CEBU, Philippines - Citing the arrest was legal, the Office of the Ombudsman-Visayas dismissed administrative and criminal complaints filed against Talisay City peace officers.
Graft investigator Jane Aguilar cleared PO2 Aquilles Cabando, PO1 Nelson Cordilla and Lagtang barangay tanods Wilson Juezan, Abraham Nebria and Ric Rabaya from charges.
Virgilio Sumeran said in his complaint that on Jan. 13, 2011 at about 9 p.m., he was illegally arrested by the respondents inside his house in Barangay Lagtang, Talisay City.
Prior to the arrest, he said he had an argument with his wife and after their quarrel the barangay tanods arrived and told him “not to go anywhere,” depriving him of his freedom of movement.
Minutes later, the police arrived and he was arrested and brought to the Talisay City Police Station where he was detained for five days.
“At the police station, a complaint for physical injuries in relation to Republic Act 9262 or violence against women and their children was filed against him. However on Jan. 17, 2011 the Talisay City Prosecutor dismissed the case against him for lack of probable cause,” Sumeran said.
He said the dismissal of the complaint was an indication that he did not violate any law during his arrest.
But in her six-page consolidated evaluation report, Aguilar cited based on the documentary evidence presented by Sumeran that there was no sufficient grounds to delve on the issue.
She said based on the evidence, the respondents only acted on the request of the wife and daughters of Sumeran for assistance.
“He admitted that there was a complaint filed by his wife and witnessed by his daughter. In fact, Sumeran acknowledged that he had a quarrel with his wife on that night. Because of the incident, his wife and daughter sought assistance from the respondents,” Aguilar ruled.
Aguilar said the allegation of the complainant for arbitrary detention has no legal basis. She added respondents “cannot be held to answer for arbitrary detention.”
“Sumeran did not present evidence to prove partiality, malice, bad faith or any corrupt purpose on the part of the respondents. Bad faith can never be presumed; it must be proved by clear and convincing evidence. Thus, the legal presumption of regularity in the performance of official duties favoring them stands,” the consolidated evaluation report read. — (FREEMAN)