In a 28-page petition, the Department of Justice, the Philippine National Police and the state prosecutors said the SC has correctly ruled on April 1 that the case "has not prescribed yet, and to apply a two-year bar will deprive the state of the time to go after those responsible for the death of 11 gang members."
"Stripped to its bare essentials, respondent mainly argues in the aforesaid motion for reconsideration that he could invoke the retroactive application of Section 8, Rule 117 of the 200 Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure, and that the trial court should be given the chance to determine respondent’s compliance with the requirements of Section 8, Rule 117," the petition read.
The SC, in its April 1 decision, said such rule was not yet in effect when the case was re-filed by government prosecutors as it was dismissed in 1999 by a Quezon City judge.
Lacson filed his motion for reconsideration on April 15, claiming he was being politically persecuted by the Arroyo administration due to his plan to run for president in next year’s elections.
"Indeed, for justice to prevail, the scales must balance; justice is not to be dispensed for the accused alone. The interests of society and the offended parties which have been wronged must be equally considered," the government quoted the SC decision as saying.
"A verdict of conviction is not necessarily a denial of justice and an acquittal is not necessarily a triumph of justice, for, to the society offended and the party wronged, it could also mean injustice. Justice then must be rendered even handedly to both the accused, on one hand, and the State and the offended party, on the other," it added.
Government prosecutors have made Lacson a principal accused in the new information they filed against the alleged perpetrators of the rubout. They said they are going to present new witnesses who were present during the incident.
The government likewise stressed Lacson and his co-accused could not cry for violation of his constitutional rights to a speedy trial or the delay in the prosecution since there was no trial to speak of in the first place.
In fact, the government said, the senator and the others "were never arrested nor subjected to a formal restraint," and were never arraigned for the charges against them.
"Surely, respondent could not claim that he was denied of due process. He was afforded the opportunity to participate in the due process. He was afforded the opportunity to participate in the preliminary investigation that was conducted by petitioners-public prosecutors, yet he chose not to submit his counter-affidavit and other countervailing evidence, therein," the prosecutors said.
The government said mere self defense being employed by the accused by saying it was a shootout should not be enough to discredit the testimonies of new witnesses who executed affidavits saying it was a rubout.
The witnesses are Senior Inspector Abelardo Ramos, former Inspector Ysmael Yu, Senior Police Officer 1 Wilmor Medes, SPO2 Noel Seno, radio operator and former police civilian agent, Mario Enad and others.
The government said Lacson and his co-accused have yet to present clear and convincing proof before the trial court that the Kuratong incident was a shootout and a legitimate police operation and thus they cannot claim that no probable cause exists to bind them to stand trial.