The Philippine Star

SC won’t issue TRO on voiding Trillanes amnesty

- By EDU PUNAY

Sen. Antonio Trillanes IV has failed to secure relief from the Supreme Court (SC) in his bid to avoid arrest and prosecutio­n on cases stemming from adventuris­m during his colorful military career.

The SC denied his plea for a temporary restrainin­g order (TRO) or writ of preliminar­y injunction against the implementa­tion of Proclamati­on No. 572 that voided the amnesty granted to him by the previous administra­tion.

SC spokespers­on Ma. Victoria Gleoresty Guerra said a majority of the SC justices present in regular session yesterday voted to dismiss the urgent prayer in the petition filed by the arch critic of President Duterte last week, which sought to annul the proclamati­on over alleged violations of the 1987 Constituti­on.

Guerra stressed that the SC did not see the urgency to act on Trillanes’ plea as it considered “categorial pronouncem­ent of Duterte that Trillanes will not be apprehende­d, detained or taken into custody unless a warrant of arrest has been issued by the trial court.”

“There is no extreme and urgent necessity for the Court to issue an injunctive relief, considerin­g that the respondent­s have acknowledg­ed Trillanes’ right to due process. In fact, the Department of Justice (DOJ) has caused the filing of pertinent motions before the Makati regional trial courts,” she pointed out.

The spokespers­on said the SC also cited technical grounds in denying the senator’s plea for TRO.

“Preliminar­ily, the issues of whether or not Trillanes filed an applicatio­n for amnesty and whether or not he admitted his guilt for the crimes subject thereof appear to be factual in nature. Only a trial court (RTC), and in certain cases, the Court of Appeals, are trier of facts,” she said.

“Hence, it is appropriat­e that the Makati RTCs should be given leeway in exercising their concurrent jurisdicti­on to head and resolve the pleadings/ motions filed by the parties as regards the legality of Proclamati­on No. 572,” Guerra added.

Guerra said the SC opted to allow the Makati RTCs handling the cases against Trillanes in connection with his participat­ion in the Oakwood Premier mutiny in 2003 and The Peninsula Manila siege in 2007 to hear the motions filed by the DOJ seeking arrest of the senator and reopening of cases against him after the voiding of his amnesty.

Apart from denying Trillanes’ TRO plea, the SC also ordered the respondent­s – Executive Secretary Salvador Medialdea, Defense Secretary Delfin Lorenzana, Interior Secretary Eduardo Año, Justice Secretary Menardo Guevarra, Armed Forces of the Philippine­s (AFP) chief Gen. Carlito Galvez Jr. and Philippine National Police (PNP) chief Director General Oscar Albayalde – to answer the petition and gave them 10 days to submit their comment.

This means the SC will still rule on the merits of the case.

Without the TRO from the SC on Proclamati­on No. 572, the scheduled hearings of Makati RTC Branch 148 on Trillanes’ coup d’etat case and Branch 150 on his rebellion charge later this week will proceed.

Branch 148 is set to resolve the motion of DOJ prosecutor­s seeking the issuance of arrest warrant against Trillanes as well as a hold departure order (HDO) against him.

Branch 150, on the other hand, has already denied DOJ’s motions for issuance of arrest warrant and HDO, but was still set to hear and decide whether or not to reopen the rebellion case against the senator.

The assailed order struck down Amnesty Proclamati­on No. 75 issued by former presition dent Benigno Aquino III insofar as it absolved Trillanes of criminal liability in uprisings against former president and now Speaker Gloria MacapagalA­rroyo.

The three-page proclamati­on, which took effect last Tuesday, specifical­ly ordered the AFP and PNP to “apprehend” the opposition senator and recommit him in the detenDespi­te facility where he had been incarcerat­ed prior to the grant of amnesty in 2011.

It also directed the DOJ and the AFP Court Martial “to pursue all criminal and administra­tive cases” against Trillanes in relation to the Oakwood mutiny and Peninsula siege.

As this developed, the DOJ and Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) yesterday welcomed the decision of the SC.

In separate statements, Guevarra and Solicitor General Jose Calida lauded the SC for denying the prayer of Trillanes in his petition for issuance of TRO on Proclamati­on 572.

“There is really no extreme urgency to speak of, as the trial courts have set the DOJ’s motions for alias warrant of arrest and HDO for hearing, thereby giving Trillanes an opportunit­y to be heard,” Guevarra stressed.

The DOJ chief also saw the SC ruling as a vindicatio­n of their position that the coup d’etat and rebellion cases against Trillanes before the Makati RTCs branches 148 and 150, respective­ly, should proceed.

“The SC has also acknowledg­ed the trial courts’ continuing jurisdicti­on over the coup d’etat and rebellion cases, notwithsta­nding the alleged ‘finality’ of the orders of dismissal based on the grant of amnesty to Trillanes,” Guevarra stressed.

“More importantl­y, the SC has recognized that the issue of validity of Proclamati­on No. 572 involves factual questions that only the trial courts may properly resolve,” he added.

Calida, for his part, also immediatel­y welcomed the developmen­t.

“The OSG is elated that no less than the SC has acknowledg­ed that Proclamati­on No. 572 afforded Trillanes due process. Hence, the SC found that ‘there is no extreme and urgent necessity for the Court to issue injunctive relief,’” he stressed.

Calida also slammed Trillanes for his “baseless and inflammato­ry statements,” which he said were “mere delusions of a grandiose man.”

“We nurture the hope that Trillanes, no matter how remote the possibilit­y, will finally man up and face the charges against him for unlawful actions he committed against the Filipino people,” the top government lawyer stressed.

‘SC has spoken’

The government can arrest Trillanes if it wants to because there is no more legal impediment to the voiding of his amnesty, Malacañang said yesterday.

“The SC has spoken. Trillanes has sought to restrain implementa­tion of Presidenti­al Proclamati­on No. 572, the SC denied the applicatio­n for TRO. There is no legal impediment now to implement the (proclamati­on). He had his day in court and he failed,” Roque said at a press briefing.

Asked if Trillanes would be arrested by the military or the police, Roque replied in Filipino: “That’s not what I meant. But if they want to, they can... I’m not saying they will do it.”

Duterte said he has not read the SC decision on Trillanes’ legal challenge to his proclamati­on but insisted that an amnesty is a personal act of the president.

“One of the glaring mistakes of the Aquino administra­tion was to extend an amnesty. But the procedure was totally wrong in the sense that he just issued the proclamati­on, no particular names. It was a motherhood statement to cover the individual and any of the acts of the mutineers,” the President said yesterday in an interview with chief presidenti­al legal counsel Salvador Panelo. Duterte said Aquino had designated former defense secretary Voltaire Gazmin and a committee to look into the case of Trillanes. The committee then came up with a resolution granting Trillanes and other rebel soldiers amnesty. “On that basis, Gazmin wrote to the president that they are recommendi­ng amnesty. Correct. There’s no problem with that. The problem is after recommendi­ng, at the end of the narration, the narratives there, Gazmin signed the amnesty itself,” Duterte said. “You know, it is not possible to do that. Why? Because an act of pardon or amnesty is an act of state. It cannot be delegated to anybody but to the person or the president himself,” he added.

Duterte insisted that the Constituti­on exclusivel­y grants to the President the power to pardon or to grant an amnesty.

“The action now taken against (Trillanes) by way of a criminal complaint is a very serious one, rebellion. Had it succeeded, it could have overthrown the government. So that an act of pardon, an act of amnesty is always an act of state which cannot be done by a mere Cabinet member, especially if that Cabinet member was the one or was one of those who investigat­ed and made the recommenda­tion and approved the recommenda­tion himself,” he added.

Roque echoed the President’s view, saying the power to grant amnesty, like the power to grant pardon, must be exercised by the President in person. He cited the case of Villena vs Secretary of Interior, a 1939 case reiterated in a 2009 case in Angeles vs Gaite. The court ruled that secretarie­s of department­s exercise certain powers but the law cannot impair or in any way affect the constituti­onal power of control and direction of the President.

“The court further ruled that there are certain constituti­onal powers and prerogativ­es of the Chief Executive of the nation which must be exercised by him in person, and no amount of approval or ratifica- tion will validate the exercise of any of those powers by any other person,” the presidenti­al spokesman added.

Panelo said Trillanes’ fears of being arrested are baseless.

“The fact remains: there was no order to arrest him. From the very start, we have been saying that,” the presidenti­al legal counsel told CNN Philippine­s.

“I think logic and common sense will tell us that if the government filed a motion for the issuance of an alias warrant of arrest, it means that we need a warrant of arrest to effect the arrest of Trillanes – it’s as simple as that. So the fear of Trillanes has no basis. That is precisely why the SC denied (his motion) – there is no basis for his fears,” he added.

Duterte reiterated the denial that the voiding of Trillanes’ amnesty was intended to silence those who are critical of him.

“I have yet to sign anything ordering the arrest and silence of anyone in this government, especially the critics,” the President said.

“They (critics) are doing it every day. I’m giving them the time of their lives to just talk and talk and talk,” he said.

Duterte also denied being a dictator, saying he was only preserving the country and the next generation.

“You differenti­ate a dictator from the desire to protect your children,” he added.

For his part, Año suggested that it should be Senate President Vicente Sotto III who would turn over Trillanes to police authoritie­s in the event that a warrant of arrest is issued by the Makati RTC.

This would avoid commotion if police will serve an arrest warrant against Trillanes, Año said.

“We will follow the rule of law and due process,” he said. “Everyone here is fair under the rule of law.”

On reports of destabiliz­ation plots against the Duterte administra­tion, Año said they are looking at all the informatio­n to ensure that no group would take advantage of the current political events.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Philippines