SC to tackle Kuratong case today

Fourteen Supreme Court justices will hear this morning the most controversial case that has been hounding the career of opposition Senator Panfilo "Ping" Lacson — the alleged summary execution of 11 Kuratong Baleleng gang members on May 1995.

The jurists will determine whether they will sustain the position of the Department of Justice, which filed the charges and recommended "no bail’ for the mass murders, or agree with the defense lawyers’ argument that the case can no longer be revived.

Prosecutors deemed the case as very crucial since this has been the only case which can pin down the former Philippine National Police chief, six police officials and 31 other police officers, based on solid physical and testimonial evidence.

Justice Secretary Hernando Perez told newsmen yesterday government lawyers are ready for the oral arguments. Solicitor General Simeon Marcelo will represent the government with the help of some solicitors and government prosecutors.

He expressed confidence the government will win the case, saying "substantive law must prevail over procedural law," referring to the 20-year prescription period after which murder cases can be set aside.

By "substantive criminal law," Perez meant the 20-year period within which a crime punishable by at least 20 years imprisonment can be filed against the suspect or a set of suspects. After this period has lapsed, a victim can no longer pursue the case.

Lacson’s lawyers, belonging to the Fortun Narvasa Law Office, have argued that their client can no longer be haled to court because it has been covered by a two-year prohibition, the case having been dismissed in 1999.

On Aug. 24 last year, the special third division of the Court of Appeals held that Lacson can no longer be held liable because the case was dismissed on March 1999, on the basis that such dismissals become final after two years.

Justices Eriberto Rosario Jr., Conrado Vasquez Jr., Hilarion Aquino and Josefina Guevarra-Salonga said that a re-opening or re-filing of the case will violate Section 8 Rule 117 of the new Rules of Criminal Procedure, which took effect Dec. 2000.

Former Quezon City Judge Wenceslao Agnir (now a CA justice) dismissed the case against Lacson. However, the DOJ re-filed the new case on May 31 last year after three new police-witnesses came forward to testify.

"Rule 117 is an important procedural rule that resolves certain procedural, practical and prescription-related issues but it does not alter in any way substantive criminal laws," the government contended.

The appeals court stopped in June last year Quezon City Judge Ma. Theresa Yadao, an appointee of deposed President Estrada who was handling the case, from issuing warrants for the arrest of Lacson and the 37 other accused.

The temporary restraining order was made permanent last August when the CA ruled that the policemen involved in the alleged rubout of the bank robbers can no longer be prosecuted for murder, invoking the Rules of Criminal Procedure.

The DOJ, through a panel headed by State Prosecutor Peter Ong, recommended no bail for Lacson and the other members of the PNP and the defunct Presidential Anti-Crime Commission (PACC).

Indicted in the Quezon City court were Lacson, Chief Superintendents Jewel Canson, Romeo Acop, Francisco Zubia, Senior Superintendents Michael Ray Aquino, Cesar Mancao III, Glen Dumlao and 31 other police officers.

The case was dismissed by Agnir in 1999 based on the fact that four witnesses – SPO2s Ed delos Reyes, Corazon dela Cruz, teenager Jane Gomez and tabloid reporter Mandy Capili – retracted their statements. Only the testimony of radio technician Mario Enad remained.