wake - except that, very often, it is vyorse than war in the international sense, for it involves internal struggle, a fight between brothers, with a bitterness and passion or ruthlessness seldom found in a contest between strangers. Being within the purview of II engaging in war" and 11 committing serious violence", said resort to arms, with the resulting impairment or destruction of life and property, constitutes not two or more offense, but only one crime - that of rebellion pl1in and simple. Thus, for instance, it has been held that "the crime of treason may be committed 'by executing either a single or similar intentional overt acts, different or similar but distinct, and for that reason, it may be considered one single continuous offense. (Guinto vs. Veluz, 77 Phil., 801, 44 Off. Gaz., 909.)" (People vs. Pacheco, 93 Phil., 521.) .,.,. XXX XXX XXX
. . . for engaging in war, serious viole:t1ce, physical injuries and destruction of life and property are inherent in rebellion, but not in assault upon persons in authority or agents of persons in authority or in rape. The word
9
1:~•.. "rebellion" evokes, not merely a challenge to 19 the constituted authorities, but, also, civil war, on a bigger or lesser scale, with all the evils that go with it, whereas, neither rape nor assault upon persons in authority connotes necessarily, or even generally, either physical injuries, or murder.
XXX XXX XXX
an insurgent who killed a prisoner of war because he was too weak to march with the retreating rebel forces, and could not be left behind without endangering the safety of the latter - was dismissed upon the ground that the execution of said prisoner of war formed parf of, and was included in, the crime of sedition, which, in turn, was covered by an amnesty, to the benefits of which said Defendant was entitled."
XX x"
33. Decades later this very same Court upheld the Hernandez doctrine and declared it to be good law in the case of In the Matter for the Petition for Habea_s Corpus of Juan Ponce Enrile v. 20 Judge Jaime Salazar, viz.: 'I,
The rejection of both options shapes and determines the primary ruling of the Court, which is that Hernandez remains binding doctrine operating to prohibit the complexing of rebellion with any other offense committed on the occasion thereof, either as a means necessary to its comm1ss1on or as an unintended effect of an a~vity that constitutes rebellion. ... 34. Hernandez, and thereafter Enrile, had the effect of amending a penal law - specifically, the provisions of the Revised Penal Code pertaining to rebellion vis-a-vis common crimes performed in furtherance of rebellion. Art. 22 of the Revised Penal
20 G.R. No. 92163, June 5, 1990. 10 Code22 therefore applies because insofar as judicial decisions 2 0 applying to or interpreting the laws or the Constitution form a part of the legal system of the Philippines,23 the Hernandez-Enrile doctrine changed the legal landscape in favor of persons who have been accused or convicted of not only of rebellion, but also those who will be accused of all common crimes performed in furtherance thereof.
35. This was precisely the intention of the State and of Rodolfo when they entered into the plea bargain that became the basis for Rodolfo's conviction for Rebellion in 1991 - that Rodolfo will be "covered by the mantle of protection of the HERNANDEZ ENRILE political offense doctrine against being charged and prosecuted for any common crime allegedly committed in furtherance of rebellion or surversion (sic)." Necessarily, this includes murder.
36. Such a stipulation is not beyond the authority of the State as it is not prohibited by law nor is it violative of customs, traditions, good order, or public policy. On the other hand, the State, through its public prosecutors in 1991, specifically entered into the plea bargaining agreement with full knowledge that the Hernandez-Emile political offense doctrine shielded then and would shield thereafter Rodolfo from any such prosecutions for common crimes allegedly done n furtherance of the political objectives of rebellion.
i The State Violated Rodolfo's Constitutional Right Against Double Jeopardy
37. The 1987 Constitution prohibits the State from exposing a person to double jeopardy in this wise: ..,, Section 21. No person shall be twice put in jeopardy of punishment for the same offense. If an act is punished
22 Article 22. Retroactive effect of penal laws. - Penal Laws shall have a retroactive effect insofar as they favor the persons guilty of a felony, who is not a habitual criminal, as this term is defined in Rule 5 of Article 62 of this Code, although at the time of the publication of such laws a final sentence has been pronounced and the convict is serving the same.
23 Art. 8 of R.A. No. 386 otherwise known as the Civil Code of the Philippines.
11 by a law and an ordinance, conviction or acquittal under 21 either shall constitute a bar to another prosecution for the same act.
38. Sec. 7 of Rule 117 of the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure gives life to the Constitutional Right above more explicitly, viz.:
Section 7. Former conviction or acquittal; double jeopardy. - When an accused has been convicted or acquitted, or the case against him dismissed or otherwise terminated without his express consent by a court of competent jurisdiction, upon a valid complaint or information or other formal charge sufficient in form and substance to sustain a conviction and after the accused had pleaded to the charge, the conviction or acquittal of the accused or the dismissal of the case shall be a bar to another prosecution for the offense charged,
or f01: any attempt to commit the same or frustration ,;l!,, thereof, or for any offense which necessarily includes ,f .I 'I or is necessarily included in the offense charged in the (! 'I former complaint or information. 1
39. Legal jeopardy attaches only (a) upon a valid indictment, (b) before a competent court, (c) after arraignment, (d) a valid plea having been entered; where (e) the case was dismissed or otherwise terminated without the express consent of the accused.24
40. More than three decades~go, the State placed Rodolfo in exactly the same position he finds himself today. The Public Prosecutor of the City of Manila charged him with the crime of Rebellion in an Information dated 2 October 1986 before Branch 12 of the Regional Trial Court of Manila. The State filed an amended information on 24 October 1986 and, after a vigorous legal tussle, Rodolfo was finally arraigned on 4 May 1987 wherein he pleaded "not guilty." After four (4) years of trial and rounds of plea bargaining, the prosecution and the defense finally arrived at an agreement. The plea-bargaining agreeUJ,ent contained the following salient provisions:
11 .... X XX
24 Dimayacyac v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 136264, May 28, 2004, citing People v. Ylagan, 58 Phil. 851. 12 -· <',' Ji,'' ??,.. .., 2. That after serious discussions and extended deliberations, and after invoking the liberal application of the rules on plea bargaining, the accused, the defense counsel and the Public Prosecutor have mutually agreed to the implementation of the following measures and conditions:
XXX XXX XXX
(2-e) That both accused will be covered by the mantle of protection of the HERNANDEZ-ENRILE political offense doctrine against being charged and prosecuted for any common crime allegedly committed in furtherance of rebellion or surversion (sic);
XX x"
41. Rodolfo was convicted of Rebellion based on this agreement, and _he fully served his time.
42. Now the State is charging Rodolfo with 15 counts of murder committed in furtherance of rebellion, and he is being made to answer - yet again - for acts for which his liberty had once been taken away. The Assistant Provincial Prosecutor of Baybay, Leyte even found in the Resolution charging Rodolfo and several others that
"x XX
i " ... there was a grand conspiracy to carry out the killing and execution of innocent persons and individuals suspected to be enemies of the CPP-NPA in Leyte and in neighboring provinces.
XXX XXX XXX
the summary executions and killings were deliberately planned and~executed by and between the Central, Provincial, and/or Local Committee members of the CPP-NPA.
XX x"
43. By placing Rodolfo in second jeopardy for murder when the State has actively negotiated for and entered into a plea-
13 23 bargaining agreement that was used as the basis to secure Rodolfo's conviction for Rebellion in 1991 - a crime which absorbs and includes murder - the State has not only violated Rodolfo's right against double jeopardy but also to due process of law.
44. The Constitution, the plea-bargaining agreement, and the Hernandez-Enrile doctrine shields Rodolfo against future prosecution not just for Rebellion but also for all common crimes committed in furtherance thereof. The State, through the public prosecutor in its Resolution, even admitted that the acts charged were committed "against individuals suspected to be enemies of the CPP-NPA."
45. Having shown the State's violations of Rodolfo's Constitutional rights, the Regional Trial Court of Manila, Branch 32 which issued the warrant of arrest is deemed ousted of jurisdiction. As per Gumabon, Habeas Corpus is therefore the appropriate, speedy, and effectual remedy under the circumstances.
Temporary Restraining Order and Injunction Must Issue to Stay the Criminal Proceedings Before the Trial Court to Arrest the Grave and Irreparable Injury to Rodolfo i,
46. On 20 February 2020, the Regional Trial Court of Manila, Branch 32 issued an Order setting the case for arraignment and/ or pre-trial on 28 February 2020 at 8:30 in the morning until 4:30 in the aftemoon.25 As such, and considering the presence of all the requisites for the issuance of a temporary restraining order and injunction in this case, petitioner seeks urgent redress from this Honorable Court to restrain the proc~dings before the trial court.
47. Jurisprudence has long recognized that criminal prosecutions may be restrained or stayed by injunction in the presence of exceptional circumstances.26 This is especially true in cases where, among others, it is necessary to afford adequate
25 Annex "E" 26 Primicias v. The Municipality of Urdaneta, G.R. No. L-26702, October 18, 1979. 14 protection to the constitutional rights of the accused,27 or where it is 24 necessary for the orderly administration of justice or to avoid oppression or multiplicity of actions.28
48. Thus, this Court did not hesitate to grant injunctive relief to restrain repeated prosecutions for a criminal charge that clearly violated a person's right against double jeopardy29 and in cases shown to have been impelled by persecution rather than prosecution. 30
49. Applying these standards, the issuance of immediate injunctive relief is undoubtedly proper to prevent the grave and irreparable damage caused to him by the continuation of the criminal proceedings for the fifteen (15) counts of murder before the Regional Trial Court of the City of Manila, Branch 32.
50. Petitioner has demonstrated in the foregoing discussion Rodolfo's clear and undeniable constitutional right to due process against hasty, malicious and oppressive prosecutions, constitutional right against double jeopardy, and his right to the protection of existing laws, which this Court has the duty to protect.
51. Without the injunction prayed for, the proceedings before the trial court sought to be restrained shall continue to provide a legal cover for the egregious violation of Rodolfo's rights. The actual and continued violation of Rodolfo's constitutional rights must be arrested now, otherwise grave injustice and irreparable injury will be caused to Rodolfo who stands to languish in detention during the pendency of the criminal proceedings, when no less than the State itself has guaranteed Rodolfo's protection against prosecution for any common crimes in furtherance of rebellion or subversion.31
52. Further, there is no other ordinary, speedy and adequate remedy available to restrain the thinly-veiled criminal persecution against Rodolfo in the trial court below. While the Respondents may argue that Rodolfo is not prevented from ventilating his defense in the court below, forcing Rodolfo to stand trial for a ..,
27 Brocka v. Enrile, G.R. Nos. 69863-65, December 10, 1990, citing Hernandez v. Albano, G.R. L- 19272, January 25, 1967. 28 Brocka v. Enrile, supra, citing Dimayuga v. Fernandez, 43 Phil 304 and Fortun v. Labang, et al., L- 38383, May 27, 1981. 29 Sangalang, v. People of the Philippines, supra. 30 Rustia v. Ocampo, CA-G.R. No. 4760, March 25, 1960; Brocka v. Enrile, supra. 31 Annex "B" - Compromise Agreement dated 9 May 1991 appended to the Joint Manifestation and Motion (After Plea Bargaining).
15 9r=... v criminal charge that should not have been initiated to begin with, is offensive to the basic tenets of our democratic society.
53. In Salonga v. Cruz,32 this Court declared that:
Infinitely more important than conventional adherence to general rules of criminal procedure is respect for the citizen's right to be free not only from arbitrary arrest and punishment but also from unwarranted and vexatious prosecution. The integrity of a democratic society is corrupted if a person is carelessly included in the trial of around forty persons when on the very face of the record no evidence linking him to the alleged conspiracy exists.
54. The Court may take notice that Rodolfo has acknowledged his criminal liability for rebellion, for which he has already repaid his debt to society. He fully served his sentence in jail and has since lived a quiet and normal life with his family. The continued state oppression against him, under the guise of prosecution of criminal charges, should not be allowed to continue.
PRAYER
WHEREFORE, in view of the foregoing and in the substantial interest of justice and fair play, petijioner Jody C. Salas, through undersigned counsel, most respectfully" prays that this Honorable Court-
1. Upon receipt of this Petition, IMMEDIATELY ISSUE a Temporary Restraining Order restraining the Regional Trial Court of the City of Manila, Branch 32 from proceeding with the arraignment and pre-trial scheduled on 28 February 2020 in Criminal Case Nos. 08-262163 and 14-306533-14-306546, effective until this Court says ..,., otherwise;
2. Thereafter, as this Court may deem proper c1fter g1v1ng due course, ISSUE a writ of preliminary injunction, restraining the Regional Trial Court of the City of Manila,
32 G.R. No. 59524, February 18, 1985.
16 ')t',_o Branch 32 from proceeding with the proceedings for Criminal Case Nos. 08-262163 and 14-306533-14-306546;
3. Upon receipt of this Petition, to also IMMEDIATELY ISSUE a Writ of Habeas Corpus directed to Respondents , commanding them and all persons acting under their control and supervision, direction and instructions to produce the body of RODOLFO SALAS, within twenty four (24) hours from receipt of the said writ and ordering above-named respondents to show cause for the illegal restraint and continuing detention of Mr. Salas, with the writ being made returnable to the Clerk of Court En Banc of this Court;
4. Set this matter for immediate summary hearing after receiving Return of the Writ and after such summary hearing, render JUDGMENT GRANTING THE PRIVILEGE OF THE WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS in favor of Mr. RQDOLFO C. SALAS, ordering that Mr. Salas be immediately set free;
Other alternative reliefs just and equitable under the circumstances are likewise prayed for, such as but not limited to allowing Mr. Salas to be set free on bail under Rule 114 or interim bail, as this Court allowed in Enrile v. Perez.33
Quezon City for Manila City, 24 February 2020.
i, FREE LEGAL ASSISTANCE GROUP (FLAG) Counsel for Petitioner-Relator Jody Salas 2nd Floor, Eastside Building 77 Malakas Street, Quezon City, PHL 1100
JOSE MANUEL I. DIOKNO, National Chairperson THEODORE 0. TE, Regional Coordinator for Metro Manila .,,,,
... 33 Reference is made to the Habeas Corpus petition filed by Juan Ponce Enrile in GR No. 147785 (Enrile v. Perez) where this Court granted Mr. Enrile "interim bail" in its Resolution dated May 5, 2001 on the observation that the testimony of the witnesses presented appear to be hearsay. Under the Constitution, there is no "legal difference" between Mr. Enrile and Mr. Salas (though actual differences may, of course, be appreciated) such as would justify a denial of this extraordinary alternative relief. 17 27 BY
NO Roll No. 35394 PTR No. 9668094/Feb. 4, 2020/Quezon City IBP Lifetime No. 00236/Feb. 9, 1995/Pasig City MCLE Exemption No. VI-000914 (Valid until April 14, 2020) BM2012 Mandatory Legal Aid Service Exempt - Free Legal Assistance Group Email: [email protected]. ph ,.
TH~~O~O.TE SC Roll No. 37142 PTR No. 9542333, January 24, 2020, Q.C. IBP No. 112306, January 24, 2020, Makati City MCLE Exemption No. VI-001316 (Valid until 4-14-22) BM 2012 MLAS Exempt-Free Legal Assistance Group Tel No. 89205514 loc. 418/CP-09175202295 [email protected] n1 ..
MICHAEL CHRISTD'ER C. DE CASTRO Roll of Atto~ls No. 68718 PTR No. 9343828/ January 6, 2020/Quezon City IBP No. 111122/January 20, 2020/Bicolandia/Masbate MCLE Compliance No. VI-0026337 /May 8, 2019 - April 14, 2022 Email: [email protected] CP. No.: 0995 651 2090
orneys No. 69701 , ... akati City, January 10, 2020 IBP No. 1090()5, Laguna1 Chapter, January 10, 2020 MCLE Compliance No. VI-0007414 (Issued on 04-11-2018) JS [email protected]
18 : •' I; ,, .' 28
/
Roll of Attorneys No. 31374 PTR No. 9269748/01-02-20/Quezon City IBP Lifetime Roll No. 07913/01-09-09/Ilocos Sur MCLE Ecemption No. VI-001428/Valid until 04-14-22 TelNo.89200044/89200177 Email: [email protected]
a Q) tJ •1~£ C .~,! 2i/ csl 'tJ ..__ (0 ~
I C~py Furnished: ;Jg, 8ft J; ··.::-nm' 2hi (1J m ·'f! (0 : ·. 8 &.i J! Kl 11j QJ 0)({!~ ~ ,taf.flgif C, .e';] ;! (~ ii f:l "f~E!c'(J-g 3fl c-22-, i.>~ -8~1U-i!l t:£i THE OFFICE OF THE SOLICITOR GENERAL ;i 'SJ 2 &-1 3."o "}]l:/!'! af 91 l E Q) 2h t !ff. 134 Amorsolo Street, Legaspi Village .:s .._:;:; 1') tlJ' ,)'tl 1 :a~ti i?ffiJ Makati City ~lcuCOru :-&xi iJtf S~J . ii_.-_~ a. ,~ 8.<2. £~ Bi 8 tr.'.£ i'j (/) C - (!j~ . .J: ,.,,~.1 .n1 ,r.· 8 ?ff ~: fr~ HON. THELMA BUNYI-MEDINA t "he -r1 [l" f;i ll Presiding Judge, RTC Manila, Branch 32 (\J,.Q -~"'c,-g T)UH _c :"J (l) ~ l'l TJ;;; fl & .~) SF, LRT Wing, Manila City Hall, Gat ~ (I) :u·18 §(ti ~~i~ §@ {/} ~ t'. 5 µ2i Antonio Villegas St., Ermita, City of iiiil ~ ~1~f i.w r.: EC 0 n_~~ Manila, Metro Manila .Ii~ !! 1';-J,j JIU 8_ 0 --=_ 8 :~ ~ (l)t) g~~ g ·"' ~ ~ JCINSP. LLOYD GONZAGA "'c1)/ ~~ Warden of the Manila CihJ Jail Annex I HH :I~ ~ fu ~ ~ £ G 2 BJMP-NCR Compound, Camp Bagong !l) g] RB~ n5 g B·E5~~ ~3l ~ "6<1>k& 1m Diwa, General Santos Ave., L~wer 8 cFmw cffi (ti ;8.~-~ ·fil~ l Ecl'l.:;l" ~~ Bicutan Taguig City, Metro Manila. ,,~ ~~g~ '6~ C ..,::.n_rtl • U..., '.') t: ·c r./) ~ ~ l ~ ~·u, EE ~ 11' ~ *IB ::l "'i ~ \g_O~§ ~D -o · ~ ~ E ;0 ~ !!.! -gm"' E :S:S C ij~ §.~t:8 --~~ flJ 0 ("" F. 0 0 - ~ g~~:l: --~ I-0 cu .. ~ fri.!11 ~ ... - ~ ~ ~ I ~tT ~i i 'B ~ u Q-~ iii iil ~ar cfJw~ 0~ ~§ ~11~)[ ~g, ~- u E _g u) 01 ~ iJl C ...... (/J E vi~ 1 i ~ ~l-~~ 8~ . .ij~ ~iG-gJ; fill~ p~ ?~Q~ ¼t.§ ...., liC tn!£~ £~C PJ ~ruO_c: ~lc.iE ~E .gIBo; ~~~! ~~~R~gJ·_rot:_.c1~C '.M .c. a.. \J.) "iJi O ~ 0 ~ (l 9 r" ·-: 1_12S c ~ fa 5½- (\j ~ C E~j~3~~~~22 ...
mmum,_J -0 .r:: tn O o ?:: 2i_ U) OlJ :N
19 ,,. t "\
29 VERIFICATION AND CERTIFICATE OF NON-FORUM SHOPPING
I, JODY S. SALAS, Filipino citizen, of legal age, with address at Unit 1706 Tower 1, Avida Cityflex Towers, 7th Ave cor Lane T, Bonifacio Global City, Taguig City, after having been duly sworn to in accordahce with law, hereby depose and state:
(1) I am the petitioner in the above-captioned case and I have caused the preparation of the foregoing Petition;
(2) I have read the Petition and that it has been explained to me in a language known to me, and I affirm that the allegations herein are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and based on authentic records;
ii I
(3) I attest to the authenticity of the annexes attached hereto;
(4) I have·not commenced any action or proceeding involving the same issue with any court of law;
' (5) that,' to the best of my knowledge, no other action or claim is pending in any other forum;
(6) that I hereby undertake to notify this Honorable Court of such fact within five days from receipt of such knowledge, should I come to learn that the same or similar action has been filed or pending before any other... court.
IN WITNESS HEREOF, I hereby affix my signature this 24 th of FeQruary 2020 in Quezon City, Philippines. i?,lLAs' SUBSCRIBED and SWORN TO before me this 24 th of February 2020 in Quezon City, Philippines, affiant exhibiting to me his Philippine Passport EC8490736 valid until 07 Aug. 2021, as competent evidence of his identity hereto attached, and personally acknowledged to me that the foregoing pleading has been executeq freely and voluntarily. \e · ATTY. JOS O P. CRISOLOGO DOC NO· Untfl Decembertary Public 31 2020 I 1 PAGE NO._ Adm. Matter No. NP-023 (2020.20211 BOOK NO. PTR No. ~270054-C, 01-02-20 a.c' SERIES OF 2020 IBP Lifetime No. LRN-03688 . · Roll No. 49462 MCLE Vl-0017262 Valid Until 4-14-2022 20 lin No. 111-979-403-000 Add: 5 General de Jesus Heroes Hills Brgy. Sta. Cruz, Fishermall a.c. 30
VERIFIED DECLARATION
I, ATTY. MICHAEL CHRISTOPHER C. DE CASTRO, hereby declare that the document hereto submitted electronically in accordance with the Efficient Use of Paper Rule are complete and true copy of the document filed with the Supreme Court.
ATTY. MICHAEL CHRI[;\ PHER C. DE CASTRO Counsel f::J:titioner 24 February 2020
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO before me this 24 February 2020, affiant exhibiting his competent evidence of identity, to wit: IBP ID No. 68718 valid until 13 September 2021 issued at Masbate.
i.
~ Doc.No. f1S ATTY. ELISEO S. CALMA, JR. Notary Public Quezon City Page No. SB Until December 31, 2020 Book No. /-)I. PTR No. 9521280 1/21 /2020-QC Series of 2020. IBP No. 095280 / Roll No. 50183 MCLE Comp. No. Vl-0012817 ADM. Matter No. NP-067 .,.., .,.blic of the Philippines) 31 1zon City )s.s.
AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE AND MAILING IN LIEU OF PERSONAL SERVICE (in compliance with RULE 13, SECTIONS l l AND 12 OF THE 1997 RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE.)
I, ~i(l /, ~8AA2 U , of legal age, as representative of FREE LEGAL ASSISTANCE lOUP (FLAG), do )1ereby state under oath that:
111
:Personal Service on : [ ] By delivering personally a copy to the party or his/her attorney on ______20 _, as shown on p. _. [ ] By leaving a copy in his/her office with his/her clerk or with a person having charge thereof on 20 _, as shown on p. _. [ ] By delivering personally a copy thereof to the Court/Tribunal/ 0 ffice on ______20 _, as shown on p. _. Registered Mail/Private Courier tQ: ifb 0' [ ] By depositing on J 1, F 2. Pursuant to RULE 13, SECTION 11 IN RELATION TO SECTION 6 OF THE 1997 RULES OF CIVIL OCEDURE, the filing/~of the foreg_oing was made by registered mail/~e couti<::,_ instead of through personal Ice because personal service was rendered impracticable clue to: •... , [✓ l the distance of adverse counsel's office in relation to th~ Court/Tribunal and res0rt.to personal service would have suited in failure to file the pleading(s)/legal document(s) on time,"to the detriment of our client(s); . [✓] the limited personnel resources of the Office which would have rendered it physically impossible for the 1leading(s)/legal documents(s) to be filed on time, to the detriment of our client(s); [ ✓ l the time constraints and to ensure the faster or immediate receipt thereof, and which would have been impossible •'fthe pleading(s)/legal document(s) was/were to be filed/served by registered mail. ~ ..,., q • . SU~SCRIBED AN_D swo~ TO BEFORE' ME this -2fl- ~#tti1)fO at Quezon City, affiant exhibiting 11before me his competent evidence ot identity (CEI) SSS/TIN No. O__j - 0, ... . ~ !71-./~,AAI A11Y.~ TANA'KAVrrERBO, J/ SCIIIIINl.fflll 2F Elltllldl lldt,, 71 llataku St., omman, QC IBP Llfetlmt Roll No. 00216/01-10"95/Caplz PTR No. - DP..- 3.o..).~ NP No. '.P/,..::..2./1:ltJ) [Doc. No. Notary ubl c • uewn Cltv ,q 29 Until Oecamber 3i, 20--{J./)___ _ Page No. 81- !Book No. 1"JIII JtSeries of 20"P1) Is. f.i\!-,;",>.r,· .. .-_.j· ,1,u,,. :,. -~- k -~. ~ft,. •~ · ,r-:--- .. . :rl:'· .,, . ,. . . ,1., ,, ,,,,,_, · . -· ·mC OF THE PHILIPPINE'S OIU'.GINM':. N~IQN.AJ.,_. APITAL. JUD;r:c;:;r~ ~ION PJl..i!'JJBY~-~--. -- ⇒----;·ru,oc;--ON~ TRJ;AL.__ · COURT _ l JIMi•k~:_, .__..,,.....,;;,,~-~-·-·--••<-·•2.~~ ✓ --~~~~:. ~0~~?1~~~~T) PEOPLE OF THE PH_ILIPPINF.S:,. . . _, Pl'1n1;iff., - versus• CRIM. CABE No; ... 86-48926 RODOLFO C• SALAS alias for Com,mander Bilog/Henry '1/ JOSEFINA CRUZ alias REBELLION " ~s·• Mercado, and JOSE CONCEPCION alias E~gene Zamora, Accused. X - - • ------~ X I . . . DECISION ------\ Filed on Ooto'ber 2, 1986. is an Information,· charging ROOOLFO c. SALAS alias Comm~der Bilog/ Henry, J0SEfIN4 CRUZ alias Mrs.. Merca•o and JOSE , CONCEPCION alias Eugene Zamora ot the crime.of REBEIJ,ION under Article 134 in relation to Article ; 135 of the Revised Penal Code. Their arraigz:uaent was set on October 14, l,;_ ' .-/!. 'i: 1986.· But the same was cancelled on separate . Ii motions ·of the prosecution and of the defense be '- . ·;. 1; ,;Ji cause the accused were to .attend on that day" __the. _.\', - ·. :I.;r hearing of a petition for habeas ·coz:;s (G:'$~ No•~~ :.r . i\ i 76069) filed in their behill before e Honorable ,: !, Supreme Court;; ! . ij On· October 24, 1986', tli'°e prosecution filed anamended information, charging him and his two •i " co-accused of the crime of REBELLION under Article i 134 in relation to Article 135 ef the Revised Penal Code, as amended, all~ged to have been com,,. mitted as follows: :.~t- "That in or about 1968 and fer some time before said year and con tinuously thereafter until the present time, in the City of Manila and·else ..'.,·{'/ .. ; vhere in the Philippines, the _Commu• \11:RfFIIM BY,::,,, -. nist. Party of the Philippines, 1 ts ... ;\\f . ,.·. military arm,:. the New Pec,pl.,-'s Army, its ..ss infiltration networl,t, the GITANJ~(;~-~-:'_N_D_: National Democratic Front with ita 01;(;;. Court1- . , ',,( other aubqr~ate orgmuzations and .,. fronts, hav~;: under the direction and I-' control of sai'd organizations-• leaderJ, h among whom are the aforenamed.accwaed, fi an4 With the aid,: participation or 111 support of meabers arid followers lllhose Whereabouts and identities are still unkno111D, risen publicly and ·.. taken~ ams througlat the country against \, . . ·L,/,;, .:,i¼;i:/, ;i;.lif'..,,. ··ti~lt ---- l.L.!.i__ --~- ~ DECISION ·. Crimi Case N~.{ 86-48926 - 2 - the tovernment of the Republic of the Philippa.es for the purpose of overthro'Wing the present Government, the s~at ~f llhich is in the City of Manila, or ot removing from the allegiance to that government and its lan, the country,&s territory · or part of it; · "!hat· tro■ 1970 to the pre sent, the above-n•ed accused in their capacities as leaders of the &forenamed organizations. in cons piracy with, and ,in support of the oauae of,. the orsatd,zations afore aentioned, encaced. theaselves in war against the forces of the go-Yern• ■ent,. deatroyiq property or caa-. aitting serious violence. and other· acts in the. puraw.t of their unlaw _ful purpose, such. as: 11 1. Conduoting armed ruds, sortie$ and ambushes agai:ut police, constabulary and· army detachments as ••11' as against innocent oiYilians in such places as Larap, Caaarinea Norte; Subio.1 Zambales; Dinalupiban, Bataan; and Tndo 1 l'lanila; •2:;. Undertakilur the so-called ~Opera~iea Agaw .AraAa• all over the Qountry, including th~ Metrapolitan Manila area, as a consequence ot llfhich, victims are mercilessly killed simply for the purpose of obt~g possession of their firearms; ~ l ,. _.j• •:,.-. Infiltrating and, by 1,,_;:; ;,I ·1 . falsehQod ~d deception, manipula ~·1 1 ~ing legitimate organizations to ili:~1 work for the success of the rebel- lion; · •. •Ii. Negotiating with foreign aource~/suppliers for the su~ply of araa to the New People•s Aray aa amply exposed ay the arrival in Isabela in July 1972 of the vessel · =!M/V KARAGA't.ANi} from foreip shores, fully loade~ld,.th-arms; VERfFJEr, BY~ GITA~t:f!c!.~; .,, .. . •. ..,~t~( 1 \ ,!, ,I • 'j1i..~I :: ·._·.•){< .. d/}t\: ,_ .,,,,••-tt~.1.:.t;, 'ii•' .. ,1,,'IJ,jll;i;,(1\'·; ,!,•· ·.,. . ·.Jt: }i~~~~f ~R . .w,,1,\, lmlISION : '1 ·, , I Cr~_.i. Case No. 86-48926. . ') I • 11, . ' ~ -~ ' •,11_1I . - 3 - '1 I ...... - ...... < .o.pen. .contempt o~ .the new scover.o: ment• .s polic~ of .reeoncillation I ·and _;Ln_a.d.e ermliied effort to I 1 ove1~th.r.ow the government and ..to . -~ install a n:ew.social and ~ political I~ order in .o.ur socletv, persisted •11 and c.ontinued Iii. their depreda-.. -Ii,, tions against the forces of tlie I govermnent and innocent civilians oausliifndeatb and destruction. _· ihich elude, among others, the .tollowliig: II "11.. Simultaneous raid/ ,, attack on the INP STatlon and -Kadiwa Center at lt!monan.1 Ouezon and the INP Station at PJ.aridel• Quezon om. March 16 1986; 1 : ·r . ! 11,:.: Ambuscade _of tr.oohers at Matacoit Poiangw. bay; \1 :~-·.i .Brgf 1 :::.) JJ~: on Aj,ri 18 1 iL; .\ ·'; :i_:t i 'i . :~! If 1·"'. -}\··!iJ~' J \§; i .~ i ,; ii "';: -Ambuscade of troopers -: '!'';l,i:j at Villa Binc1;, Gumaoa, Quezon . :~ '"i\·'"l on June 30. 19 ; -__ '.:11·l_, ~ ! i~i 11 6:.i. Ambuscade of ·tr.oo~rs at Vintar, !locos Norte o:n J y . '-:Jm.~:",J, .. \t 2'11 . 20, 19@6~ ·,, t·"' )'i,:l1 ·, I· "7ie~ Ambuscade .of troopers . ,/. at ..Br,i;•i. Cinco{ Sarratl§Ilocos Nerte on lugµs 2;, 19 ; "8.~ Liquidation of ~aptr~ . Cecilio Palada and COJl=OD 'at Gate j~J:£elt~jJ3i Quezon Qilj on •.t ·;._ "'t'- ; 11 9·~, Kidnaoiing and liaw.da• VERfFJED ·ev! tion·ot Cof:_l!eat-ran at71lrs:to' .§acian, 5:fff alinga-lj,ayao on September · ' . 19 -; · GITANJA.~.,{:~9ND •., , .;,:~?:; ·t~ ·. ,., . li:~~1·~~iXl.\i iiJL , -~-1 r~m•. t~-~.. ~--fi·~~i·f(fftS I~~:! ------·- -•-•"·-·- ' DFCISICti ,.;cr1m·;1 .case No·. 86-48926 - 4 - at Maria .Aurora: Aurora i?rovinc.e .. on September Ji·!; 9f! resultlii~ in .the rrdeatb.'.of 1;.,6 .o ,. Constancio Lasatan ana others; _ -"11/: ·aa1d/attack .on PC l)etachment .at. San Franoiso.o, . kailan; san. Pablo City on Septem- 'ber ·17 1986: . · I "CONTRARY TO LAW." On llovember 10 1986, ·the accused through _ counsels filed a mo~lon to quash the information and when apprised that an amended information was filed, they_manifested in a writ~en. pleading that their motion to quash shall refer to the amended informa tion~ On November 19, 1986• the prosecution filed its written opposition to the motion to quash. · Thereafter, the parties asked for _• and were granted •• time to file their respective memoranda •. On JII~h 6, 1987', the Court denied the motion to quash ·and set - the arraignment of the accused on March 26, 1987. After-several deferments, .th.e accused were finally arraigned on May 4, 1987 and assisted by their res• pectiv-e counsels, each entered a p;Lea of "NOT GUILTY" to the offense charged 'in the amended information:.; . i Thereafter .accused Rodolfo Salas fi;ied. a petition for bai;1 After hearing, the Court, in its Order of July 7, 1987,, granted his petition al'ld ij :.-.~1 fixed. the amount thereof to P3o,ooo.oo, later in• ... ~- creased to P5o,ooo.-oo (see Order of July 30, 1987). · ,/:.i Said Orders were the subject of a petition forcer• ,·1:,,j :,,1·' tiorari .and prohibition the prosecution filed with : 1:_: the Honorable Supreme Court.. A temporary restrain• i.f; ing Ord.er was issued against this Court, commanding i;r-11,, , it not to implement its questioned Orders. Hence, ! I ;_ , , althoug):l accu~ed Rodolfo Salas posted cash bail of . ,ii·,, i ' ' 11 1· :;~:i !.,, . :,.,,_ , , •1·, . '.)'r1 P50 ,oocr.oo for his provisional liberty, he· remains ,., I ;! l. det·ained. to the present;.- ,.,. ,1· ,. '1 ·'1 :, :: ..J :, ( "i\! 11 111, - ~-- • - - , . 1 .1 I l, Trial started c,n Sept~ber. 24, 1987(..•_. The ; :k- ;:: : ·:11,) l:- .prosecution presented PC Lt., Colt~. Robert c.: D_ elfin, ,•·nTj· '' ·· 1-!: i Doainador Tuliao, Tomas -:Kabigting Simbulan, Ricardo ""' - /;, 1..::•? 1 l 11 / Singi&l'l~ Col;., Leon 0,._ Ridao, Emesto Bergonio, \1ERIFIEr:J 8'1!/ 1 · , t ; l! 1 Ricarte Riv-_era, Arceo Guevarra, Honorio Car.!-flo, · -:,Jf::•t, 1 '.\tl Atty•L_,,.Yirgilio -Sald.e;)eno1 PC_. Sgt-·• Fortunato.: .Ca~-tillo. , _:~-.· -': ,,J DEX:ISION. Qr1m·,1._ Case NQ. 86 ..48926 - 5 - (out of 81 listed witnesses it .proposed to present),•. ·:;11·1r ' 1,, i ,· !$ After the admission of its testimony/docu-. ·;c mentary (274 pieces of documents} evidence,. the pro I' se~ution rested its case on March 20, 1990• ' ·11f: :11, I· 'l On April 17, 1990, the d~ense filed a joint · ! Ii ,,f-•1 motion for.leave of court to file motion to acquit :11 ! 1 11 f accused.;, A week later1 accused Rodolfo Salas filed 1.\·Cl 1';· a motion to strike out the entire testimonies of -;r-i prosecution witnesses Ernesto Bergonio, Dominador ~, l Tuliao, Ricardo Singian, Honprio Carillo, Arceo . ;:ji I; Guevarra, Rioarte Rivera ad. ru.oardo Sim~an on :d: the ground that their testimonies are totally irre IJr , leTant to the criminal.charge filed against hi~.. The :11 I same was resisted. by tbe prosecution in its plead'!'" :, ! --.): \. ·11.,)' ing dated April 'Zl.,. 1990. · On May 8, 1990, the Court '. denied .said motiGn:~ Then, on May 22, 1990, the . I·; defense filed a motiGn to preserve right to file '' demurrer and two daya later, accused Rodolfo Salas i fi1ed a motion for reoo~sideration of the Order l · denying his motion to strike out testimonies:.: The I' prosecution filed its opposition.to the motion to I preserve right to file demurrer and another oppesi- ll •tion to Salas,1 moticm for reconsideration. In separate Orders, both dated JUlle 14, 1990, the Court ~!: 1 denied the defense motion to preserve right to ~1·l ·.]!-~ :;i'~I file demu~er ancl f?alas·• mG>tion for reconsideration:ll I_1 1\ Li:;.·;·iJ. I\ fhus, on September 20, 1990, th~ defense started adducing its evidence (24 witnesses, aside· :-1~?;·) ,r 1 'i1 from the accused, were proposed to ba presented). .: 1,.'·¥ ii'•, .• It called to the witness stand Asst. Executive __ r,' ,.i-,,·,11 'j Secretary for Legal Affairs Cancio Garcia, P/Capt~ I( /~ ;i Virgilio Gante, Major Julius Magno, Asst. Chief I!!:;'·1;;; :,:; Prosecuto;r Nilo Marian(),- Atty •. Artemio Aspiras, t:1 ;.·~_·, \ Col~ Manuel Yan, Jr.., Mariani to D11'aandal• Senator \' I ¼'I Rene Augusto Saguisag, and Atty. Arno Sanidad. \:ii:)[ " ' ,,ij Wh:l.le A.tty. Sanidad Wc;lS still at the witness .stand, the defense, bn April 25, 1991, manifested that it ·1; iI ;1 is studying the possibility of accused Rodolfo ,i 1-/: Sal.as to enter into "plea barga.i».ing" by with• dr~wing his previous plea of "Not Guilty" and to enter another one of "Guilty" to the offense of Rebellion while his wite, Josefina Cruz alias Mrs'.i Mercado, be dropped from the case ("the third accused, Jose Concepcion alias Eugene Za11ora., was killed on December 16, 1990 and sot .the case .,ains~ him was dismissed in the Order of January 24, 991)~ On May 9, 1991, the defense· and the prosecution sulnitted a joint manifestation an:d motion (after bargaining);, in, VERIFIED plea quoted hereunder full: BY~ . I ·f' ' '••w· I 1 "The Accused Rodolfo Salas and ,' ' ,)~. Josefina.Cruz-Salas, assisted by counsel• ~d the. Public Pro·secutor, · GITANJ~a.t1 Jt>~ri~l -~ointly .sumit, tor the approval c1e,tJ~t_;_court. V,:;i this Honora'"-e Coµrt, the followiq01/ . ::~ coaprlmise agreement: • '•, ... i'' ~H'-< ..1-··1 J!fV ,=,--- _ . ,...,, _,.., l)F.C°ISION. c;rill._Case No. . ' 86--48926. - 6 - •1.. That ~e accused, their counsel and.the Public Prosecutor are all deeply desirous ct bringing about an early disposition of this ease; 11 2.• : That after serious dis• '''.,I ~:.•' [! cussions and extended deliberations, and attar invok&lg the liberal appli l;] cation of the rules on plea bargain• --1. ing, the accused, the defense col.lnsel, ,,ii 'i' and the Public Prosecutor have mutual ji ly agreed to the implementation of 1\ the folloWing measures and conditions: , 'f "(2-a) That the accused :Ii Rodolfo Salas and Josefina Cruz-Salas Will withdraw their fil:.ea. o:t NOT GUILTY.to the crime of Rebelli9n defined and pen• alized under Articles 1;4 and Jfl'l .. 135 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by Presidential :'it Decree No. 1834,.'Which had-in• :; /!f-~ creased the penalty to_ rec .,Ji/" lusion po:rpetu.a or clea~and Accused Rodolto Salas will · .,, H:J I enter a plea of QUILTY to the :) ,t;}/ !J crime of REBELLION defined :)',1it' and penalized under Articles ··Jfrt1 ,;•a;, - 134 and 135 of the Revise4 I' '.)" Penal Code1 as amended by : reduced the penalty to a ' I ~?'].•. maximum o:r prision mayor; .:,, t·· lj ' ~-b) That upon their withdrawal. of their original plea of NOT GUILTY to the - ; I( . ·1 I j crime of Rebellion defined and I• I penalized under Articles 134 .' '1., and 135 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by.P.D. 1834 providing for a penalty of reclusion perpetua ~?:J:l'.~ to death, ! ij" ;~ ' the· Accused would be immediate . :?r,,(:~ lyre-arraigned at m'lch.point, '· .... ,;-:~ '. the Accused Rodol'fo Sa1as .would, as a:f'orestated, enter his plea of gui:Lty to the t;l~: ·:-. \1jr lesser offense/crime of Rebel VIAfFrED BVf :· lion defined and penalized. :1 Ji·. under Articles 134 and 135 of the.Revised Penal Code, as l· amended by Executive Order 187, GITANJAff-JLeONDOO rl_,,;,_,'ti now penalized only with impri- Cler Court V , :-, ., sonment of six (6) years an7 • t:C ! one day to twelye (12) years .• ·r::!'t'I- I of prision 1aypr~ . • i!l- ··1· f~t-~, }~ (1 :,I·:::::/ .~'•c-i\'i~11 --;J.- --. ,._ ~:::r=;;g;;~.,, ~ ;t,IX:ISION . !'lrilti'"••• Case No··• 86-48926 - 7 - "(2-c) That forthwith, the Court would conviot·•,dme .Accused Rodolfo Salas o:r·the lesser offense or crime of Rebellion defined and pena ' lized under Articles 134 and •1'.I'. 11 135 of the Revised Penal. Code, 1i:; '• t!, as amend.ed further· bi Execu I: tive Order 187, reducing the , L . penalty from reclusion per ./i petua to deatli to only six •,. ·I:11 \,.jtll years to twelve years impri• ,j I· sonment• and as part of the -!Y \i plea bargaining, the Prosecu tion would move formall7, for the dropping and/or dismissal !IL of the charges against the .Accused Josefina Cru.z-Salas :,.~· l I • for illautf'lQiency of evidence; ·' '.·1 t ' ! "(2-d) · That in sen tencing the Accused Rodo~o Salas, the Court is respect fully requested and urged to take into account the mitiga . i' ,/ ting circumstance of pleading I ,1 ~1 guilty to the lesser offense or crime of Rebellion defined '~l and penalized under Articles 1! 134 and 135 • Revised Penal · Code, as amended further by I\ Executive Order 187; i. 11 (2-e) That both accused will be covered by the mantle of protection of the HERN.ANDEZ-liNRILE political offense doctrine against being charged and prosecuted for any common crill• allegedly com mitted in: furtherance of rebellion or surversion; /'f ,'/iii ' ··IJ;,?Jf;:ii. /,,q' 11 •il!,t~ (2-f) ·That since, from '\1H,~!; the tµne of.bis arrestyon Sep ,:•i'•J· -ii, ,;,; ,-~";!i} ; tember 29, 1986, the Accused ~·,- ,, , ~I\ , t" ,.~- l 'Rodolfo Salas has been confined/ t; ,,~: detained at Camp Crame, Quezon City as one of the political . ~- ~'::.1VJrt ·t.~ I prisoners detained thereat, he ·VERJFIED BY. . .· I ,j; .. would continue to be detained . ·.; }/i'' th.er«,.. until his sentence shall have been tu.Uy served, and the . .ti ~r1 '. Prosecution would extend full GITANJAt B9,NDOQ'~\ id Clerk Court V .-. :1 : .\ oooperatiom. in this.regard• . . ' :1 ,, • ~ ' •• , i • and the Court is requested to/ 11,•~· issue the corresponding Qrder , ii ,J 1 to this effect; • .. , ,.· ,: ~ ... :/f '--1. '!: i.: ·I. i .,l .·,,_.,,J/' ,:<,·,1t ··r'.i . 1~i _:.;:.;,:1·~1 '.."• ! ·~\ .- ·tIVlF i;~; ',: i a.L!.S-1 :;:;:t.., .w..·-~:1. ~~.J------=:::'.". ~-;;,. _____ --'-'=-'--- ? ---- - . :-~ ' ' ~,-v r . -~ .~)). DF.CISIOH. Cri.JJ.~: _Case No,.i 86-48926 i' - 9 - ~':';~{!} ;,•,,ll»;•\ It bearing the canformity of the prosecution and the Court finding the joint aotion to be well-· ?f,fi taken, the previows plea of "Not Guilty" entered· •··· ·,. -:mi by accused Rociolfo·Salas was ordered wi't}ldravn and he was iJDmed.iately re-arraigned. When re-arraigned vhere11'1 the Jmera.ded. Information was again read to hiJI and assisted by counsels,_ accused Rodolfo Salas. voluntarily and spontaneously entered a plea of "Guilty" to the offense therein charged--:1 It is to be noted from the record that on May 4, 1987,. when the accused were arraigned, the j. penalty for the crime of rebellion is· reclu:aio@ r . ,:j 1'I perpetua to deatJi. (Article 135, Revised Penil. ode, :'.t . ... . 1J1 : as amended by Presidential Decree No.; ~834)~ In 11• the course of the trial or on June 5, 1987, Execu• tive Order No •. 187 was issued by the ~resident of t111 the Philippines, lmich repealed,. amon·c~ others.. Pre sidential Decree No •. 1834:. Consequently • .Article 01-I 135, among others. of the Revised Penal eoae, was "restored to full fore~ and effect as (they) existed~ n,. before the said amendatory decrees••(.' In fine, the 1• pe11alty of reclusion perpetua to death for the lt··;~:..__ ,_:lt offense of rebellion was reduced to its original l~t~ ill.· i'.J.1 j; penalty mich :1s prision mayor and a fine· not to \!~ exceed P.20,000,,._00., Needless to state, s.814 Execu Jf'f,:/1 ,,\ }•::.;. tive Order No:.: 1871 , being a penal law.t _is made retr()@I .'/c active as it is favorable to accused ttodol.fo Salas . i : : ti l who is not abo,c to be a habitWll. delinquent .. ·11 · (Article 22, Revised Penal Code; see Buiser vs.: r Peo. ple:, et al, L-32377, October 23, 1982, 117 SCRA f::I, \ 750)~i i i, After having ruled that ~e penalty for the l crime of rebellion herein charged is now prision ta~~ (or an imprisonment of from 6 years and 1 day i/ years) and a fine not exceeding P-20,00°'-00, the next matter to be resolved is the proper penalty .. ~ to be imposed herein•. 'i.] '1 "l I The defense, with the conformity of the pro f_·•j I I secution, prayed that the ch8Jlge of plea made by !: J the said accused be considered a plea of guilty to· the '!.esser offense",. Such stand is legaJ.ly tana'ble., For although tble "lesser offense• mentioned in -Section 2, Rule 116·,, 1985 Rules on Carim1:oal Pro- cec.ture, cnnotes an off'ense different to the offense - · L for which an accused is cmarged; regardless of :- . 'Whether or not it is necessarily included in tb'1f:R1FIED 9,v;:r,,,1., . 1 crime charged or is cognizable by a court of lesse21 ·•· ·_ : . ! · ~urisdiction than -the trial court,_the CoUl"t .is · of . .. . ·:~ii, i,1; ·, the well•conaiderecl opinion that said Section -2 can -. f • . ' ~i , be invoked in and, th.eref'ore·, is applicable :to. iH.~NJAbr· ;,t · 1;,· • present case.' An offense is "lesser". to;::-the· offense~•k, ;;.' ~- ,,.,:t1;'., 1 il~.- • charged not oDly because 1 t is a crim•.··· e di£ferent to. - •· . ,.:,.'.·.\i.··1 f.\-: :.·• the_ .1. atter but also because it carries a-,,lesser/ -,.·.. · ·.. •.,:1.r+t··.:i •. ~i~·.. ~i.t .,-.: ligh~er penalty_ 1 Herein, the penalty for the crime/_ JVil1~i:~~jt~:, \ . :·''l'~'•,ic,i:~• ~(,: ,; · · ./f , ~' ·, •11,1;'i\lr,· . ; · ;;:: : i§J1>· ,: "'(·,:!; ·:,• )~(r·ir·X{'i'l'\1ti;'f :. ,,,,, 1· ------~ -,~/- : , , , ,.'·~<.J..-1.~.a,11\, 'if, •h: DECISION ·},·..u ·t· Cri.JJl~L Case No:. 86-48926 ;;jf J .. 10 - of rebellion has been reduced .from. reclusion ~er-·- · petua to dea,tb. t_o priaion mayor and a fine no ex-. ceeding P20,000'.~., Bence, it does not matter. much it the "lesaer··of.fense" pertains -to a dif:ferent ·- · offenae_becaus, under the pe~uliar .facts and oir cumstances o-taining herein, the penalty of rebellion has been reduced to a lower degree·~·: In a way., then,_ 'accused Rodolfo Salas haa pl~aded· giuity to a •lesser offenae":.~ · From another perspective, the Indeterminate Sen.tence Law (Act No:. 4103, as amended) provides in its Section 2 that it does not apply to certaill enumerated offenses, one of lllhich is the crime ot rebellion~. Although the penalty of prision JB8.I9r is capable of being divided into three periods,_ there is no more need to divide it in this cas•~ What legally suffices is taat the penal~ to pe imposed. is within the range of from six ( 6) years and one (1) day to twelve (12) years.; Exere.isiq then·its discretion, the ~ourt decides to imiose the lowest nmg of the penalty, ''ilhich is SIX l6) YEARS and ONE ( 1) DAY of prisio:D ,.-Ltf~i I ~t;l ll&J!)r. because: -- [~)1 t. Accused Rodolfo Salas, from originally .\l,. resisting the charge against him, now owna its ·1,f·~ commission. In fact, he expressed his willingness \}i and readiness to serve the penalty to be 1.lllposed [il;~ on him. His change of heart militates to his favo~~ \tti i~~ i 2. The readiness of the &(icused to take his j{_ .. oath of allegiance to the Republic, as proposed by ,;"'.: the Court, is another point in his favor.' ~; }., With his plea o! guilty, the government ('' is now spared from incurring further expenses and :-t '. )t·1 ·using police/military manpower ill prosecuting this ( case•. It is of public knowledge that in bringing the accused to trial every thursday before this Court, the government, through the military/police establishment, has to provide vehicles and seowity :,,_ . t'~k1~,: consisting of no less than twenty. at times to }~1 around 30 to 50 personnel consisting of then Cons it':! tabulary officers and men (nowfffP officers and ;~'i~ ['' men) ~d elements of the Constabul.11.ry Highway Patrol ~icj ~ Group,, Quezon City and "WPD Police Forces:. \'eRIFIED BYi·"•i, •j1l 'WHEREFORE, iJi the light of the foregoing .. · ~li_ considerations, the Court finds the accuse'4j _- ~ · . )!j;. RODOLFO SALAS alias Commander Bilog/Henry, gm.ltflf ANJAb , - . ,f~ i i beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of REBELLIOH,, c,~~ _f ~ _· ~:1 ! ! as ,defined in Article 134 and, penalized under . · :l~f; .Article 135, Revised Penal Code, as amended by - _- :i \ I Executive Orde:r- NO:. 187, and as charged in the :· i51 1 Amended Informatio~, and, accordingl1,~1 hereby senr-. ;_: __) __ -_ ~j~'._'.;_ tencea hi• to suffer the penalty of SIX (6) YEARS ! ·'.) ,~ t i;: !'.Jh 1/: . . ·~j~ u1 -~1'!. ('. !i ,,1 , . ;_11-.1fil:': i I ,-,· ."'. :;~~Jiai -r~:,1:1;, . ,. ',,; lff: . 'i••i~~l {~'~1'~*~~{11!/"N*~f.1 ; ... ·•·.:,f\:. ," ';~)~r:t:::rx:f!: . . . ' ;;: 42 DF£ISI0N C.rini·. Case No. 86•48926 i - 11 • \: and QNE (1) DAY of frision mayor, with the accessory /' -penalties prqvi~~-d or '6y law; -Eo pay a fine of SIX THOUSAND {~6·•0~;p8) PF.SOS without subsidiary iap,;-1- somaent in .case of.. insolvency; and to pay one-third. ( 1 /3) ef the costs,., . In the service of his sentence, the accused ( who appears to have been arrested on September 29,,. 1986 but brought under·the jurisdiction of this ·court on October 2, 1986) shall be credited. with the full tiae during lllhich he underwent pr~entive illprisonment· previded he voluntarily agreed in 'Writing to abide by the same disciplinary rules imposed upon convicted prisoners; otherwise, he shall be credited to only four-fifths (4/'5) there of. (Article 29, Revised Penal Code, as amended by :~-, itl.? ~:~ Republic Act No:. 6127)i. : ~,' ". 'Hi SO ORDERED.: :.'; i{ Manila, Philippines, May 10, 1991~J ;~ ~:· ,, ;. f4 fl) . i.1.il I. ~1 1.;J PROc..cm,cr-J'. DONATO tiF . ' ·~; ! Judge rX~ l:..f½· I.']<,! • •-,.i ~ . I'\'i'J, P,:D/c-~g ;\:t: fj I:;;- !,_•}': t:\~> ! [•.' f: f. !.·-·., ~.'' ~· i !: --7 .,.r // / ,; ,, / • ' : :i ~, ·. ( , fi: , k; -,, ;~··~ ... ,· VERIF1Er1 81~ -.. it • :1 ClTANJAL~ONDoQI .;'1' Cler1l/2t"c'~~1r1: V;.? . ·II, ~' I '.ii',I• Ji •.·· · J Ir~ ··, ):~·;,; _; :;, . ·.r.: '""'._ .. --.!i!•"\" •·'. ' ,k ··'!...:·: , ,------,~~-···-····-······, ... •----····•-·~-·-~·... --:".. ,t';l.''tlf ...,. . "~ ·:· -,~ . ANNEX"I • .. REPliBLlC OE' 'fll,> PIIILIPl?INllS i .•. . · ~ 3 -- - ~·. L l!APITAL suD.ICIJ\L RFG!.oll i c ... ltl ,\ . ORIGINAL ~ ·'. !.. '. ~!'.ONA~ 'l'HIAL CO~J_RT .,· tr\ NILA, er: . I lfllU•Jif:"Y· ~,?~1 (SP JCIAL CRIMINAL COURT) :L .... ll. i. • ::?~f-?1.1 BRJ\NCH 12, MANILA n~~?.& v: . ft,\,ttJ'TT>~,.9.£ifi.\ti,Jli.~j~ ~,...... ,,_ • ✓_. V I {),1•r~~I C' I .._ 11~ .. --- 'f';:1,1~:· L (•'lt't 1' ·1;1t.. 1' 'f ~I. -·.- ... • PJ:"r";'t:.'J:J,, ~· , 11'~ ,JS:: TI-{!., ,f.'-lLl'ILI]'''.lI1\JJ~ , r: h ~-',;f f' ... -...... ,, ~.-lei,,_ :-7() Plainti!t. -·-··---. ~:::, · ,o · --....-...... • ., i ·~:\ " ..... versus ... CRIM. CASE NO. 0M8926'• · ·- ... ROOOL.FO SALAS; .n:r AL. , Accus.,ed. .Y x, ...... ____ ..,..__..,...... ]( \ \ \ JQA11·i, f"!A1(f:.B'~~9,'A'J~IoN A~D. rn,n~1.01i _l\r;•J.T.Tl PLE:A -~\HGAlNING ~~-- ... - -<: ·--~.. ___,,.._ ~' ·--..._ . The l\ccused Rodolfo 8;~1-as r:H1tl~oae,fina Cruz-Sela$, assisted by com1.sel, and the Public l;~_secutor, jointly submit. for ·the aµprovel Of this Honor~~Court, the foll<1w.tni; compromise agreememt, · "'-, 1. That the acc:nJsed, their counsel in nd. the Fublie Prosecutor are all deeply df:rnirous of bringing abr)u-t an (;;rn•lr dispots:i. t:i.on of this cese, 2. Thc-it aftet' · ser1oua discusslons and extended deli berat.Lons, and aftt!':1r invo'kir.11:; the llbera.l eppli.cnt1on of tho ; rules on. plea bargAi.ning, the accused, the defense oowwel, and the Public F:r.t)secutot' ha.Ve mutually agreed to the implementation of the followl.ng rneaauries end oond.L tions • (2-a) That the AOCUSed Hodol!o Salas r:md \ ,Josef!na Cruz ... Sti:,los wi.ll. wi thdre.w their plea of. NrJJ: G- UIJ... TY 't;o the crime ot Rebellion deflned and peno.lized under At'tiates 134 and 135 of the He'Vised Penal Code, ·e.s amended by Presidential Dncree Not 1834, wl1ieh hatl increased th~ pennlty to .tft4b'J.S!Q,1.!..l?.§1n?..~tillll Ot' demth, and AcCUSC'Kl Rodolib Salos wlll enter a plea of GUILTY / , llI 1 ~ / ./ - 2 .. '14 ii to tha cr:LmG of Hi.ilfol.LION def .i.ned cl.rid pensli.zed. t' under Articles l 34 and 135 of the ,,Revise~ P~·riri!- l .:•~ ,:; Code, €:\s amemcled by r~ceoutive Ord11:?r 107, ·whlch reduct~d the penalty tt) a maxlmum of Er;1si9n m~YQI!I ( 20b) lJ.1hat upon their withdrawal of the:ll"' or-ig!nml plea of NtYl1 CHJII}l'Y to the cr.ime of Rb&lJJ.on defined and per1alized t1nder .Articles 134 end l35 ·of the Rev.i.i:Jed P enal Code, as amended by P ~n. 1034 prov1c1:tng for 0 per1al ty of recl,L\s.ym. ,2g,;i.:r_,et~1n to d<::2r-rth, the AccusGd '\-\lt)Uld be imrnediately re-•a.rraignad at 1'/l1.i. oh point, the Accused Rodolfo ~1ala~1 would, ~s afor,~s tated, cnb~r 115.s plm::i of guilty to the lesser offense: er Jme o.f Rebellion d.eflned mid. penn1izl9d under Arti.cle~; 134 and 135 of th E::i Rl.'Nlt1ed Ptirna1 Code, ao amended by PxemJ tive Order 187, now penaliz~d only wlth OJ.ti.rN-c9a.v\ J.mpriaomnent of six (6) yc~1:1rs"'to twalve (12) years of P.,t'iA1=..Qk1. r1Hus1r1 (2-c) That forthwith, the Court ,,rould oonvict the Aocusr::id Rodolfo Sa':l.as of the lesser off limr.Je 01" cr1.me of Rebellion. d1afirwd nncl penalized under Articles 134 and 135 of. ·tho H,.?Vised Penal r.,ode, as emended further by Kx:ecutive Omor 187, reducing l:i t ------J ,; the penalty :trow r&SlMii2!l J2!tl?.8tlUl to death to ~,•'.. ' t<'J <':Inly aix ye8r.s tc1 twelve years imprisonment, (_/ii'.j and as part of th~~ plea- bargr.dning, the Prosecut.toh \-,JOuld move fox~ma1ly fol" the. dropping and/or dismi.srm.J. of the oharg·es against the Accused tTosc:fin..~ Cruz ... Si~las for i.nsu:t'f.ioienoy of evidence, (2""<1) That in aentanoing the Aocuaed H.odollQ •·· Solas, the Court is ~esp ectf'ully r t&quested ~-·nd · / ,,/// ,.,..... j.I / / I . /I .( , ___ /.,/ ~··· ·•-·······r -··-· . ·-· ,. ~---· ~. ,' f 1'.'.,, ... 3 .... '.i'. ~5 '. ·~)! f-· ! i 1 ttr;[~ed t:r6 hii~.H ;tnto tiH)Gmmt th,1t mitigatir}8 o.i.reum&tfl.nG ' f: o.f x,1~1f.H:lir1g guilty to the lesser of.t·ense or crime oJ. Rebe:Ulon dei'inml end penellzod urtd.er At-tiolt1~ 13.f anti 135, n1.:,viiH1d. Pt:mru. Gods, lllB tnnend.oo fu:r:•thGr hy 13.ttecuti,Vc1 Or.d,!t' 1.07, (a-e) T.hat both AtlCUEHKl w;U,l be ooveretl by the morrtla of' prcrb:Hltlon o.f the 1mmiMrDEz..,.·1·::'iU-lil.B po::U.:tie~l 0£:fetu-Hi> d.ot1trine E~ ga.irwt being charged itnd pmt:;ie,.-;:utod fo.r i, r~f C".t>tm:,o;cm. o.-rime o.llf.n~~clly fXJm ml tted. in f't.t\"1JH'1t. 1tmor~ of reb ca-£) Tho1~ trl.rwrtt t .fn,:1 tho tilfH:1 o.( his nrrest on a:- 1.:te!11'blfi1"" 2~), 19fH5, the /\ccutwd lloclol!o Hi~lrw l:u:n, ben~n ctmf'Jr'H?d/d.~d:.1:.d.nli1ia id; Cfi'.lmJ.) C:r.ama, 1..,:i,wt:on t:ti:y r:,s c,me o:r t1·,,1;1 poll t:iea.l prlnone.rs d.(at~tn 1 ,U,lPI"ent 'his. i!,tn·•1"l1~ j•-~·•·" '~ •.,r,n .t,,,., b.-:-. <"l•.~t,;,,'i"'"'.'fl t;hn... ~,ci, t-£. .i1 c....,_ ; ,Fw.- ";i·, ,.1 .... ~ ,J.. 1r..-'i,.1t1.t,.iJ.,1.1,l~;i:· '"""'·i a ""·"'" 11;:~>3.tq;i.. ~,. ,.~, c, tmt.tl l'U .. a nentent:hll eshr~11 hav1a br-rnn fully a~t''V(~cl, end. the P1~iJfH'H.1:ntJ.on ·1.r1cH1ld eKtenci full coop0rfltion ln Udf.'l rr:~t,(!rd, and tho Cl"lurt is re ,uostc:icl to isoue the <.~orra~pcndJ,n'.:; ordf•r. to "this o:Lfectt (2•tJ) Thin t, 11& suigel!l'ttl!d by tl'Hi! Q:n.u"i: ;· t ha two (2) Acousat'l ,wmld m1bsc.r"il:>t\! to an oath of (;'l.lleg.tene,J to th<:t C.·msti tut.tot:l o:t:' the R.i•i,J.mblio ,:,t the Phll!pplnc(11 ( 2-h) 1'htt:d. the an<::U!H'.:'d nodolfo S~il.as, thru. oounst,1, nnd ·tt:rn PnhU.o Pl"OSit;H~n tor wouJ.d. n'lOV(:e jointly for th(l dJ s:nln~al. c,:r. t1H,il .Fr;_,:ti .. t1on for C1?.rtit1rinri ~nd F1""1Qhih! tion reln -t;tng..,, 't<:> 'b1.11i ( ar;r-~1(~1.m:int \)() t\;iprovod in or / / .... ~11f!,(fj' w / 1 1· /II .. · '--·- .... -. r; rl: ~ ... 4 - i!6 ;;, could be forthwlth. implcimHnted. -~ Oth~r reliefs ju~t and equitable ln the rrn1Lse1 a.re likewise et:iught. Mmn.i.ln.- Philipp.i.nes, May 9, 1991. n~ CIIMSTOPl·IF.:R LOCK ROlf,1:r'O C. SALAS (Prosecutor)/\ (*cused) ATT'i •· VIRGILIO SAJ.,D.ASE.\\lO (Prosecutor) Assisted by, l/,/ . __ .,,,--;;7 ~::>- ✓ 'J •j'\' / 1J.:"it1(·} C /,"')!JI (")'l'JG / ..... l;• :_..;.cl i.LJ. J\1 , .J • .l~ A ___,, •• / -✓-7 .,,.. . .-~ ,,/ .-- / '/ ~------,,,...-~~ i:,' L.-- ✓---,,.---- .. AT'.L'Y·t AHNU V. SANIDAD t'/ 3ew~tt (- ~f~ m, r ., ·~ J\1 fY • . J; ,1, c,vARJ;,;,~~<;;;,.ry / ...... NOTICE ....., .....OFu Hfi.MUNG.,., ...... ""'"'...... The Cla~k of Co~rt HE:igi.one.l Trial Court • lh:inlla, Hraneh 12 ; 0 R E E T I N G S • . Pleo.se submit the ft:iregoing mo ·tlcn for the considerfltj on , and a.pprova.1 of thls IIonor.-Jble Court, immiiid:lately upon receipt hereof. .May 9, l9!Jl. I,/ ',,,,_ ~ ... CHl'U,ZTOPHER .LOCK /LONG ..,,. /4:y~~~API (Pro mHlu tor ---~----l // .-· ;,--· / ,// - ,.,,.-· .. ----· ,. __ .,,,,,-- .. ...::::. AtTY. VJ,RGII;ro SALDAJ~ /AT'rY.. A_~1,1cr V • SAN IDAD At'l'Yd:;~. SUMlJ> \\ .1:, 'I ) . ' ,• ~: ,___...... ,..__..... ____...... -\NNEX (. ORIGINAL Re)> blic of the PhiHppines ~ .,, ~·· . tZ-:g:;. • • __ ·fj.( FILEl)BY: - . DE£4 {TMENT OF JUSTICE 2 -~ ,,m DATE: ,... :~~ ~.1..."- - 6521 Bnvbnv, Leyte OFFICE OF THE ASSISTAN;f P.Rff\71NCIAL PROSECUTOR PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, l.S. NO. 06-116 Plaintiff, For: -versus- MURDER (Tweye Counts) JOSE MARIA SISON aka JOMA, @ Amado Guerrero @ Armando Liwanag, et. Al., Respondents, x------. ------/ RESOLUTION This treats the complaint for Murder for twelve (12) counts filed by The Philippine National Police -Region 8, Palo, Leyte, represented by P/Clnsp. George L. Alrnaden, Legal Officer, PROB and Capt. Allan Tiu, Staff Judge Advocate, I th representing the 8 Infantry Div. Philippine Army and by virtue of a complaint ·1 ·t affidavit executed by the relatives of the victims of these atrocities, against t11e following respondents; Jose Maria Sison aka Joma, @ Amado Guerrero, @ Armando Liwanag; Benito Tiamzon aka Gelo; Wilma Tiamzon aka Ria; Rodolfo Salas; Leo Velasco; Rafael Baylosis; Saturnina Ocampo @ Satur; Jose Luneta; Geronimo Pasetes, Prudencio Calubid; Luis Jalandoni, Eduardo Sarmiento, Juliet Sison, Adelberto Silva; Randall Echaniz; Francisco Pascual, Jr.; Vicente Ladlad; Fides Lim;·· Exusperado Uoren @ Maciong, Berting, Eksan, Nilo, Johnny; Mil Lominion; Nympha Abaya @ Asyon, Terry, Meding; Fortunato Felicilda @ Edna; Jaime Soledad @ Glenn; Noli Narca @ Abdul, Del; Norberto Murillo-1.. Benjamin Beringuel; Qurino Quinawayan @ Willy, Fernan~o Rachel; Pecario Soriana, Jesus Solayao, Lino Salazar, Alfredo Taladro, Tito Gabar, Mwco Lubong @ Nathan, Nonoy, lkit, Bebot; Felix Dumali @ Gaspar, Pony; Ciriaca Malimot @ Leizel; Luzviminda Orillo@ Remy, Genia, Gelyn, Fely; Anselmo Balduhesa@ Klin; Alfredo ... Mabingay; Bernabe Ocasla; Bertino Oroza; Bonifacio Padoc @ William; Rodrigo Papiona @ Luding; Prescillono Beringel;. Anastacio Dorias@ Jing, Jury, Buntay; Fr. Nick Ruiz @ Sendong; Policarpo Opo, Numeriano Beringuel @ Amad; Sammy Labarda@ Namo; Glecerio Roluna@ Dado; Charlie Fortaliza@ Noble; Luis Villena @ Bagang; Oscar Belleza, Rolando Caballera @ Jet; Donata Lambrento @ Naty; Luz Abejo; Maureen Palejaro,:\@ Mao; Jasmin Jerusalem; Dario Tomada; Ruben Manatad, several John does and Jane Does and other respondents who were identified by their nick-names or aliases without ~pecific identities. VI' The complaint came about when on August 26, 2006 a mass grave was discovered and unearthed by the 43rd Infantry Battalion of the Philippine Army at Sitio/Mt. Sapang Dako, Brgy. Kaulisihan, lnopacan, Leyte through an information given by a civilian eyewitness on the tragic incident that happened on tne said place. .. According to Floro M. Tanaid sometime in the month of May 1985 he saw persons known to him who were abducted by the elements~@f e Communist Party of the Philippines - New People's Army (~P-NPA). A?6sometin in the month of ) June 1986, he saw fresh diggings on Sapang Dako, wrich he sus1 ected to be the CERTIF ED TRUE cop· ..--...... LL-) ~ -./ lft.:.LI •-- . . ····f""' . 1 ~---- ill ' .. ~ ✓.eLEBI< o _,,,ioun ,,c · j ·t re, BR, 1s,- 1 nJ~ H, .. ;. , rt -... .!\: ~ ,,/ I'' ~ burial ground of those who were abducted by the NPA's because he never saw them '18-,:· . again. _.I~' On the basis of the revelation and assistance of Floro M. Tanaid, an excavation was made on the area. Found and exhumed at the site by a team of Crime Scene Investigators were 67 human skeletal remains, believe to be victims of the Communist Party of the Philippines - New People's Army (CPP-NPA) operation . code named OPERATION VENAREAL DISEASE. Out of the 67 human skeletal remains and based on the exhaustive crime investigation of the case by a team of Forensic Experts, Scene of the Crime Operatives and the National and Regional Inter-Agency Legal Attion Group (IALAG) ten ( 10) positive and/or possible matches on the comparison examination made on their respective relatives namely:· 1).Juanita Aviola, 2). Concepcion Aragon, 3).Gregorio Eras, 4).Teodoro Recones, Jr., 5).Restituto Ejoc, 6).Rolando Vasquez, 7).Junior Milyapis, 8).Crispin Dalmacio, 9)Zacarias Casil, and 10).Pablo Daniel. The relatives of Romeo Tayabas, Domingo Napoles, Ciriaco Daniel, Crispin Prado, and Ereberto Prado insists that their relatives were among those who were executed by the NPA, whose skeletal remains were unearthed at the grave site at Sitio Sapang Dako, Brgy. Kaulisihan, lnopacan, Leyte . Witnesses for the complainants including the relatives of t11e above-named victims claimed that in the year 1985 up to the year 1992 there were at least 100 persons residing in the adjacent Barangays and Municipalities of Sitio Sapang Dako, Brgy. Kaulisihan, lnopacan, Leyte, who were seen to have been abducted, hog-tied, tortured and executed by the elements of the CPP-NPA. The witnesses for the government particularly Zacarias Piedad, Glecerio Roluna, Numeriano Beringuel, Leonardo Tanaid and Veronica Tabara, who were one time or another men~bers of the CPP-NPA Regional Committee, alleged that on the same period of time the CPP-NPA Central Committee directed and/or ordered the implementation of OPERATION -VENERAL DESEASE (OPN-VD). The aim of which was to "cleanse" the ranks of the Local and Regional Committees of the CPP-NPA. The "cleansing" resulted in · the abducti.on and execution/liquidation of suspected traitor NPA members and innocent persons who were said to be sympathizers of the Military. The directive to implement OPN-VD wa"s done in the Provine~- of Leyte sometime in the year 1985. According to Zacarias Piedad on that year Saturnina Ocampo @ Satur a member of the CPP-NPA Central Committee, personally came to the province to preside a meeting with some Central Committee Members and Regional Committee Members including but not limited to the herein respondents on the directive of the Central Committee and on how to implement the said order. Mr. Piedad avers that when the operation was put into action in 1985 there was no let up in the abduction and execution of suspected traitors and military sympathizers and innocent civilians until he surrendered sometime in the year 1992. In fact he was an eyewitness when in one ·of th~ meetings they had at Mt. Sapang Dako, in the year 1985 Satur Ocampo directed Exusperado Lloren to sentence to death a certain Juanita Aviola and likewise ordered her ex~culionjr his presence. Leonardo Tanaid corroborates the testimony of Zacarias Piedad, when he said that the directive to implement OPN-VD was made by the CPP-NPA Central Committee sometime in the year 1985. The said directive was put into- action in the Province in the same year. In one instance particularly in the month of June 1985, ,, he saw Glecerio Roluna, liquidate and buried Rosky, Horato ar . 2 """") ~n-, .. government witness and former NPA Member, was discussed in a meeting attended ... ;::, •!l'-~ by the members of the Leyte Regional Committee, led by Exusperado Lloren, . .,,·, sometime in the year 1984 at Baybay, Leyte. In this meeting a special unit dubbed as Arresting and Investigating Team (AIT) was created. Intel Group, Arresting Group, Investigation Group and Execution Group were also created. These groups were headed by members of the local or provincial committee and were tasked to carry out the Orders from the Central Committee and thus implement OPN-VD. In his disclosure Numeriano B. Beringuel, claim that sometime in the year1985 they arrested several persons, then brought them to Mt. Sapang Dako. At said place these persons (named in his Affidavit) were investigated and were sentenced to death. They were executed by the use of a bla~ed weapon locally known as kutsi/yo allegedly by the group led by Glecerio Roluna The directive coming from the Central Committee of the CPP-NPA and the · implementation of Operation Venereal Disease by the Leyte Regional Committee is confirmed by Glecerio Roluna @ Jay-ar. He also confirms to have executed several persons to include but not limited to the persons/victims herein previously mentioned, by virtue of the said directive. He further avers that the execution of the suspected enemies of the CPP-NPA was done sometime in the year 1985 at Mt. Sapang Dako, Brgy. Kaulisihan, lnopacan, Leyte up to the time when he was : I arrested by the Military. '' ! In her Supplemental Affidavit, dated October 9, 2006 Veronica Tabara, divulged that she became a regular Member of the CPP, Central Committee in 1985. As such she came to know that Jose Maria Sison aka Armando Liwanag aka Amado Guerrero and JOMA was the founding chairman of the Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP). During his detention Rodolfo Salas was appointed Acting I' Chairman then followed by Benito Tiamzon. I