Ca Ruling On Dacer Case PDF

Republic of the Philippines
COURT OF APPEALS
Manila
SPECIAL SIXTH DIVISION PANFILO M. LACSON, Petitioner, - versus REGIONAL TRIAL COURT OF MANILA, BRANCH 18, PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, CARINA L. DACER, SABINA DACERRE ES, EMIL DACERHUNGERFORD, !"# AMPARO DACER-HENSON, Respondents. CA-G.R. SP NO. 11$%&' Me()ers* ENRI+UE,, -R., Chairperson, . DICDICAN, !"# BATO, -R., JJ.
Pr/(u01!2e#* 3333333333333333333 FEB 03, 2011
x--------------------------------------------------x
DECISION
BATO, -R., -.*
This is a petition for certiorari and prohibition, under Rule 65 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure, to annul and set-aside the Orders dated Februar !, "#1# and $ul "%, "#1# of public respondent court findin& probable cause for the issuance of 'arrants of arrest a&ainst (enator Panfilo )acson *petitioner for short+ 'ho 'as i,plicated in the -acer-Corbito case and char&ed of t'o counts of ,urder for havin& been issued 'ith &rave abuse of discretion a,ountin& to lac. or e/cess of 0urisdiction1 The pertinent factual and procedural antecedents, as culled fro, the pleadin&s and anne/es sub,itted b the parties, are as follo's2
3
4e' Third 5e,ber vice $ustice 5acalino 'ho inhibited per Raffle dated Februar 1, "#111
CA-G.R. SP NO. 116057 DECISION
6n the ,ornin& of 4ove,ber "!, "###, a pro,inent public relations practitioner in the person of (alvador 78ubb 9 -acer, on board his 'hite To ota Revo, to&ether 'ith his driver :,,anuel Corbito, 'ere abducted alon& ;obel Ro/as (t1 in the Cit of 5anila11 T'o da s after the abduction, 5r1 :d'in Far&as, the spo.esperson for the -acer fa,il , re<uested the 486 -irector to conduct an investi&ation1 =fter al,ost five ,onths of police 'or., the 486 filed several co,plaints for .idnappin& *61(1 4o1 "##1-"!7+ and double ,urder *61(1 4os1 "##1-%11 > "##1-%!7+ a&ainst several persons 'ith the -epart,ent of $ustice *-O$+1 On 5a 11, "##1, after a preli,inar investi&ation, the -O$ panel of prosecutors" filed an 6nfor,ation for double ,urder a&ainst the follo'in& persons, na,el 2 $i,, )1 )ope?, =le/ 81 -ilo , @illia, )1 )ope?, (PO! 5arino (oberano, (PO% 5auro Torres, (PO% $ose :scalante, Crisosto,o 51 Purificacion, Ri&o -e Pedro, Renato 5alabanan, $ovencio 5alabanan, 5ar&arito Cueno, Ro,,el Rollan, PA(upt1 Blen -u,lao, PAC16nsp1 Cicente =rnado, PA6nsp1 Roberto )an&cauon, (PO! 8en0a,in Taladua, (PO1 Rolando )acasandile, PA6nsp1 -anilo Cillanueva%, (PO1 5ario (ar,iento, (PO1 @illia, Reed, PO" Tho,as $1 (ar,iento, (PO1 Ruperto =1 4e,eno, $ohn -oes and $a,es -oes1! The case, doc.eted as Cri,inal Case 4o1 #1-191969, 'as raffled to RTC-8ranch !1 of 5anila1 )ater, the case 'as transferred to RTC-8ranch 1D of 5anila after the inhibition of $ud&e Rodolfo Ponferrada1 One of the accused, PA(upt1 Blen -u,lao, after he 'as arrested, e/ecuted on $une 1", "##1 a hand'ritten =ffidavit5, subscribed before Eue?on Cit =sst1 Prosecution 66 4ilo =1 PeFaflor, 'herein he narrated his actual .no'led&e and recollection of the -acer-Corbito case, vi?2
A F F I D A
1 "
I!
% ! 5
Rollo, p1 "DD-%11, -O$ Resolution dated 5a 11, "##11 5ade up of (tate Prosecutor 66 Ruben 81 Carretas, (tate Prosecutor Beroni,o )1 ( and Prosecution =ttorne $uan Pedro C1 4avera1 -ropped as an accused in the Order dated =u&ust 17, "##1 of the RTC1 6bid1, p1 1"1 Rollo, pp1 %%7-%!51

6, PA(GPT1 B):44 -G5)=O B=)=PO4, of le&al a&e, ,arried and a resident of 8& 1 Cilla (ur, 5addela, Euirino, after havin& been s'orn to in accordance 'ith la' do hereb depose and sa 2 1That 6 a, a police officer b profession and the for,er -eput Chief for Operation of the Tas. Broup )u?on of the defunct Presidential =nti-Or&ani?ed Cri,e Tas. Force *P=OCTF+H "That 6 a, narratin& , actual and truthful .no'led&e and recollection about the -=C:R-COR86TO case2 6n the second or third 'ee. of $anuar 1999, 6 'as &iven a tas.in& b PA((GPT1 56CI=:) R=J 81 =EG64O, the then Chief of Operations -ivision, P=OCTF, to conduct discreet 8ac.&round 6nvesti&ation on a certain personalit 'hich later turned-out to be 5R1 (=)C=-OR 78G88J9 -=C:R1 For this purpose, he &ave ,e a callin& card of the sub0ect and instructed ,e to 'ithdra' T'ent Thousand Pesos *P"#,###1##+ fro, the Finance and )o&istic -ivision1 6, then, proceeded to 5anila Iotel, chec.ed-in to one of its roo, *nr canKt re,e,ber+ usin& the alias 6R@64 CI=C:;1 6n *sic+ , first da , 6 'as able to locate the t'o *"+ unitsAroo,s bein& occupied b 5R1 -=C:R and his staff *nr of roo, canKt re,e,ber but 6 .no' its location+1 The ne/t instruction to ,e b PA((GPT1 =EG64O, havin& ?eroed in the roo,s, is to surreptitiousl enter the roo,s and ta.e 'hatever docu,ents 6 can and to ,onitor personalitiesAvisitors of our sub0ect1 6n , desire to acco,plish said tas.in&, 6 tried hard to &o bac. and forth in the vicinit of the roo,s but it is reall hard for it is situated in the dead-end of the ri&ht-'in& of 5anila Iotel1 6t is e<uipped 'ith a ca,era or a sort of ,onitorin& device at the top of the ,ain door1 There 'as a 'ooden bench in front of the other roo, but 6 canKt sta lon&1 (ince 6 cannot find a &ood cover to be there and a &ood reason to enter an of the roo,sAoffice, 6 reported to PA((GPT1 =EG64O the need to recruit an insider or e,plo ee of 5anila Iotel preferrabl *sic+ securit &uard or 0anitor1 6 also rela ed to hi, that sta in& in the hotel as a &uest is not feasible either as the roo, 6 occupied 'as not strate&icall co-located 'ith , sub0ect1 The ne/t da s, 6 endeavored to tal. 'ith the 'aiters at the coffee shop, attendants at the ,ini-stores on the &round floor and securit &uards and 0anitors purposel to spot possible recruits1 8ut 6 later

ruled it as ris. since these e,plo ees ,i&ht still be lo al to the for,er -irector of the Iotel1 @ith ne&ative develop,ent, 6 a&ain reported to PA((GPT1 =EG64O and there he told ,e2 7Lun& di .a a, sunu&in na lan& o pasabu&in, ,asira ,an lan& an& ,&a do.u,ento at co,puters nila19 6 ans'ered2 7Tin&nan .o (ir19 Then 6 leave *sic+1 Personall not a,enable and convince *sic+ 'ith such instruction, 6 0ust 'ent to the Iotel irre&ularl for t'o *"+ 'ee.s and han& around at its lobb and soon 'ith the influ/ of other cases and develop,ent of , on&oin& pro0ects, this tas.in& had 'aned1 Paran& na.ali,utan since 6 'as then deliverin& positive results in other cases 6 a, handlin&1 Then 6 'ent to 8an&.o., Thailand to under&o a fort -five da s *!5+ Cri,inal 6nvesti&ation Course at the 6nternational )a' :nforce,ent =cade, *C6):=+ fro, 16 =u&ust M "7 (epte,ber 19991 Fro, schoolin&, 6 'or.ed on Robber AIold-up cases and delivered positive results1 Fro, here on, 6 'as pre-occupied 'ith tas.in&s fro, , Chief, TB )u?on re&ardin& cases and co,plaints endorsed to our office1 (o,eti,es *sic+ on the ,onth of October "###, 6 'as as.ed b PA((GPT1 =EG64O re&ardin& , previous C6 effortsK result of 5R1 -=C:R and told ,e to revive such effort1 6 ans'ered that 6K, handlin& a C=(:OP and is nearin& its e/ecution phase1 @ith that reason, he instructed ,e to turn it over to CA64(P1 C6C:4T: =R4=-O1 The ne/t da , CA64(P1 =R4=-O approached ,e and rela ed the &uidance of PA((GPT1 =EG64O1 6 told that 6 'as onl able to locate the t'o *"+ roo,s bein& rented b 5R1 -=C:R at the 5anila Iotel1 Ie as.ed ,e vehicles bein& used, but 6 have not seen an as it is bein& par.ed at the bac. of the hotel1 6n one occasion in the sa,e ,onth of October "###, 'hile 6 'as at the =d,inistrative Office T=(L BROGP )G;O4, PA((GPT1 C:;=R 5=4C=O called ,e in his office and in<uire *sic+ fro, ,e if 6 .no' the tas.in& of CA64(P1 =R4=-O 'ritten in the dispatch for, as 7(pecial Operations91 6 ans'ered hi, 6 donKt .no'1 PA((GPT1 5=4C=O 'as concerned on the fundin& as 'ell as the use of his ,en since CA64(P1 =R4=-O and his tea, ,e,bers are under TB )G;O41 PA((GPT1 5=4C=O then as.ed ,e to &o 'ith hi, at the Operations -ivision 'here PA((GPT1 =EG64O 'as the Chief1 @hile en route to that office, he uttered2 7Lun& sila an& ,a tas.in& dapat sila an& ,a&pondo1 =n& liit na n&a an& pera natin, tapos tao pa natin an& &a&a,itin19 @hen 'e reached the office of PA((GPT1 =EG64O, PA((GPT1 5=4C=O as.ed2 74o , ano ba

iton& (pecial Operations na itoN9 PA((GPT1 =EG64O ans'ered2 7La .u'an an nr O -=C:R1 O. na an sa 5alacaFan&, pina&usapan na an19 PA((GPT1 5=4C=O a&ain <ueried2 7Clear ba ito sa boss natin, .a 71N9 *referrin& to Ben1 )acson+1 PA((GPT1 =EG64O ans'ered2 7(ila na da' bahala sa .an a19 @e then 'ent out of the office and PA((GPT1 5=4C=O co,,ented2 7(i 4ino tala&a O totoo .a a onN9 Ie then as.ed ,e 'hat 6 a, doin& and told hi,, 6 a, supervisin& the effort of CA64(P1 =-=4B)=O re- -ru& ( ndicates 'hich 'e later lin.ed to CC= .ids .idnappin&1 On 4ove,ber "!, "###, there 'as a scheduled pro,otional board ,eetin& prepared b Chief, =d,inistrative -ivision, CA64(P1 :55= :8)=4=41 This ,eetin& 'as to tac.le 'ho 'ould be included in the reco,,endee for pro,otion as a result of the =laban& :ncounter 'ith Robber AIold-up Broup in 'hich 6 'as the Pro0ect Officer1 @hile 'e 'ere 'aitin& for other ,e,bers to arrive *supposedl it 'ould start 1#2## a1,1+, PA((GPT1 5=4C=O, also a ,e,ber of the board as.ed if the ,e,bers are alread co,plete1 6 told hi, not et, then he invited ,e to his office2 7-on ,una ta o sa taas ,a&ta,ba ,9 he said1 =t around 112## M 112%# a1,1 on sa,e da , 'hile 'e 'ere tal.in&, *6 and PA((GPT1 5=4C=O+, 6 received a te/t ,essa&e fro, PA((GPT1 =EG64O 'hich read2 74a.uha na si -:)T=1 Pa.i T161 ,o si a coordinate 'ith 19 *referrin& to CA64(P1 =R4=-O+1 Iu'a& .an& ,a&dala tao ,o ta&a 8icol19 6 i,,ediatel told PA((GPT1 5=4C=O and as.ed hi,2 7=no sirN9 Ie ans'ered1 7(i&e puntahan ,o na1 6-update ,o a.o n& resulta n& T161 ,o19 6 'ent do'n fro, the Office of PA((GPT1 5=4C=O then called-up PA((GPT1 =EG64O and as.ed hi,2 7(ir, ano an& itatanon& .oN9 Ie ans'ered2 76tanon& ,o .un& ano an& pina&usapan nila ni Presidente, tapos ano an& bala. n& oposis on, lalo na si FCR at =l,onte1 6li&a' ,o para di ni a ala, .un& sino an& .u,uha sa .an a19 6 proceeded to the par.in& lot in front of P=OCTF I<s1 5 issued vehicle, a blue 5itsubishi =dventure 'ith Plate P @I$-%#9, 'as then &oin& out of the co,pound so 6 told the &uard on dut to stop it1 6 coped up 'ith , vehicle and sa' CA64(P1 =R4=-O on board1 Ie i,,ediatel told ,e2 7(i&e hira,in .o an& sasa. an ,o, na.uha na n& ,&a bata .o on& sub0ect na,in19 6 ans'ered2 75a pinapunta si - DD *PA((GPT1 =EG64O+ contact lan& da' .ita,

T161 da' a.o n& tao19 Ie ans'ered2 7Jon na on sir, ta,an&-ta,a, sa,a na ta o19 8ut 'hen 6 sa' , driver, PO% 4ilo :scanio *he is a 8icolano+, 6 told hi,2 7:sca, tulun&an ,o na lan& on& tea, natin sa pa& 8161 Tanun&in ,o .a (PO! 4uas on& ,&a tar&ets19 7La,i na an& bahala dito19 The &u obli&ed and dise,bar.ed1 CA64(P1 =R4=-O enthused2 7@ala na ta on& driver sirN9 6 told hi,2 76nstruction ni DD *PA((GPT1 =EG64O, hu'a& ,a&dala n& 8icolano19 Then CA64(P1 =R4=-O told ,e2 7(ir, Cavite pa an& punta natin19 @ith that, 6 loo.ed for another driver and 6 spotted PO% )arr =,bre and CA64(P1 T=44=C=4 'ho told ,e that PO% =,bre 'as at the bac. of P=OCTF office near P4P B ,1 CA64(P1 =R4=-O instructed hi, to drive to Cavite1 @hile &oin& out fro, Ca,p Cra,e to :-(=, CA64(P1 =R4=-O 'as callin& his troops thru his cellphone then told ,e2 7traffic da' sa Coastal Road, ,a& ():Q na ta o sa Car,ona e/it19 PO% )arr =,bre obli&ed1 Then he called so,eone and rela ed2 7(ir, na&aanta on& tropa .o sa li.od n& 5etroban., 'ala pa da' on& ,&a tao ,o doon19 @hen the finished, 6 as.ed2 7(ino onN9 Ie ans'ered2 7(i 17 sir19 *Referrin& to PA((GPT1 T:OF6)O C64=+1 7Pinapunta .o sa lu&ar,9 Then 'e slept on the 'a 1 @hen 'e finall arrived on or about 1-" P5 at -as,ariFas, Cavite, 6t told , driver to par. in the shaded area and 0ust 'ait inside the vehicle and sleep 'hile 'aitin& for ,e1 CA((GPT1 =R4=-O i,,ediatel 'ent ahead to&ether 'ith his troops and after so,eti,e, 6 follo'ed suit1 6 sa' one *1+ 'hite To ota Corolla en&ine on, one 'hite )ite =ce M en&ine on and one *1+ To ota Revo par.ed at the bac. of the establish,ent thereat1 =lso, 6 sa' CA64(P1 =R4=-O no' tal.in& 'ith (A64(P1 RO86 )=4BC=GO4, PO% )=C=(=4-6):, (PO1 R::- > (PO! T=)=-G=1 =&ain, CA64(P1 =R4=-O called-up thru his cellphone1 7(ir, 'ala pa on& ,&a bata ,o19 =fter their brief conversation, 6 as.ed2 7(ino ba onN9 Ie ans'ered, 717 sir, paratin& na da' sila19 =fter a 'hile, PO% (ar,iento and Ri&or arrived 'ith so,e foods pac. in 'hite st rofor1 CA64(P1 =R4=-O > (A64(P1 )=4BC=GO4 'ent inside the )ite-=ce Can1 =fter around ten *1#+ ,inutes the ca,e out and said2 7@alan& ,asabi sir1 6.a' T161 ,o19 6 told the,2 7Lain ,una ta o19 =nd 6 instructed Ri&or to &ive one *1+ pac. of food to , driver1 =fter eatin&, 6 'ent inside the van and sa' t'o *"+ blindfolded ,alefactors1 6 also sa' (PO% 4e,eFo 'ho stood as &uard inside1 6 tal.ed to the ,alefactors seated in the ,iddle

portion 'earin& all 'hite attire1 6 as.ed his na,e and told ,e 5R1 8G88J -=C:R1 6 as.ed 'hat 'as instructed to ,e re M Their conversation 'ith the president but 0ust ans'ered2 7Iu,ihin&i lan& n& advise19 7Re&ardin& the plans of the opposition, he ans'ered19 Laibi&an .o n& ,ata&al on& ,&a an1 Lahit sa ad,inistras on, ,ara,i rin a.on& .aibi&an but 6 al'a s sta neutral and professional1 @ith these strai&ht ans'ers, 6 .no' 6 canKt facilitate an thin& so 6 called up PA((GPT1 =EG64O and canKt &et an thin&1 Ie then instructed ,e to &o bac. to base but secure an docu,ents and &ive it to hi,1 @ith that, 6 told CA64(P1 =R4=-O about the instruction and he ans'ered2 7(i&e, sir, a.o n& bahala dito19 =t this 0uncture, at around "2%# P151, the tea, ,e,bers of PA((GPT1 C64= arrived on board one *1+ ,odel car and one *1+ 'hite To ota Revo1 6 reco&ni?ed onl (PO! (oberano, the t'o *"+ others 6 donKt .no' their na,es1 (o 6 proceeded bac. to P=OCTF I<s1 @ith ,e 'ho re<uested to hitch a ride, 'ere (A64(P1 )=4BC=GO4, (PO% 4:5:RO, PO% )=C=(=4-6): and R6BOR1 Gpon reachin& the P=OCTF I<s1, PA((GPT1 =EG64O 'as not around as such, 6 'ent to PA((GPT1 5=4C=O1 Ie told ,e2 7=non& nan& ariN9 6 replied2 7@ala sir a.on& na.uhan& ,a&anda 'alan& sinabi19 Then, PA((GPT1 5=4C=O reiterated2 7(i 17 *referrin& to PA((GPT1 C64=+ nandon baN9 6 ans'ered2 7@ala sir, bata lan& ni a19 Ie then dialled *sic+ his cellphone and 6 heard hi, sa 2 78o&s *referrin& to PA((GPT1 C64=+, 'ala .a na na,an pala sa area1114a flash alar, na O ba.a ,adra&net .a o O .a,i na na,an ,apuputu.an dito sa )u?on19 @hile the 'ere tal.in&, 6 eased out in his office and proceed to the officersK barrac.s and rested1 @hen the vehicle of -=C:R, a To ota Revo, 'as recovered at 5ara&ondon, Cavite, PA((GPT1 =EG64O called ,e up about the ,atter but 6 0ust said 6 donKt .no'1 Then he <uerried *sic+ about the docu,ents, 6 told hi, 6 had the, in , vehicle1 Ie instructed ,e to 0ust secure it for the ,eanti,e1 Then, PA((GPT1 5=4C=O chanced upon ,e in the office, called ,e inside and as.ed2 78at na,an &anoon an& &ina'a nila 8o&sN Ta o an& ,aiipit dito1 -a,i na n&an& tu,ata'a& tun&.ol sa .aso na ito1 Tinatanon& .un& anon& &ina&a'a natin19 6 0ust ans'ered2 7-is.arte nila sir eh19 Then he <uerried *sic+ so troubled2 7(ino .a a an& i-tas.in& natin na tea, ditoN O (i&e, a.o na bahala19 6 also told hi,2 7(ir, pinapata&o pa n&a ni DD *PA((GPT1 =EG64O+ on& ,&a papeles

na narecover eh19 Ie ans'ered2 74a.u, deli.ado an, idispose ,o na19 (o 6 'ent out and 'ent strai&ht to )a 5esa -a, 'here 6 burned the said docu,ent1 6n another occasion after this ,eetin&, PA((GPT1 5=4C=O and 6 have a chance to tal. until it a&ain reached the -=C:R case1 Ie told ,e that he had reported to 71 *referrin& to B:41 )=C(O4+1 Ie also e/pressed to ,e his concern on ho' to deal 'ith the case speciall to ,edia 'ho 'ere al'a s as.in& for develop,ent 7Ta o tulo an& naiipit sa )u?on,9 he ended1 %That the above circu,stances are , personal .no'led&e and truthful recollection of the facts surroundin& the -=C:R-COR86TO case1 64 @6T4:(( @I:R:OF, 6 do hereb affi/ed , si&nature this 1"th da of $une, "##1 at P4P 6ntelli&ence &roup, Ca,p Cra,e, Eue?on Cit 1 *(B-+ PA(GPT1 B):44 B1 -G5)=O (Affiant) (G8(CR68:- =4- (@OR4 TO before ,e this 1!th da of $une "##1 at Eue?on Cit 1 *(B-+ 46)O =1 P:R=F)OR =((T1 PRO(:CGT6O4 =TTOR4:J 66 EG:;O4 C6TJ9
On $une "", "##1, upon ,otion of accused PA6nsp1 -anilo Cillanueva that he is not the 7(PO% Cillanueva9 i,plicated in the -acer-Corbito case, the RTC ordered the -O$ panel of prosecutors to conduct a reinvesti&ation of Cri,inal Case 4o1 #11919691 =lso, the RTC directed the -O$ panel of prosecutors to deter,ine 'hether probable cause e/ist a&ainst PA(enior (upt1 Ce?ar 5ancao, PA(enior (upt1 5ichael Ra =<uino, PA(enior (upt1 Teofilo Cina and PO% )arr =,bre1 The -O$ Panel of Prosecutors issued subpoenas to the aforena,ed persons for the, to appear on $ul "7 and %1, "##11 -urin& the reinvesti&ation, throu&h his la' er =tt 1 8ernard
Citriolo, PA(enior (upt1 Ce?ar 5ancao sub,itted his Counter=ffidavit6 dated $une "9, "##1, subscribed before Prosecutor 66 Fernando Felicen, 'herein he declared under oath, as follo's2
COG4T:R-=FF6-=C6T 6, PA(r1 (upt1 Ce?ar O1 5ancao 66, of le&al a&e, ,arried, Filipino, and 'ith office address at the Re&ional (pecial (tud Co,,ittee D, Police Re&ional Office D, Philippine 4ational Police, Ca,p Lan&leon, Palo, )e te, after havin& s'orn to in accordance 'ith la', hereb depose and sa , TI=T2 11 6 a, the person referred to as PA(r1 (upt1 Ce?ar 5ancao in the affidavit dated $une 1", "##1 e/ecuted b PA(upt1 Blenn B1 -u,lao i,plicatin& ,e in the -acer-Corbito double ,urder caseH "1 Prior to , present assi&n,ent as Chair,an of the Re&ional (pecial (tud Co,,ittee D, Police Re&ional Office D, Ca,p Lan&leon, Palo, )e te, effective =pril 1D, "##1, it 'as a co,,on .no'led&e and an open boo. that 6 'as one of the hi&h ran.in& officers assi&ned 'ith the defunct Presidential =ntior&ani?ed Cri,e Tas. Force as Chief, Tas. for )u?on1 =ttached for read reference as =nne/ 719 is a photo cop of , desi&nationH %1 =fter the fall of the :strada ad,inistration, all hi&h ran.in& officers of the then P=OCTF 'ho 'ere perceived to be as close associates and aides of for,er CAP4P Panfilo )acson no' (enator-elect 'ere relieved fro, their positions and reassi&ned in far flun& areas in Cisa as and 5indanao, a clear ,anifestation of harass,ent and persecution violative of the ri&hts of the affected Police Officers li.e , self 'ithout due process of la'H !1 (hortl after , relief in the P=OCTF, 6 'as assi&ned on a 7floatin& status9 at Iead<uarters (upport (ervice, Ca,p Cra,e, Eue?on Cit 1 (ubse<uentl , 6 'as char&ed before the Co,,ission on :lections no less than b the P4P for violation of the election la' doc.eted under :1O1 Case 4o1 1#-#% no' pendin& before the )a' -epart,ent of the said Co,,ission on account of , alle&ed support to then (enatorial Candidate Panfilo )acsonH 51 Thereafter, on =pril 17, "##1, the P4P throu&h no less than the Chief of the Philippine 4ational Police, )eandro R1
6
Rollo, pp1 !!#-!!91

5endo?a, referred the ,atter of the revival of the Luraton& 8alelen& case on the basis of alle&ed ne' 'itnesses to the (ecretar of $ustice 'ho, on =pril 17, "##1, issued -epart,ent Order 4o1 11! constitutin& a panel to conduct the reinvesti&ationAre-openin& of the preli,inar investi&ation of the said case in violation of both the substantial and procedural ri&hts of the respondents therein includin& respondent hereinH 61 4ot contended, the present ad,inistration, particularl the -epart,ent of $ustice throu&h the la' enforce,ent a&encies of the &overn,ent i,plicated ,e and other opposition leaders in the i,a&ined offense of rebellion on 5a 1, "##1 b declarin& a none/istent concept of 7(tate of Rebellion9 in 5etro 5anila and ordered the arrest 'ithout 'arrant of respondent herein includin& opposition leaders1 Conse<uentl , a hold departure order 'as li.e'ise issued b the 8ureau of 6,,i&ration in their concerted effort to persecute the opposition to 'hich respondent herein is identified1 For da s and 'ee.s, the blac. propa&anda scripted b the &overn,ent 'as published in al,ost all ne'spapers includin& the pro0ection that the respondent herein 'as a fu&itive and a plotter to &rab po'er1 Io'ever, because of ,ountin& disa&ree,ent fro, the left, the left of center includin& ri&htist ele,ents the &overn,ent bac.trac.ed and 0ustified its ,ove throu&h the decision of the (upre,e Court on the ,atter1 =ttached as =nne/ 7"9 is a photo cop of the Iold -eparture Order issued on 5a 1, "##1 b 86-, -O$1 71 Further, on $une 6, "##1, despite his authori?ed leave of absence issued for and in behalf of the Re&ional -irector, P4P Re&ion D, Palo, )e te, b -eput Re&ional -irector for Personnel, PA(r1 (upt1 Falconit, to attend court hearin&s in 5etro 5anila on 5a "D to $une 5, "##1 and despite his verbal co,,unication 'ith the Re&ional -irector to e/tend his authori?ed leave, the P4P Re&ion D Co,,and throu&h its Re&ional -irector reported to the CA P4P throu&h the P4P -eput -irector Beneral for -irectorial (taff to place hi, under the list of =@O)1 =ttached as =nne/es 7%9 and 7%-=9 are photo copies of respondentKs authori?ed leave and the co,,unication to place under the list of =@O) officers, respectivel 1 D1 The pattern of persecution is so obvious that several 'ee.s after the arrest of PA(upt1 Blenn B1 -u,lao, the principal suspect in the alle&ed -acer-Corbito double ,urder case, an affidavit alle&edl e/ecuted b said suspect i,plicated respondent herein for the said double ,urder case 'ithout an solid factual basis other than his self-servin&, scripted and coerced affidavit1
10

Gnder present 0urisprudence, an affidavit is susceptible of fabrication and sub0ective state,ent1 The (upre,e Court is consistent on this point that an affidavit 'ithout sufficient and solid corroborative factual evidence is loo.ed upon as 'ea. evidence and has no probative value sufficient to deter,ine ,oral certaint for conviction1 The factu, probans therefore re,ains unproven unless additional direct, factual and real evidence are introduced to support the alle&ations in the co,plaint or affidavit1 6n People vs1 Babas, "%% (CR= 77, the court rules2 7a s'orn state,ent or an affidavit does not purport to
contain a co,plete co,pendiu, of the details of the event narrated b the affiant19
11
91 The affidavit of PA(upt1 Blenn B1 -u,lao is full of lies, inconsistent, half truths and untenable to sa the ver least1 6t never happened the 'a the hidden stron& ar, in the e/ecution of this affidavit pro0ects it to be1 6t is pure and si,ple harass,ent 'ith political undertones1 =s a decorated Police Officer, it 'ould be hi&hl illo&ical, unnatural and unli.el to do the alle&ations leveled a&ainst ,e, .no'in& full 'ell that at that ti,e of the alle&ed &rueso,e ,urder the opposition and the civil societ 'ere 'a&in& a hate ca,pai&n a&ainst all persons connected 'ith the :strada ad,inistration1 Particularl , the hate ca,pai&n a&ainst the for,er CAP4P and the defunct P=OCTF as a result of the i,peach,ent trial at that ti,e a&ainst for,er President $oseph :1 :strada1 The said affidavit e/ecuted b -u,lao is therefore conclusivel concocted b the stron& ar, of the &overn,ent, the la' enforce,ent authorities, to persecute persons or police officers identified 'ith the past ad,inistration1 6t is a si,ple ,ere after thou&ht in order for -u,lao to e/tricate hi,self fro, his present situation and ,a have entered a s'eet deal 'ith his captors1 Perhaps -u,lao suffered fro, ,ental and ph sical abuse in the hands of the police authorities that forced hi, to e/ecute said affidavit1 The fact that -u,lao too. several 'ee.s to e/ecute said affidavit sho's not onl after thou&ht *sic+ but puts into <uestion his credibilit and the ver reason of the e/ecution1 Obviousl , it is politicall ,otivated not onl to pin do'n (enator-elect Panfilo )acson but li.e'ise all other Police Officers close to hi,1 1#1 Fro, the affidavit of PA(upt1 Blenn B1 -u,lao *-u,lao for brevit +, he alle&es that so,eti,e in the third 'ee. of $anuar 1999, he received a tas.in& or instruction for, PA(r1 (upt1 5ichael Ra 81 =<uino *=<uino for brevit +, then Chief of Operations -ivision of the 'hole P=OCTF, for bac.&round

investi&ation for 5r1 (alvador 78ubb 9 -acer 'ith specific instruction to enter sub0ectKs office roo,s in 5anila Iotel and ta.e docu,ents found thereat1 This instruction or tas.in& clearl sho's that the stor he alle&es is not onl ridiculous but incredible1 6f true, this is a ver sensitive ,ission not onl because it involves a .no'n personalit in the political arena but it concerns an ille&al act1 Iavin& said that, it is <uite incredible and be ond hu,an e/perience speciall 'hen the operatives are hi&h ran.in& officers, a Police (uperintendent and (enior (uperintendent e<uivalent to )ieutenant Colonel and full Colonel, to for&et about the specific details of the docu,ents to be retrievedH 111 6n the sa,e affidavit, -u,lao alle&es that he reported to =<uino his inabilit to penetrate the sub0ect because of a ca,era or a ,onitorin& device ,ounted on top of the ,ain door of -acerKs office1 @ith this assertion, it is therefore i,perative to loo. at the tape of the said securit ca,era to confir, and verif his state,ent, if indeed he is tellin& the truth1 -u,lao further alle&es that he reco,,ended to =<uino the need to recruit persons fro, the said hotel to acco,plish his tas.in& and tal.ed to 'aiters, securit &uards and store attendants1 =&ain, in the interest of 0ustice, these persons 'ho, he tal.ed to can confir, his presence in the hotel1 @h is it that up to no' these persons have not been na,edN 1"1 -u,lao further alle&es that he conducted the hotel surveillance for t'o 'ee.s and reported directl to =<uino that the ,ission failed and said 7-i .a a91 =&ain, =<uino instructed hi, to 7pasabu&in o sunu&in9 ,asira ,an lan& an& ,&a do.u,ento and co,puters nila19 Clearl , -u,lao 'as receivin& instructions fro, and reportin& to onl one person, if indeed he is tellin& the truth, that person is PA(r1 (upt1 =<uino1 Obviousl , PA(r1 (upt1 Ce?ar O1 5ancao, 66 has no .no'led&e or infor,ation and never consented to the activities, ,ission and tas.in& of =<uino and -u,lao, if it ever e/isted at all1 6f PA(r1 (upt1 5ancao 'as involved, -u,lao should have at least infor,ed hi, of the nature and pro&ress of his ,ission bein& his i,,ediate superior officer in ter,s of desi&nation1 This 'as never doneH 1%1 4e/t, -u,lao alle&es that his operation 7'aned9 or 7na&.ali,utan9 fro, Februar 1999 to October "### or after the lapse of "# ,onths *1 ear and D ,onths+1 6n the interi, he further alle&es that he 'ent to 8an&.o., Thailand on official schoolin& fro, =u&ust 16, 1999 to (epte,ber "7, 1999 'ithout an pro&ress report on the tas.in& or operation or endorse,ent to an officer for that ,atter1 4o coordination 'hatsoever, even to =<uino, his direct
12

superior in the alle&ed -acer operation, for an endorse,ent despite the sensitive nature of the tas.in&1 This is a&ain indicative of a scripted stor line, i,possible and incredible1 1!1 @hen he returned fro, 8an&.o. so,eti,e in the last 'ee. of (epte,ber of 1999, he alle&es that he beca,e bus fro, the various tas.in&s assi&ned to hi, b respondent herein then Tas. Force )u?on Broup Chief, P=OCTF1 On October of "###, despite the period of 1 ear and D ,onths 'or.in& under respondent herein 'ithout ,entionin& an thin& about the alle&ed -acer tas.in&, then out of no'here he dra&s and i,plicates respondent PA(r1 (upt1 5ancao1 151 -u,lao alle&es that =<uino instructed hi, to revive the alle&ed -acer special operation, but because of his present assi&n,ent he 'as instructed b =<uino to turn over the said operation to PAC 6nsp1 =rnado1 =t this point, -u,lao alle&es that respondent herein ,ade an in<uir about the said 7special operations9 fro, -u,lao as indicated in the dispatch for,1 =&ain, the best evidence is the dispatch for, if indeed this stor scripted b -u,lao is true1 @here is the dispatch for,N Clearl , -u,lao is l in& because respondent herein bein& then the Tas. Force Broup Chief for )u?on can easil confront and in<uire fro, PAC 6nsp1 =rnado, his subordinate then 'or.in& under hi, in the said Tas. Force1 4othin& 'as said in -u,laoKs affidavit about respondent herein and =rnado in relation to the said tas.in&1 6ndeed, a cheap atte,pt to i,plicate respondent herein in the -acer case1 161 =&ain, -u,lao continued in his atte,pt to i,plicate respondent 5ancao b &ivin& an i,pression that said respondent 'as 'orried about the said tas.in& in respect of fundin& and ,anpo'er1 P=OCTF 'as not a private entit , it is a &overn,ent la' enforce,ent co,posite unit funded b the Office of the President 'ith a earl bud&et of Php1"#,###,###1##1 6t &oes 'ithout sa in& that fundin& and ,en 'ere never an issue in the pursuit of peace and order1 -u,lao and his captors are desperate in tr in& to invent a 'ild stor line that cannot be &iven credenceH 171 6n a fa,iliar tone, -u,lao no' ,iserabl tried to lin. respondent herein 'ith =<uino in the alle&ed 7special operations9 and in a blan.et date of October "###, he alle&es that in his presence respondent herein personall in<uired fro, =<uino about the said 7special operations9 and thereafter ,ade co,,ents in relation to the conversation1 This alle&ed ,eetin& never happened1 Respondent herein 'ill never and 'ill not consent to or be a part of
13

an cri,inal activities1 Respondent herein is a professional and decorate police officer 'ith sterlin& record in his cap1 Respondent in conscience can not and 'ill not do cri,inal acts and violate the rule of la' he 'as s'orn to defend and uphold1 RespondentKs &ood na,e and reputation, the dedication to his s'orn dut , the bri&ht and pro,isin& career, the future of his fa,il and love of countr 'ill al'a s be his &uidin& factors in his pursuit to uphold the la'1 6n fine, Respondent 'as ,eritoriousl pro,oted t'ice to the ne/t hi&her ran. for acco,plish,ent in police operations 'hich e/plains 'h at his oun& a&e of %9 he is alread a full Colonel or PA(enior (uperintendent, one step sh for Beneral ran.1 Respondent 'as a recipient of the hi&hest and presti&ious Philippine 5ilitar =cade, Cavalier ='ard for Police Operations1 6n 199%, Respondent 'as a'arded the $unior Police officer of the ear in the entire Philippine 4ational Police1 $ust recentl , respondent 'as a'arded t'ice as the 8est Tas. Broup Chief for the ear 1999 and "###H 1D1 (urprisin&l , -u,lao alle&es that respondent herein invited hi, in his office to tal. 'hile said respondent 'as 'aitin& for the scheduled pro,otional board ,eetin& on 4ove,ber "!, "### 'here he 'as a ,e,ber1 Io'ever, the affidavit sho's that the did not tal. about an thin& despite the fact that on the sa,e da -acer and his driver Corbito 'ere abducted1 -u,lao further alle&es that he received a te/t ,essa&e fro, =<uino sa in& that 7na.uha na si -elta, pa.i T161 ,o si a 'ith 1919 This te/t ,essa&e 'as personal to -u,lao, he never said in his affidavit that he told respondent 5ancao about it or sho'ed it to hi, if indeed it 'as true1 Io' can 5ancao sa 7 (i&e puntahan ,o na, 6 update ,o a.o sa resulta n& T161 ,o9 'hen he has no .no'led&e of the contents of the te/t ,essa&e in particular and the alle&ed 7special operations9 in &eneral, if it e/isted at all1 The truth is that this alle&ed ,eetin& never happened1 6t 'as ,erel fabricated and ,eant to lin. respondent 5ancao to the -acer-Corbito caseH 191 Further to the alle&ations of -u,lao as indicated in his affidavit, the alle&ed 7special operations9 dealt 'ith the instructions and co,,unications fro, =<uino to -u,lao, =rnado to -u,lao, -u,lao to =rnado, -u,lao to Cina and the ,inor officers1 Thereafter, -u,lao reported to =<uino and the latter instructed -u,lao to secure or &et the docu,ents1 Ta.e note that in 1999 'hen -u,lao alle&edl started this operation as indicated in his affidavit, the ,ission 'as to retrieve docu,ents fro, -acerKs office1 4o', in his atte,pt to i,plicate (enator-elect Panfilo )acson, -u,lao, desperatel lin.s respondent 5ancao for hi, to directl
14

lin. (enator-elect )acson as 'ell as PA(upt1 Cina 'ho is under the custod of the police authorities1 6n this 'a , the police authorities can utili?e Cina, =<uino and 5ancao to testif one 'a or the other a&ainst ulti,atel (enator-elect )acson, the onl credible opposition leader at this ti,e1 "#1 Finall , -u,lao alle&es that he tal.ed or reported to respondent 5ancao after the alle&ed abduction1 Ie li.e'ise said that 5ancao tal.ed to PA(upt1 Teofilo Cina over the cellular telephone1 @orst, respondent 5ancao alle&edl instructed -u,lao to dispose the retrieved docu,ents and reported the ,atter to (enator-elect )acson1 This stor line concocted b -u,lao in his o'n initiative or b the coercive force of his captors is not onl false, incredible but also ridiculous1 Fro, the ver inception of -u,laoKs affidavit, respondent 5ancao 'as never part of the 7special operations9 in an ,anner but later to his affidavit respondent 5ancao suddenl pla ed a ver crucial role in that he reported the ,atter to )acson and ordered the disposal of the docu,ents1 These state,ents co,in& fro, PA(upt1 -u,lao ne&ate the instruction of =<uino to secure the docu,ents retrieved fro, -acer and contrar to the ob0ective of the alle&ed ,ission that is to retrieve the docu,ents as narrated in -u,laoKs affidavit1 -u,laoKs penulti,ate state,ents 'ere ,eant to lin. respondent 5ancao and ulti,atel to lin. (enator-elect )acson in the -acerCorbito double ,urder case1 Obviousl , this is a si,ple de,olition 0ob to paral ?e a possible stron& opposition leader in the person of (enator-elect Panfilo )acson1 "11 The undisputable fact is that after the reported abduction of 5r1 (alvador -acer and his driver, respondent 5ancao as Chief of Tas. Force )u?on, P=OCTF initiated an investi&ation throu&h the instruction of then CAP4P Panfilo )acson and too. steps to solve the abduction as follo's2
a1+ b1+ c1+ d1+ e1+ f1+ &1+ Conducted follo'-up investi&ation as evidenced b his initial report dated 4ove,ber "5, "### inclusive of attach,ents1 1st Pro&ress report dated 4ove,ber "D, "### inclusive of attach,ents1 (pot report fro, PPO to R-1 )etter re<uest of Chief TF )u?on, P=OCTF to 4861 5:5O to CAP4P fro, R-, PRO" dated -ece,ber 1, "###1 Re<uest fro, Chief, TF )u?on to )TO for verification1 Re<uest for verification dated -ece,ber !, "### re2 Recovered handcuff
15

h1+ i1+ 01+ Copies of letters of de,and to the -acer fa,il b un.no'n suspects1 5e,o for Chief, TF )u?on re2 after ,eetin& report dated -ece,ber 5, "### transferrin& the lead a&enc to the 486 for the -acer-Corbito investi&ation 5e,o for CAP4P dated -ece,ber 11, "###1
16
Gnfortunatel , the &overn,ent decided to transfer the case to the 4ational 8ureau of 6nvesti&ation1 =ttached as =nne/es 7!9 to 71%9 are photo copies of the actions ta.en in the -acer-Corbito Case1 ""1 =ll said, the investi&atin& prosecutor should proceed 'ith the investi&ation of this case ad cautela,, as the (upre,e Court repeatedl ruled that the purposes of a preli,inar investi&ation are to secure the innocent a&ainst hast , ,alicious and oppressive prosecution, and to protect hi, fro, an open and public accusation of a cri,e, fro, the trouble, e/pense and an/iet of a public trial, and also to protect the state fro, useless and e/pensive trialsH "%1 6n vie' of the fore&oin&, it is respectfull pra ed that the Ionorable 6nvesti&atin& Officer resolves this case in our favor and dis,iss outri&ht the above-entitled co,plaint a&ainst ,e for lac. of ,erit and for insufficienc of evidence1 $une "9, "##1, 5anila1 *(B-1+ PA(r1 (upt1 Ce?ar O1 5ancao 66 =ffiant (G8(CR68:- =4- (@OR4 to before ,e this "9th da of $une "##1, in 5anila1 6 hereb certif that 6 personall e/a,ined the affiant and 6 a, convinced that he voluntaril e/ecuted and understood his affidavit *(B-1+ F:R4=4-O )1 F:)6C:4 Prosecutor 669
On (epte,ber 1!, "##1, after the reinvesti&ation, the -O$
17
panel of prosecutors issued a Resolution7 the dispositive portion of 'hich states2 7@I:R:FOR:, it is respectfull reco,,ended that PA(enior (upt1 Ce?ar 5ancao 66, PA(enior (upt1 5ichael Ra 81 =<uino, PA(enior (upt1 Teofilo Cina and (PO% =llan Cadenilla Cillanueva be indicted of double ,urder for the deaths of (alvador 78ubb 9 -acer and :,,anuel Corbito1 Further, it is respectfull reco,,ended that the co,plaint for double ,urder a&ainst PO% )arr =,bre be -6(56((:- for insufficienc of evidence and that PA(enior (upt1 Blenn -u,lao, PAC 6nsp1 -anilo Cillanueva, $i,, )ope?, @illia, )ope? and =le/ -ilo be -6(CI=RB:- as accused fro, the said =,ended 6nfor,ation, for the, to testif as 'itnesses for the (tate, 'ith the e/ception of PAChief 6nspector -anilo Cillanueva19 Pursuant to the above Resolution, the prosecution filed a 5anifestation and 5otion dated (epte,ber 17, "##1 to =d,it the =,ended 6nfor,ation1 =ccused (oberano, Torres, :scalante Purificacion, Renato and $ovencio 5alabanan filed their Opposition dated (epte,ber "D, "##11 The RTC denied the 5otion to =d,it =,ended 6nfor,ation in its Order dated October 1, "##11 The prosecution elevated the ,atter b 'a of certiorari to the Court of =ppeals 'hich rendered a -ecision dated =pril #!, "##" orderin& the ad,ission of the 7=,ended 6nfor,ation dated (epte,ber 17, "##1 substitutin& (PO% =))=4 C=-:46))= C6))=4G:C= for PA6nsp1 -=46)O C6))=4G:C= as accused, and char&in& PA(enior (upt1 56CI=:) R=J =EG64O, PA(enior (upt1 C:;=R 5=4C=O 66 and PA (enior (upt1 T:OF6)O C64= as additional accused, and dischar&in& or e/cludin& onl the accused $655J )1 )OP:;, @6))6=5 )1 )OP:; and =):Q 81 -6)OJ and to CO4T64G: 'ith the proceedin&s therefro, 'ith ut,ost deliberate dispatch1 4eedless to state, the ori&inal infor,ation filed on 5a 11, "##1 stands insofar as PA(enior (upt1 B):4*4+ B1 -G5)=O is concerned19D The (upre,e Court in its -ecision dated October 5, "##5 affir,ed the aforestated -ecision dated =pril !, "##" of the Court of =ppeals, 7'ith 5O-6F6C=T6O4 to include PA(r1 (upt1 B):4 B1 -G5)=O as one of the accused
7 D
Rollo, pp1 %1"-%%61 SPO4 Marino Soberano, et al. vs. The People of the Philippines, B1R1 4o1 15!6"9, October 5, "##5, !7" (CR= 1"51
18
e/cluded fro, the =,ended 6nfor,ation dated 17 (epte,ber "##1199 On 5arch 1, "##7, 'hile in the Gnited (tates, Ce?ar 5ancao 66 e/ecuted his second =ffidavit, subscribed before 6sabel 5oreno, 4otar Public, Count of 8ro'ard, (tate of Florida, statin& his .no'led&e of the 7-acer-Corbito -ouble 5urder Case9, vi?2 7=FF6-=C6T OF C:;=R O1 5=4C=O 66
6, C:;=R O1 5=4C=O 66, hereb ,a.e the follo'in& state,ent voluntaril and of , o'n free 'ill1 6 'as not pressured, coerced, or pro,ised an thin& in return for this state,ent1 =t all ti,es prior to ,a.in& this state,ent, 6 61 6 a, !5 ears old, ,arried, and have four children1 6 currentl reside 'ith , fa,il in Florida1 6 'as born in the Philippines and &raduated fro, the Philippine 5ilitar =cade, *P5=+ in 19D61 =fter &raduation, 6 served in Philippine la' enforce,ent until 6 left the countr in "##11 Fro, 19D6 to 1991 6 served 'ith the Philippine Constabular as a second and first lieutenant1 6n 1991 the Philippine constabular 'as inte&rated into the Philippine 4ational Police *P4P+ 'here 6 served in various supervisor positions ran&in& fro, (enior 6nspector to (enior (uperintendent 'hich is the e<uivalent of an =r, Colonel1 6 first ,et 5ichael Ra =<uino durin& , cadet da s at the Philippine 5ilitar =cade, 1 5ichael Ra =<uino &raduated t'o ears after ,e in 19DD1 5ichael Ra =<uino and 6 first 'or.ed to&ether in a 199% 0oint operation to neutrali?e a cri,inal s ndicate .no'n as the 7Red (corpion Broup19 6 'as 'or.in& 'ith the Philippine 4ational Police and 5ichael =<uino 'as 'or.in& 'ith the Presidential =nti-Cri,e Co,,ission headed b Panfilo )acson1 6n 5a of 1995, 5ichael =<uino and 6 'ere a&ain united in another 0oint operation a&ainst a &an& of ar,ed robbers .no'n as the 7Luraton& 8alelen& Broup19 =s a result of this operation several ,e,bers of the 0oint tas. force 'ere accused of cri,es as serious as ,urder1 5ichael =<uino, Panfilo )acson, and 6 'ere a,on& those accused1 =ll char&es 'ere ulti,atel dis,issed b the courts and appro/i,atel t'o ears later in 1997, 5ichael =<uino and 6 'ere both
661
6bid1

assi&ned to 7(pecial Pro0ect =lpha9 'here 'e 'or.ed closel to&ether for about one ear under the supervision of Panfilo )acson1 -urin& this ti,e, Panfilo )acson 'as .no'n for his ver close ties to Cice-President $oseph :strada 'ho 'ould soon 'in the presidential election1 6n $ul of 199D, then president, $oseph :strada, for,ed the Presidential =ntiOr&ani?ed Cri,e Tas. Force *P=OCTF+ 'ith Panfilo )acson as its leader1 5ichael =<uino held the position of Chief of Operations and 6 'as assi&ned as Chief Tas. Broup M )u?on1 6n 4ove,ber "###, 5ichael =<uino and 6 'ere a&ain e,broiled in controvers in a case .no'n as 7-acerCorbito91 8ubb -acer 'as a 0ournalist 'ho had ,ade public co,,ents a&ainst President :strada and Corbito 'as his driver1 -acerKs car 'as du,ped into a ravine in Cavite Province and a ,urder investi&ation ensued 'ith =<uino and , self a,on& those suspected of involve,ent1 6n the ,idst of the ,urder investi&ation in Februar of "##1, President :strada 'as re,oved fro, office and the P=OCTF 'as disbanded and its for,er ,e,bers 'ere reassi&ned to far flun& areas of the countr 1 (o,eti,e =u&ust of "##1 in a )as Ce&as hotel, 5ichael =<uino 'as bla,in& fello' officer Teofilo Cina for sloppil du,pin& 8ubb -acerKs car into a ravine in Cavite 'here it 'as easil discovered1 =<uino 'as co,plainin& that the tas. had not been carried out correctl 1 This slopp 'or. resulted in an investi&ation 'hich later i,plicated 5ichael =<uino in -acer and CorbitoKs disappearance1
=1 =fter -acer and CorbitoKs disappearance, 6 'as as.ed to investi&ate the case1 -urin& , investi&ation 6 spo.e 'ith Teofilo Cina and Blen -u,lao1 6 called Cina and as.ed hi, if he had an involve,ent in the disappearance and he told ,e that he had been tas.ed b 5ichael =<uino to &et 8ubb -acer1 6 understood this to ,ean that =<uino had tas.ed Cina to neutrali?e -acer1 @hen spea.in& to BlenSnT -u,lao about 5ichael =<uinoKs possible involve,ent, 5r1 -u,lao bla,ed =<uino for ille&al orders1 6 understood the ille&al orders to be conspirin& in the abduction and ,urder of -acer and Corbito1
19
6661
6C1
6n 5a of "##1 Panfilo )acson 'as elected (enator1 5ichael =<uino acted as a ca,pai&n coordinator for )acson b overseein& ca,pai&n contributions, posters, and other ca,pai&n ,edia1 (hortl after 'innin& the seat a ,eetin& 'as held 'here Panfilo )acson advised =<uino and 6 that 'e should leave the countr 1 Ie told us that the ne' presidential ad,inistration 'ould co,e after us for the

-acer-Corbito case in an effort to destro )acsonKs reputation and ne&ativel affect )acsonKs possible chances of a presidential bid in "##!1 On $ul 1, "##1 6 follo'ed )acsonKs instructions, left , fa,il , and fle' fro, the Philippines to Ion& Lon& 'here 6 ,et up 'ith 5ichael =<uino1 Fro, there the t'o of us fle' to the Gnited (tates 'here 'e traveled and lived to&ether for the ne/t three ,onths1 6n (epte,ber of "##1, 6 settled in Florida and 5ichael =<uino settled in 4e' $erse 1 5ichael =<uino and 6 .ept in touch 'ith each other and ,et 'ith (enator )acson several ti,es over the ne/t t'o ears includin& ,eetin&s in @ashin&ton -C *October K#1+, 4e' Jor. *$anuar K#"+, )os =n&eles and )as Ce&as *$anuar K#%+, and 5ia,i *(epte,ber K#%+1 6t 'as durin& this (epte,ber K#% ,eetin& in 5ia,i that 6 heard (enator )acson instructin& 5ichael Ra =<uino to search for G1(1 real properties in the na,e of $ose 5i&uel =rro o, the husband of the Philippine President, Bloria =rro o1 )acson believed that $ose 5i&uel =rro o had received ,illions of dollars in ille&al .ic.bac.s and 'as investin& the ,one in G1(1 real estate1 This 'as co,,onl .no'n as the 7$ose Pidal (candal19 This infor,ation 'ould be e/tre,el helpful in discreditin& the current ad,inistration1 One da after lunch, 5ichael =<uino brou&ht ,e to )acsonKs roo, in the hotel1 )acson then as.ed =<uino 'hat he &ot and =<uino sho'ed )acson so,e docu,ents 'ith addresses of suspected properties1 )acson revie'ed the docu,ents and appeared unsatisfied1 Ie as.ed =<uino to continue searchin& and to search for various aliases used b 5i&uel =rro o as 'ell1
20
C1
=fter carefull revie'in& the facts and bein& full a'are of the conse<uence of , decision, 6 -O (O):54)J (@:=RA=FF6R5 that the facts stated are true and correct1 *(&d1+UUUUUUUUUUUUUUU (i&nature Passport PPPO1#!D"! %A#1A#7 -ate
(tate of Florida Countr of 8ro'ard
('orn to and subscribed before ,e this 1st da of 5arch "##7, b C:;=R O1 5=4C=O 66, 'ho is personall .no'n to ,e1 *(&d1+UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU

4otar (i&nature
(T=5P 5=RL:- appearin& on the docu,ent reads as follo's2 6sabel 5oreno 5J CO556((6O4 P--"!9#%" :QP6R:(2 (:P 11, "##7 8onded throu&h =dvanta&e 4otar 'ith the seal2 4otar Public (tate of Florida9
21
On Februar 1%, "##9, 'hile in custod of the G1(1 Federal =&ents, Ce?ar 5ancao 66 e/ecuted his third =ffidavit, subscribed on Februar 1!, "##9 before Philippine Ionorar Consul Beneral =n&elo (1 5acatan&a , Fort )auderdale, Florida G(=, containin& the follo'in& state,ents, vi?2
= F F 6 - = C 6 T 6, C:;=R OCIOCO 5=4C=O 66, of le&al a&e, ,arried, Filipino and presentl under the custod of G( Federal 5arshals at Fort )auderdale, Florida, Gnited (tates of =,erica, after bein& dul s'orn to in accordance 'ith the la', hereb depose and state, to 'it2 11 6 a, the sa,e C:;=R OCIOCO 5=4C=O 66 'ho is one of the several accused in Cri,inal Case 4o1 #1-191969 pendin& before 8ranch 1D of the Re&ional Trial Court of 5anila, 5etro 5anila, Philippines, entitled 7PEOP E O! T"E P"# #PP#$ES vers%s M#C"AE RA& A'(#$O, et. al.9, or ,ore popularl .no'n as the -=C:R-COR86TO -OG8): 5GR-:R C=(:1 "1 6 a, e/ecutin& this =ffidavit to narrate, out of , o'n personal .no'led&e, a,on& others, the relevant incidents that transpired in connection 'ith the abduction and death of (=)C=-OR 78G88JK -=C:R and his driver :55=4G:) COR86TO on 4ove,ber "!, "###, and na,e the persons responsible therefore1 %1 6 hereb attest at the outset that 6 a, e/ecutin& this state,ent freel , voluntaril and intelli&entl , 'ithout an force,

inti,idation, threats, or an for, of duress bein& e/erted on , self or on an of , fa,il ,e,bers b the &overn,ent of the Republic of the Philippines or an of its officials or e,plo ees1 The e/ecution of this state,ent is the result of , o'n initiative to offer the Bovern,ent of the Republic of the Philippines cooperation in ter,s of disclosure of relevant infor,ation concernin& the -=C:RCOR86TO double ,urder case1 6 li.e'ise attest that 6 'as assisted and &iven sufficient le&al counsel b , la' er, 8:R4=R-O )OP:;, :s<1, =ssistant Federal Public -efender, Federal Public -efenderKs Office, Fort )auderdale, Florida, G1(1=1 all throu&hout the preparation of this affidavit1 !1 6 start 'ith the fact that in $ul 199D, the Presidential =nti-Or&ani?ed Cri,e Tas. Force *P=OCTF+ 'as for,ed durin& the ad,inistration of PR:(6-:4T $O(:PI :(TR=-= *:R=P+1 This 'as headed b CI6:F (GPT1 P=4F6)O )=C(O4 *)=C(O4+1 6 'as initiall desi&nated as deput chief of tas. &roup )u?on but a fe' ,onths thereafter, 6 'as pro,oted as chief, Tas. Broup )u?on1 The follo'in& 'ere so,e of its ran.in& officials to&ether 'ith , self, na,el 2
a1 b1 c1 d1 e1 CI6:F (GPT1 FR=4C6(CO ;G86= M -eput for =d,inistrationH (GPT1 5=BT=4BO) B=T-G)= M -eput for OperationsH (GPT1 56CI=:) R=J =EG64O *=EG64O+ M Iead, Operations -ivisionH $OI4 )OP:; M Iead, Finance and )o&istics -ivisionH (GPT1 T:OF6)O C64= *C64=+ M Iead, Tas. Broup Cisa asH
22
51 =s chief of Tas. Broup )u?on, 6 'as assisted b PA(GPT1 B):44 B1 -G5)=O *-G5)=O+ as , deput for operations and (GPT1 B=CGT=4 as , deput for ad,inistration1 =side fro, bein& the deput for operations, -G5)=O is also one of , tea, leaders, to&ether 'ith CI6:F 64(P1 C6C:4T: =R4=-O *=R4=-O+1 61 Io'ever, not'ithstandin& the for,al or&ani?ational structure of P=OCTF, and as the realit in speciali?ed and co,part,entali?ed la' enforce,ent units li.e the PO=CTF, so,e personnel ,a be directed to perfor, special operations b the chief of operations M PA(GPT1 56CI=:) R=J =EG64O *=EG64O+1 For instance, , deput for operations, -G5)=O in so,e special cases directl reports to =EG64O 'ithout &ivin& ,e the details of his assi&n,ent or pro&ress of his tas.in&s1
23
71 (o,eti,e in the earl part of October "###, 6 found out fro, , operativesK dispatch slips that =EG64O 'as utili?in& so,e of , personnel at Tas. Broup )u?on in his 7special operations9 'ithout , .no'led&e1 Ri&ht then and there, 6, to&ether 'ith -G5)=O 'ho happened to be in , office at that ti,e, 'ent to&ether to =EG64OKs office and in<uired about the ,atter1 =EG64O infor,ed us that these 7special operations9 had been previousl approved and cleared b )=C(O4 and b 5=)=C=R=4B itself1 -G5)=O ,entioned to ,e that the 7special operations9 had for its tar&et a certain ,edia ,an critical of :R=P" 'ho, the referred to as 7-:)T=91 8ein& in the nature of a special operation, 6 decided not to in<uire further1 For purposes of clarit , P=OCTFKs 7special operations9 then pertained to operations that did not follo' the nor,al channels of co,,and and did not co,e under the purvie' of its ,andate1 D1 @hile 6 'as opposed to =EG64OKs use of , personnel, there 'as nothin& 6 could do then to prevent hi, because he occupied a position hi&her than , self in ter,s of desi&nation at the P=OCTF or&ani?ational hierarch 1 =dditionall , these special operations 'ere under the directions of )=C(O4 as P=OCTF head1 Io'ever, 6 still instructed , ,en at Tas. Broup )u?on to brin& to , attention orders re&ardin& special operations not directl co,in& fro, ,e and not to be .een in perfor,in& operations outside of the P=OCTF ,andate, especiall ille&al ones1 91 On t'o *"+ separate occasions so,eti,e in October 4ove,ber "###, t'o of , tea, leaders, =R4=-O and R:J:(, confided to ,e that =EG64O ordered both of the, to conduct operations a&ainst R:J4=)-O 8:RROJ=1 6 re,e,ber t'o *"+ instances 'hen =R4=-O and R:J:( 'ere alread in a position to abduct 8:RROJ= but could not &et in touch 'ith =EG64O for the final 7&o9 si&nal and sou&ht ,ine, and 'hich 6 both declined1 These incidents ostensibl reached the attention of )=C(O4 and =EG64O because 6 felt the, turn lu.e'ar, and indifferent to'ards ,e, to the e/tent that 6 'as constrained to re<uest for , transfer to a re&ular P4P unit1 )=C(O4, ho'ever, refused to &rant , re<uest1 1#1 (o,eti,e in October "###, 6 heard )=C(O4 order =EG64O to li<uidate 8:RROJ=, his publicl -.no'n ne,esis, sa in&2 )$o*, tirahin ni*o na si +ero., )=C(O4 said this 'hile 'e 'ere on board his car en route to a $apanese restaurant in Breenhills, (an $uan, for lunch1 6 'as seated at the front seat of

the car then driven b (BT1 OQ65O(O *7O/ 9 as 'e usuall called hi,+, 'hile =EG64O and )=C(O4 sat at the bac.1 =EG64O responded to )=C(O4 that he intends to neutrali?e or li<uidate -:)T= first because :R=P 'as alread peeved at hi,, sa in&2 7Tapusin ,una na,in si -elta, (ir, .asi naiirita na si 8i&ote sa .ani a19 7-:)T=9, referred to ,edia and PR ,an (=)C=-OR 78G88J9 -=C:R *-=C:R+, 'hile 786BOT:9 'as co,,onl -.no'n pseudon , of :R=P1 )=C(O4 ho'ever insisted that =EG64O rather operate on both 8:RROJ= and -=C:R (65G)T=4:OG()J, sa in& )#pa-saba* .o na at tin-nan natin /%n- sino na an- .a%%na.,, 'hich obviousl ,eant that =EG64O operate on -=C:R and 8:RROJ= at the sa,e ti,e and to 0ust see 'ho bet'een the, is .illed first1 111 =t around 112## in the ,ornin& of 4ove,ber "!, "###, 'hile -G5)=O and , self 'ere at , office at tas. &roup )u?on, -G5)=O suddenl e/cused hi,self because he supposedl received a te/t ,essa&e fro, =EG64O sa in& that -=C:R 'as alread in the custod of C64= so,e'here in the province of Cavite and thus directin& hi, to proceed to the area to conduct tactical interro&ation on -=C:R1 =s -G5)=O 'as leavin& , office, 6 told hi, to share 'ith ,e the results of his tactical interro&ation1 1"1 =fter -G5)=O left, 6 i,,ediatel called C64= and verified about the alle&ed operation1 C64= confir,ed to ,e the operation and told ,e he 'ill ta.e care of it and that the sa,e 'as upon the orders of =EG64O1 1%1 @hen -G5)=O returned to the office, 6 in<uired 'hat happened to his tactical interro&ation of -=C:R and he told ,e that he did not obtain an valuable infor,ation fro, the sub0ect1 6 as.ed hi, if C64= 'as also present in the area and he replied in the ne&ative1 =nd so 6 called up C64= on his cellphone and as.ed hi, 'h he 'as not at the area after all1 =&ain he told ,e not to 'orr as he 'ill ta.e care of the situation1 1!1 =fter learnin& about -=C:RKs abduction, 6 i,,ediatel infor,ed )=C(O4 and as.ed for his &uidance on the ,atter1 )=C(O4 instructed ,e to head the investi&ation of the incident since doin& so 'ill allo' P=OCTF to control the situation b coverin& up the involve,ent of P=OCTF personnel1 =ccordin&l , 6 dispatched , ,en to conduct a re&ular investi&ation of the incidentH 6 also re<uired all investi&atin& police stations to for'ard to us all relevant docu,ents, ,a.in& us the repositor of
24

these docu,ents, and thus enabled us to cover-up for the involved P=OCTF operatives1 -ue to , successful cover-up of the incident, )=C(O4 and =EG64O beca,e 'ar, and appreciative of ,e a&ain1 151 (everal da s thereafter, ne's bro.e out about -acerKs car bein& found du,ped in a ravine in 5ara&ondon, Cavite1 6 chanced upon -G5)=O in our office and as.ed hi, 'h it happened that 'a 'hen C64= continuousl assured ,e that he 'ill ta.e care of the situation1 6 re,e,ber ,e sa in&2 )A/ala /o plinantsa ni*a n- .aa*os01 Mapapasa.a t%lo* ta*on- lahat dito1, -G5)=O on the other hand, told ,e that he had in his possession the docu,ents recovered fro, -acerKs vehicle1 6n repl , 6 co,,ented that it 'as ver ris. for hi, to be .eepin& the,1 6 later on learned that -G5)=O disposed the docu,ents b burnin& the sa,e1 161 =fter :R=P 'as deposed fro, po'er in $anuar "##1, 6 'as reassi&ned to Re&ion C6661 171 =fter 'innin& the election as senator of the Republic of the Philippines in the 5a "##1 elections, )=C(O4 called =EG64O and , self to a ,eetin& in a house so,e'here in Breenhills, (an $uan, 5etro 5anila1 6n that ,eetin&, )=C(O4 instructed both of us to leave the countr since the ne' ad,inistration 'ould surel &o after us and lin. us in the -=C:RCOR86TO double ,urder case, a,on& others, in order to destro his reputation and presidential a,bition1 Ie assured us that he 'ill ta.e care of both of us and 'ill continue to &ive us our ,onthl allo'ance1 6 can vividl re,e,ber )=C(O4Ks 'ords2 )2ailan-an%.alis na /a*o n- bansa dahil si 3lenn na-bi-a* na n- state.ent, an- 2%raton- +alelen- 4ase a* bin%ha*, at posiblen- -a-a5a *an n- iba pan- .-a /aso. "%5a- /a*on- .a-6alala, a/o an- bahala sa in*o., =t that ti,e, the burnt re,ains and belon&in&s of -=C:R and COR86TO had been recovered fro, a cree. so,e'here in 6ndan&, CaviteH so,e of the perpetrators had even confessed to the .illin&H and the case 'as alread bein& investi&ated b the -epart,ent of $ustice1 1D1 6n reaction to )=C(O4Ks instructions, 6 told hi, that for his sa.e, 6 'ill obe even if that 'ould entail for ,e to be a'a fro, , fa,il 1 6ncidentall , 6 re,e,ber that on the sa,e occasion, $=4: BO5:;, a vital 'itness in the Luraton& 8alelen& incident 'as also in the house 'here our ,eetin& 'ith )=C(O4 'as held1
25
26
191 On $ul 1, "##1, 6 follo'ed )=C(O4Ks instructions for ,e to leave the countr for the Gnited (tates1 6 rende?vous 'ith =EG64O in Ion&.on& and fro, there, 'e proceeded to the Gnited (tates via (an Francisco1 )=C(O4 ,ade arran&e,ents for our sta at Iarrold Iic.sK friendKs house in -al Cit H Iic.s is a for,er enlisted ,an 'ho 'or.ed under )=C(O41 Io'ever, before 6 left the countr , 6 'as ,ade to si&n a Counter-=ffidavit in the then pendin& preli,inar investi&ation concernin& the abduction and death of -=C:R and COR86TO before the -epart,ent of $ustice1 The Counter-=ffidavit contained for the ,ost part, stron& denials of , supposed .no'led&e or participation in the -=C:R-COR86TO operations as narrated b -G5)=O in a hand'ritten affidavit1 6 'as constrained to si&n the sa,e despite .no'in& that so,e of the alle&ations 'ere actuall true, in order to save , nec. and the hope that 6 'ill be e/onerated therefro,1 "#1 On or about =u&ust %, "##1, 'hile =EG64O and , self 'ere inside our roo, at the 5B5 Iotel in )as Ce&as 'here 'e 'ere sta in& upon the invitation and sponsorship of 8GTCI T:4OR6O *T:4OR6O+, the for,er head of Philippine =,use,ent and Ba,in& Corporation *P=BCOR+ durin& the ter, of :R=P, 6 heard T:4OR6O tellin& =EG64O that 'hen he received infor,ation fro, the latter that -=C:R has been neutrali?ed, he i,,ediatel rela ed the infor,ation to :R=P thin.in& that the infor,ation 'ill please hi,1 Io'ever, :R=P supposedl turned indifferent, 'hich reaction surprised T:4OR6O1 6ncidentall , T:4OR6O, :(TR=-= and )=C(O4 all stood as principal sponsors in =EG64OKs 'eddin&1 "11 6n (epte,ber "##1, 6 decided to settle in the state of Florida, 'hile =EG64O settled in the state of 4e' $erse 1 6 have lived in Florida since then and never 'ent bac. to the Philippines1 6n the ,ean'hile, )=C(O4 repeatedl travelled to the G1(1 fro, October "##1 up to (epte,ber "##% and ,et 'ith us in all of these occasionsH he also did not fail to rei,burse our plane fares and other e/penses1 ""1 6 a, e/ecutin& this =ffidavit to attest to the truth of the fore&oin& alle&ations and for other le&al purposes this ,a serve1 6 reserve the ri&ht to provide ,ore details about this incident as need be durin& court trial1 64 @6T4:(( @I:R:OF, 6 have hereunto si&ned this 1%th da of Februar "##9, at FORT )=G-:R-=):, (T=T: OF F)OR6-=, G1(1=1
27
*(B-+ C:;=R OCIOCO 5=4C=O 66 =ffiant (G8(CR68:- =4- (@OR4 to before ,e this 1%th da of Februar "##9 at Fort )auderdale, F)OR6-=, G1(1=19
On 5arch "7, "##9, the dau&hters of (alvador -acer, filed a Co,plaint-=ffidavit1# a&ainst petitioner 'ith the -O$, doc.eted as 61(1 4o1 QC6-64C-#9C-##"%", pra in& for a 7re-openin&9 and 7reinvesti&ation9 of the -acer-Corbito case1 The full te/t of the Co,plaint-=ffidavit reads2 7CO5P)=64T-=FF6-=C6T
@e--:56)J -=C:R-IG4B:RFOR-, of le&al a&e, ,arried, G1(1 citi?en, and presentl residin& at )on& 8each, California, Gnited (tates of =,ericaH (=864= -=C:R-R:J:(, of le&al a&e, ,arried, Filipino citi?en, and presentl residin& at (ton broo., 4e' Jor., Gnited (tates of =,ericaH C=R64= )65 -=C:R, of le&al a&e, sin&le, Filipino citi?en, and presentl residin& in @est 4e' Jor., 4e' $erse , Gnites (tates of =,ericaH and =5P=RO -=C:R-I:4(O4, of le&al a&e, ,arried, Filipino citi?en, and presentl residin& at )on& 8each, California, Gnited (tates of =,erica, ---after havin& s'orn in accordance 'ith la', hereb depose and state2 11 @e are the dau&hters of the late (alvador 78ubb 9 -acer, 'ho 'as a publicist, ne'spaper colu,nist and ,edia practitioner durin& his lifeti,e1 "1
1#
On "! 4ove,ber "###, our father and his driver,
Rollo, pp1 9!-1#"1

:,,anuel Corbito, 'ere ,urdered and appropriate char&es 'ere filed a&ainst the suspects1 %1 =fter the proceedin&s, a case entitled, 7People of the Philippines v1 5ichael Ra =<uino, et al19 and doc.eted as Cri,inal Case 4o1 #1-191969 'as filed in court no' pendin& before 8ranch 1D of the Re&ional Trial Court of 5anila, char&in& the follo'in& 'ith double ,urder for the .illin& of our father and 5r1 Corbito2
a+ b+ c+ d+ e+ f+ &+ h+ i+ 0+ .+ l+ ,+ n+ o+ p+ <+ r+ s+ t+ u+ PA(enior (upt1 5ichael Ra =<uinoH PA(enior (upt1 Ce?ar O1 5ancao 66H PA(enior (upt1 Teofilo CiFaH (PO" =llan C1 Cillanueva PA(enior (upt1 Blenn -u,laoH (PO! 5arino (oberanoH (PO% 5auro TorresH (PO% $ose :scalanteH Crisosto,o 51 PurificacionH -i&o de PedroH Renato 5alabananH $ovencio 5alabananH 5ar&arito CuenoH Ro,,el RollanH PA6nsp1 Roberto )an&cauonH (PO! 8en0a,in TaladuaH (PO1 Rolando )acasandileH (PO1 5ario (ar,ientoH (PO1 @illia, ReedH PO" Tho,as $1 (ar,ientoH and (PO1 Ruperto =1 4e,eFo1
28
(o,e of the accused are no' facin& trial 'hile others re,ain at lar&e1 !1 Recentl , Carina had occasion to tal. to Ce?ar O1 5ancao 66 and his 'ife in Fort )auderdale, Florida, G1(1=1 'here 5r1 5ancao is presentl bein& held for e/tradition proceedin&s1 6n the ,eetin&, 5r1 5ancao e/pressed to Carina his 'illin&ness to reveal all that he .no's pertainin& to the perpetrators, includin& the ,aster,ind, of the ,urders of our father and 5r1 Corbito1 51 5r1 5ancao e/ecuted a s'orn state,ent in the G1(1 disclosin& all that he .no's of the circu,stances that led to the .illin& of our father and 5r1 Corbito1 5r1 5ancao &ave Carina a cop of his =ffidavit dated 1% Februar "##91 61 Para&raph 1# of 5r1 5ancaoHs =ffidavit dated 1%

Februar "##9 *cop states2 71#1 of 'hich is attached hereto as =nne/ 7=9+
29
(o,eti,e in October "###, 6 heard )=C(O4 order =EG64O to li<uidate 8:RROJ=, his publicl -.no'n ne,esis, sa in&2 74o , tirahin ni o na si 8ero19 )=C(O4 said this 'hile 'e 'ere on board his car en route to a $apanese restaurant in Breenhills, (an $uan, for lunch1 6 'as seated at the front seat of the car then driven b (BT1 OQ65O(O *7O/ 9 as 'e usuall called hi,+, 'hile =EG64O and )=C(O4 sat at the bac.1 =EG64O responded to )=C(O4 that he intends to neutrali?e or li<uidate -:)T= first because :R=P 'as alread peeved at hi,, sa in&2 )Tap%sin .%na na.in si 7elta, Sir, /asi naiirita na si +i-ote sa /ani*a., 7-:)T=9 referred to ,edia and PR ,an (=)C=-OR 78G88J9 -=C:R *-=C:R+, 'hile 786BOT:9 'as the co,,onl -.no'n pseudon , of :R=P1 )=C(O4 ho'ever insisted that =EG64O rather operate on both 8:RROJ= and -=C:R (65G)T=4:OG()J, sa in& )#pa-saba* .o na at tin-nan natin /%n- sino na an- .a%%na,, 'hich obviousl ,eant that =EG64O operate on -=C:R and 8:RROJ= at the sa,e ti,e and to 0ust see 'ho bet'een the, is .illed first19
71 6t is clear fro, the afore-<uoted para&raph that (en1 )acson ordered the .illin& of our father1 6t can also be &leaned fro, the sa,e para&raph that (en1 )acson ordered the .illin& of 8erro a1 5oreover, it is apparent fro, 5r1 5ancaoKs =ffidavit that the P=OCTF, 'hich (en1 )acson headed, conducted 7special operations,9 i.e., 7operations that did not follo' the nor,al channels of co,,and and did not co,e under the purvie' of SP=OCTFKsT ,andate1911 D1 (en1 )acsonKs co,plicit in the ,urder of our father and 5r1 Corbito is sho'n further b his appointin& 5r1 5ancao as head of the investi&atin& tea, in the case to allo' the P=OCTF to have control over the sa,e and thus able to cover up the involve,ent of P=OCTF personnel1 5r1 5ancao stated2 71!1 =fter learnin& about -=C:RKs abduction, 6 i,,ediatel infor,ed )=C(O4 and as.ed for his &uidance on the ,atter1 )=C(O4 instructed ,e to head the investi&ation of the incident since doin& so 'ill allo' P=OCTF to control the situation b coverin& up the involve,ent of P=OCTF personnel1 =ccordin&l , 6 dispatched , ,en to conduct a re&ular investi&ation of the incidentH 6 also re<uired all investi&atin& police stations to for'ard to us all relevant docu,ents, ,a.in& us the repositor of these docu,ents, and thus enabled us to cover-up
11
=ffidavit dated 1% Februar "##9, par1 !, p1 11

for the involved P=OCTF operatives1 -ue to , successful coverup of the incident, )=C(O4 and =EG64O beca,e 'ar, and appreciative of ,e a&ain19
30
91 5oreover, after the burnt re,ains and belon&in&s of our father and 5r1 Corbito, 'ere recovered fro, a cree. so,e'here in 6ndan&, Cavite, (en1 )acson instructed 5r1 5ancao and 5r1 =<uino to leave the countr 7since the ne' ad,inistration 'ould surel &o after Sthe,T and lin. Sthe,T in the -=C:RCOR86TO double ,urder case, a,on& others, in order to destro S(en1 )acsonKsT reputation and presidential a,bition19 1" (en1 )acson even consistentl ,et 'ith 5r1 5ancao and 5r1 =<uino in the G1(1 fro, October "##1 to (epte,ber "##%, and provided for the,11% This ,a.es (en1 )acson cri,inall liable for violation of Presidential -ecree 4o1 1D"9, (ection 1*c+, 'hich states2 7(:CT6O4 11 The penalt of prision 4orre44ional in its ,a/i,u, period, or a fine ran&in& fro, 1,### to 6,### pesos, or both, shall be i,posed upon an person 'ho .no'in&l or 'illfull obstructs, i,pedes, frustrates or dela s the apprehension of suspects and the investi&ation and prosecution of cri,inal cases b co,,ittin& an of the follo'in& acts2
7/ / /1 7*c+ Iarborin& or concealin&, or facilitatin& the escape of, an person he .no's, or has reasonable &round to believe or suspect, has co,,itted an offense under e/istin& penal la's in order to prevent his arrest, prosecution and convictionH 7/ / /19
1#1 (en1 )acson had an a/e to &rind, so to spea., a&ainst our father1 Our father stron&l opposed (en1 )acsonKs appoint,ent as Chief of the Philippine 4ational Police *P4P+ durin& the :strada ad,inistration1 This he e/pressed in one of his letters to then President :strada1 *= cop of the letter is attached hereto as =nne/ 789+1 111 Our father had repeatedl told us a fe' ,onths before his disappearance on "! 4ove,ber "### that if so,ethin& happened to hi,, there should be no one else to bla,e but (en1
1" 1%
=ffidavit dated 1% Februar "##9, par1 17, p1 !, =nne/ 7!9 hereof1 #bid1, pars1 "#-"1, p1 51

)acson1 This 'as testified in court b (abina on 11 $ul "##D in the proceedin&s in Cri,1 Case 4o1 #1-1919691 *= cop of the pertinent portion of the Transcript of (teno&raphic 4otes dated 11 $ul "##D is attached hereto as =nne/ 7C9+1 1"1 6t is clear fro, the above that (en1 )acson not onl conspired 'ith the accused in the ,urders of our father and 5r1 Corbito but in fact orchestrated the sa,e1 8ein& then the head of the P=OCTF, he e/ercised ascendanc over all ,e,bers of the tas. force, particularl those 'ho e/ecuted the .illin&s1 To be sure, the acts of the P=OCTF personnel involved before, durin& and after the &rueso,e .illin& of our father and 5r1 Corbito could have onl been done upon the direction of (en1 )acson1 1%1 8ased on the fore&oin&, and considerin& further that a ne' personalit has been i,plicated in the ,urders of our father and 5r1 Corbito, it is apparent that there is a need for a reopenin& and reinvesti&ation in order to deter,ine 'hether probable cause e/ists to hold (en1 )acson for trial as a co-conspirator in the ,urders of our father and 5r1 Corbito1 6n this li&ht, it is respectfull re<uested that the appropriate action be ta.en b the Ionorable Office insofar as this ne'l -discovered evidence, i.e., 5r1 5ancaoKs =ffidavit dated 1% Februar "##9, is concerned1 1!1 @e are e/ecutin& this =ffidavit in support of our Co,plaint for double ,urder and violation of Presidential -ecree 4o1 1D"9 a&ainst (en1 Panfilo )acson, $r1 @e are also e/ecutin& this =ffidavit to attest to the truth of the fore&oin& state,ents and for 'hatever useful purpose it ,a later serve1 64 @6T4:(( @I:R:OF, 'e have hereunto set our hand on this UUU da of 5arch "##9 in 4e' Jor., G1(1=1
31
*(B-+ C=R64= )1 -=C:R Affiant
*(B-+ (=864= -=C:R-R:J:( Affiant
64 @6T4:(( @I:R:OF, 'e have hereunto set our hands on this UUU da of 5arch "##9 in )os =n&eles, California, G1(1=1 *(B-+ *(B-+

:56)J -=C:R-IG4B:RFOR=5P=RO -=C:R-I:4(O4
32
Affiant
Affiant9
On October "6, "##9, petitioner filed his Counter-=ffidavit *:/ =bundante =d Cautela,+1! den in& an involve,ent in the -acerCorbito case and refutin& the alle&ations in the Co,plaint-=ffidavit filed a&ainst hi,, vi?2 7COG4T:R-=FF6-=C6T (E8 A+($7A$TE A7 CA(TE AM)
6, (:4=TOR P=4F6)O 51 )=C(O4, of le&al a&e, Filipino and 'ith address at the (enate of the Philippines, B(6( Iead<uarters 8uildin&, Financial Center, Ro/as 8oulevard, Pasa Cit , after havin& been s'orn to in accordance 'ith la', hereb depose and state that2 11 6 a, sub,ittin& this Counter-=ffidavit 'ithout pre0udice to , Petition in B1R1 4o1 1D95#% no' pendin& 'ith the (upre,e Court1 "1 6 a, a (enator of the Republic of the Philippines currentl on , second ter,1 6 'as first elected in "##1 and 'as reelected in "##7 and , ter, of office 'ill e/pire in "#1%1 %1 6 a, a vocal critic not onl of the President of the Philippines but also the First Bentle,an and all their errin& allies in the ad,inistration as sho'n b , e/poseV of the latter in several of , speeches in the (enate1 !1 =&ainst the bac.drop and considerin& the circu,stances under 'hich the char&es a&ainst ,e 'ere filed, it is clear that this case is nothin& but persecution underta.en b the present =d,inistration a&ainst ,e because of , criticis,s, 'hich directl or indirectl have caused the lo' ratin& of incu,bent President1 51 6 ad,it that the co,plainants in this case are the dau&hters of (alvador 78ubb 9 -acer as stated in para&raph 1 of their co,plaint-affidavit1 6n fact, the co,plainants approached ,e for assistance in the investi&ation of the disappearance of their
1!
Rollo, pp1 !#1-!%91

father and his alle&ed driver, :,,anuel Corbito1 61 6 ad,it that a cri,inal case entitled, )People of the Philippines vs. Mi4hael Ra* A9%ino, et al., and doc.eted as Cri,inal Case 4o1 #1-191969 is pendin& before 8ranch 1D of the Re&ional Trial Court of 5anila *RTC+, 'hich involves the alle&ed ,urder of co,plainantsK father and his driver as stated in para&raphs " and % of their co,plaint-affidavit1 COG4T:R-(T=T:5:4T OF F=CT( 71 6 vehe,entl and specificall den the rest of the alle&ations of the co,plaint-affidavit, the truth of 'hich are as follo's2
711 Prior to , first election as a (enator of the Republic of the Philippines in "##1, 6 headed the Philippine 4ational Police *P4P+ as Chief *Police -irector Beneral+ thereof and conco,itantl , 6 'as also the Chief of the Presidential =nti-Or&ani?ed Cri,e Tas. Force *P=OCTF+, an anti-cri,e tas. force created b then President $oseph :strada, fro, 199D-"##11 71" On $une "6, "##1, 'hile still in the Philippines and prior to leavin& for the Gnited (tates of =,erica, Ce?ar 5ancao *5ancao+ e/ecuted a Counter-=ffidavit statin& that the affidavit of BlenSnT -u,lao i,plicatin& hi, *referrin& to 5ancao+ in the 7-acer-Corbito -ouble 5urder Case9 is 7full of lies, inconsistent, half truths and untenable to sa the least19 5ancao dis,issed the affidavit of -u,lao as 7pure and si,ple harass,ent 'ith political undertones9 and that -u,lao ,a have 7suffered fro, ,ental and ph sical abuse in the hands of the police authorities that forced hi, to e/ecute said affidavit19 5ancao also deplored the sa,e as 7politicall ,otivated not onl to pin do'n (enatorelect Panfilo )acson but li.e'ise all other Police Officers close to hi,19 = Certified cop of 5ancaoKs Counter-=ffidavit dated $une "6, "##1 is hereto attached as =nne/ 7=9 and ,ade an inte&ral part hereof1 71%1 On #1 5arch "##7, 'hile in the Gnited (tates of =,erica, 5ancao e/ecuted another =ffidavit statin& his .no'led&e concernin& the 7-acer-Corbito -ouble 5urder Case19 6n said affidavit, 5ancao never ,entioned a sin&le 'ord concernin& , possible involve,ent, participation or role in the 7-acer-Corbito 5urder Case19 = Certified cop of 5ancaoKs =ffidavit dated #1 5arch "##7 is hereto attached as =nne/ 7891
33
34
71! On #6 =u&ust "##D, in an intervie' 'ith B5= 4e'sK 5a.i Pulido, 5ancao revealed the pressures fro, the Philippine Bovern,ent *=rro o ad,inistration+ throu&h 6(=FP Chief 8ri&1 Beneral Ro,eo Presto?a even offerin& hi, to ,i&rate to (in&apore 'ith his fa,il in e/chan&e for testif in& a&ainst ,e1 = C- cop of the B5= 4e's Report is hereto attached as =nne/ 7C9 and ,ade an inte&ral part of this Counter-=ffidavit1 715 On 1" =u&ust "##D, in another intervie' 'ith Ta,balan& Failon at (anche? in -;55, 5ancao narrated in detail the offer of the Philippine Bovern,ent *=rro o ad,inistration+ throu&h then Presidential (ecurit Broup *P(B+ Co,,ander, no' 8ri&1 Ben1 Ro,eo Presto?a, in e/chan&e for testif in& a&ainst ,e in the 7-acer-Corbito -ouble 5urder Case91 6n the said intervie', he recounted 8ri&1 Ben1 Presto?aKs state,ents as follo's2
7E2 =no an& offerN
=2 =fter ni an& ,a&pa.ilala, sinabihan ni a a.on& si a a ba&on& halal, ba&on& appoint na P(B Chief1 (abi ni a ,as ado ra' ,ain&a si (enator )acson, paran& ason& ulol, &usto ni a patahi,i.in1 Busto ni a a.on& &a,itin, in-offer-ran nila a.o at buon& pa,il a .o na ,anirahan sa (in&apore1 )ahat na .ailan&an .o provide nila19 Q//
=n audio cop of the intervie' of 5ancao 'ith Ta,balan& Failon at (anche? is also included in the C- cop hereto attached as =nne/ 7C91 716 The e/istence of the said intervie's 'as confir,ed b 5ancao hi,self 'hen he testified in open court on 1# (epte,ber "##9 in the Re&ional Trial Court of 5anila as follo's2
7=TTJ1 =C6(=-O
E2 5r1 @itness, 'ould ou ad,it havin& an intervie' in "##D 'ith =8(-C84Ks Ted Failon and B5= 7Ks 5a.i PulidoN / / / / / / (:#T$ESS MA$CAO A$S:ER#$3) =2 Jes, (ir1915
717 6n the said intervie's, specificall in the intervie' 'ith B5= 4e's correspondent 5a.i Pulido, 5ancao disclosed that the Philippine
15
T(4 pa&e 67, (epte,ber 1#, "##9, Cri,inal Case 4o1 #1-191969, 6nitial Cross-:/a,ination of Ce?ar 5ancao 661

Bovern,ent 'ants to de,olish and <uiet ,e1 71D 6n the sa,e intervie', 5ancao also revealed that he received several offers fro, the present =d,inistration throu&h then P(B Co,,ander, no' 6(=FP Chief 8ri&1 Ben1 Ro,eo Presto?a, in e/chan&e for i,plicatin& ,e in the 7-acer-Corbito9 case1 This fact 'as affir,ed b 5ancao hi,self as follo's2 =TTJ1 5:4-O;= TO TI: @6T4:((2
E1 6s it not a fact that a certain Beneral Presto?a called ou and ,ade ou so,e offers re&ardin& our testi,on in court1 *@6T4:(( 5=4C=O =4(@:R64B+ =1 6 didnKt .no' the person on line identified hi,self as then Colonel Presto?a1 / / / / / E1 6s it not a fact that durin& that ti,e he called ou and as.ed ou to testif and i,plicate (enator Panfilo )acson in e/chan&e for relocation to (in&apore, 5r1 @itnessN =1 4o, sir1
35
E1 6n e/chan&e for so,e benefits such as reinstate,ent to the Philippine 4ational PoliceN =1 Pro,ises 'ere ,ade as to relocation of , fa,il , reinstate,ent to the police force, in order for ,e to fabricate so,e issues a&ainst no' (enator )acson at that ti,e 'hen 'e had a conversation over the phone, sir116
719 =&ain, under oath, 5ancao testified as follo's2

(T=T: PRO(:CGTOR C=)-:; E Io' ,an ti,es did ou receive a call fro, certain Presto?aN
*@6T4:(( 5=4C=O =4(@:R64B+ =1 Once, 5aKa, on (epte,ber "7, "##71 / / / / / E1 =1

16
Could ou please tell us a&ain 'hat that caller told ouN Ie 'as as.in& ,e to fabricate so,e infor,ation or char&es
T(4 pa&es %!-%5, (epte,ber 17, "##9, Cri,inal Case 4o1 #1-191969, Cross-:/a,ination of Ce?ar 5ancao 661

a&ainst (enator )acson and pro,isin& ,e in e/chan&e of the efforts that 6 'ould be brou&ht bac. to the different countr or to (in&apore specificall and to relocate , fa,il , financial support and reinstated to the police force117
36
/ / / / / 711#1 @ith these ad,issions in open court, it is ver clear that the present &overn,ent e/erted &reat efforts in pressurin& and bribin& 'itness 5ancao 0ust to i,plicate ,e1 =s earl as "##D, 6 alread .ne' that 5ancao 'as under tre,endous pressure fro, this &overn,ent to fabricate a ,alicious stor 'hich 'as desi&ned to silence ,e1 6 could onl hope that 5ancao 'ould have the coura&e to resist the pressure and te,ptation1 71111 6t appear that on 1% Februar "##9, after &ivin& in to the pressures of the Philippine Bovern,ent, 5ancao, in a co,plete turnaround, e/ecuted another affidavit this ti,e alle&edl i,plicatin& ,e in connection 'ith the 7-acer-Corbito -ouble 5urder Case19 711"1 6n 5a "##9 after havin& been e/tradited b the Philippine &overn,ent throu&h the unusual and e/traordinar efforts of the -epart,ent of $ustice, 5ancao ca,e bac. to the countr but ironicall not to be prosecuted b this Ionorable Office for his involve,ent in said cri,inal case but rather to utili?e hi, to pin ,e do'n and other leaders of the political opposition1 711%1 = cop of 5ancaoKs s'orn =ns'er in a civil case for -a,a&es 6 filed a&ainst hi, is hereto attached as =nne/ 7-91 6n the said =ns'er, 5ancao confir,ed the pressures e/erted a&ainst hi, to i,plicate ,e in the 7-acer-Corbito -ouble 5urder Case9 and that he e/ecuted the =ffidavits attached hereto as =nne/es = and 81 711!1 =&ain, it ,ust be e,phasi?ed that before such pressures 'ere e/erted, 5ancao ,ade state,ents re&ardin& the 7-acer-Corbito -ouble 5urder Case9 @6TIOGT 65P)6C=T64B 5: thereto1 Obviousl , it is not coincidental that after pressures 'ere e/erted a&ainst hi, to i,plicate ,e in the &rueso,e cri,e, he san& a different tune and e/ecuted his 1% Februar "##9 =ffidavit, nearl t'o *"+ ears after such phone call1 71151 Clearl then, rel in& solel on the =ffidavit e/ecuted b 5ancao on 1% Februar "##9, co,plainantsK co,plaint-affidavit has no &round to stand on, as the alle&ations in the said co,plaint-affidavit are purel hearsa 1
61 Co,plainantsK alle&ations in
17
T(4 pa&es 1#!-1#5, (epte,ber 17, "##9, Cri,inal Case 4o1 #1-191969, Re-direct :/a,ination of Ce?ar 5ancao 661

their co,plaint-affidavit are purel hearsa 1 -----------------------D1 6t ,ust be e,phasi?ed that the alle&ations of the co,plainants in their co,plaint-affidavit a&ainst ,e are hearsa since a perusal thereof 'ould readil sho' that the co,pletel relied on the affidavit of 5ancao1 This is not a ,ere evidentiar ,atter but an absolute re<uisite for preli,inar investi&ation1 5 counsel advised ,e that in +orlon-an, Jr., et al. vs. Pena, et al., the (upre,e Court held that21D 6t ,ust be e,phasi?ed that the affidavit of the co,plainant, or an of his 'itnesses, shall alle&e facts 'ithin their *affiants+ personal .no'led&e1 The alle&ation of the respondent that the si&natures of Ponce, =bad, On& and 5ontilla 'ere falsified does not <ualif as personal .no'led&e1 4o'here in said affidavit did respondent state that he 'as present at the ti,e of the e/ecution of the docu,ents1 4either did he clai, that he 'as fa,iliar 'ith the si&natures of the si&natories1 Ie si,pl ,ade a bare assertion that the si&natories 'ere ,ere du,,ies of 6(C6 and the 'ere not in fact officers, stoc.holders or representatives of the corporation1 =t the ver least, the affidavit 'as based on respondentKs 7personal belief9 and not 7personal .no'led&e19 Considerin& the lac. of personal .no'led&e on the part of the respondent, he could have sub,itted the affidavit of other persons 'ho are <ualified to attest to the falsit of the si&natures appearin& in the <uestioned docu,ents1 One cannot 0ust clai, that a certain docu,ent is falsified 'ithout further statin& the basis for such clai,, i1e1, that he 'as present at the ti,e of the e/ecution of the docu,ent or he is fa,iliar 'ith the si&natures in <uestion1 Other'ise, this could lead to abuse and ,alicious prosecution1 This is actuall the reason for the re<uire,ent that affidavits ,ust be based on the personal .no'led&e of the affiant1 The re<uire,ent assu,es added i,portance in the instant case 'here the accused 'ere not ,ade to rebut the co,plainantKs alle&ation throu&h counter-affidavits1 Q// 91 Further, , counsel infor,ed ,e that althou&h onl a lo' <uantu, and <ualit of evidence is needed to support a findin& of probable cause, the sa,e cannot be 0ustified upon hearsa evidence that is never &iven an evidentiar or probative value in this 0urisdiction119 1#1 Thus, co,plainantsK conclusions that 6 had an a/e to
1D 19
37
B1R1 4o1 1!%591, 4ove,ber "%, "##71 2ilosba*an, et al. vs. COME EC, et al., B1R1 4o1 1"D#5!1 October 16, 19971

&rind a&ainst their father and that the latter told the, that should their father disappear there is no other person to bla,e but ,e, are all hearsa if not ,ere conclusions, 'hich are not supported b facts 'ithin their personal .no'led&e1 111 5ore i,portantl , it ,a be recalled that durin& the (enate 6nvesti&ation on 19 =pril "##1 b the (enate Co,,ittee on $ustice and Iu,an Ri&hts, 'here herein co,plainants 5s1 :,il -acer and 5s1 (abina -acer-Re es appeared as resource persons, none of the, in 199D ever ,entioned that their father had previousl told the, that should he die, 6 'ould be responsible for such death1 Clearl , their belated disclosures on this supposed conversation 'as ,ere afterthou&ht desperatel desi&ned to i,plicate ,e in this case1 661 5ancaoKs 1% Februar "##9 affidavit no lon&er has probative value in li&ht of his previous affidavits, 'hich failed to i,plicate ,e in the -acer-Corbito ,urder case and there is evidence, 'hich contradicts a ,aterial fact contained therein1 --------------------------1"1 This Ionorable Office cannot disre&ard the prior affidavits of 5ancao1 Throu&h counsel, 6 'as advised that the discrepancies in his affidavits are irreconcilable and une/plained and the d'ell on ,aterial points, such inconsistencies necessaril discredit his veracit as a 'itness1"# Biven the flip-floppin& affidavits of 5ancao, it is be ond lo&ical co,prehension for this Ionorable Office to accept the state,ents in his 1% Februar "##9 =ffidavit1 Iis cavalier attitude in chan&in& s'orn state,ents indeed does not spea. 'ell of his candor and honest 1 "1 Iis latest affidavit is obviousl a product of a 'ell-funded but lousil e/ecuted special operation1 6t is 'ell-settled that affidavits of recantation are not favored and do not cancel or erase the affiantKs earlier declaration, thus2
Brantin& ar&uendo, that the second affidavit validl repudiated the first one, courts do not &enerall loo. 'ith favor on an retraction or recanted testi,on , for it could have been secured b considerations other than to tell the truth and 'ould ,a.e sole,n trials a ,oc.er and place
"#
38
"1
People vs. Anis4al, ""D (CR= 1#1 p1 11"H People vs. T%la-an, 1!% (CR= 1#7H People vs. Casi., "1% (CR= %9#1 !o;as, Jr. vs. Rollan, =151 4o1 P-##-1%D!1 Februar "7, "##"1

the investi&ation of the truth at the ,erc of unscrupulous 'itnesses1 = recantation does not necessaril cancel an earlier declaration, but li.e an other testi,on the sa,e is sub0ect to the test of credibilit and should be received 'ith caution1""
39
1%1 5 counsel advised ,e that in deter,inin& probable cause, the avera&e ,an 'ei&hs facts and circu,stances 'ithout resortin& to the calibrations of technical rules of evidence of 'hich his .no'led&e is nil1 Rather, he relies on the calculus of co,,on sense of 'hich all reasonable ,en have an abundance1 The ter,s are le&all s non ,ous and their reference is not a person 'ith trainin& in the la' such as a prosecutor or a 0ud&e but to the avera&e ,an on the street1 1!1 Thus, althou&h 6 have presented evidence of the clear pre0ud&,ent of this Ionorable Office a&ainst ,e, based on the co,,on sense of the proverbial avera&e ,an on the street, 5ancaoKs alle&ation cannot be &iven an 'ei&ht even for purposes of deter,inin& probable cause1 =n avera&e ,an 'ill not believe a person 'ho under the ad,itted pressure of the &overn,ent e/ecutes an affidavit, 'hich ,entions , na,e contrar to his previous affidavits that failed to ,ention ,e at all1 6661 5ancaoKs state,ents as to the conversation he alle&edl 7personall overheard9 'hile he 'as ridin& at the front passen&er seat stands on solid &round1 -----------------------------151 5ancaoKs alle&ation in his 1% Februar "##9 =ffidavit deserves scant consideration for it is pure fabrication1 5ancao rela ed that the 7incident9 in the car occurred durin& the ti,e 'hen then President :strada 'as out of the countr 1 This fact is the ,aterial reference in ti,e upon 'hich the alle&ed incident adverted to b 5ancao is anchored upon1 This 'as testified to b 5ancao as follo's2
(T=T: PRO(:CGTOR C=)-:; E1 5r1 5ancao, ou testified that or ou said a'hile a&o that Col1 =<uino told ou that the operation 'as approved b
""
!ran4is4o v. $ RC, B1R1 4o1 17##D7, =u&ust %1, "##6, citin& People v. Jo*a, B1R1 4o1 79#9#, October 1, 199%, ""7 (CR= 9, "6-"7 and People v. 7avatos, B1R1 9%%"", Februar !, 199!, ""9 (CR= 6!7, 6511

5alacaFan& and that the 'ill ta.e care of the P=OCTF Chief Beneral )acson1 @hat else, if an , transpired after that incident in relation to this operation deltaN *@6T4:(( 5=4C=O =4(@:R64B+ =1 =fter that incident, 6 can recall on (epte,ber to earl October, it 'as the ti,e 'hen the then President 'as out of the countr , , self, Beneral )acson, Col1 =<uino and O/i,oso 'ere in route to &o to a restaurant in Breenhills and inside the car, 6 have personall overheard the operation and another operation1"%
40
161 6t ,ust be e,phasi?ed ho'ever that durin& such ti,e, 6 'as also out of the countr 'ith President :strada1 = Certification issued b the 8ureau of 6,,i&ration, attached hereto as =nne/ 7:9, 'ould sho' that for,er President $oseph :1 :strada and 6 'ere out of the countr fro, (epte,ber !, "### until (epte,ber 1%, "###1 =fter his return fro, abroad, President :strada did not leave the countr for the rest of (epte,ber and October "###1 171 (ince 6 'as also in the Gnited (tates at that ti,e 'hen President :strada 'as abroad, 6 could not have been possibl present in the car 'ith 5ancao1 (ince 6 'as not in the car at that ti,e, 6 could have &iven Col1 5ichael Ra =<uino the alle&ed 7order9 to neutrali?e -acer and Corbito1 5ancaoKs stor therefore is nothin& but a bi& lie1 1D1 6n fact, durin& the said official trip to the Gnited (tates 'ith for,er President $oseph 7:R=P9 :strada, 6 'as in the co,pan of (enator 5anuel Ro/as1 The =ffidavit of (enator 5anuel Ro/as is attached hereto and ,ade inte&ral part hereof as =nne/ 7F91 191 5ancaoKs point of reference of the ti,e the 7incident9 alle&edl transpired is the ti,e 'hen then President :strada 'as out of the countr 1 4ecessaril , considerin& that, durin& such ti,e, 6 'as also out of the countr 'ith President :strada, such 7incident9 actuall never transpired1 "#1 :ven assu,in&, 'ithout ad,ittin&, that the alle&ed incident in the car too. place, still, 5ancaoKs o'n state,ents ,ade in open court on 1# (epte,ber "##9 failed to live up to the si,ple test of credibilit , 'here he testified as follo's2
=TTJ1 =C6(=-O
"%
T(4 pa&es "%-"9, (epte,ber %, "##9, Cri,inal Case 4o1 #1-191969, -irect :/a,ination of Ce?ar 5ancao 661
41
E1 Could ou recall 'hat .ind of car 'ere ou ridin& includin& the plate nu,ber of that carN *@6T4:(( 5=4C=O =4(@:R64B+ =1 6 cannot recall e/actl , sir1
E1 8ut ou could recall 5r1 @itness because in our testi,on ou said that, correct ,e if 6K, 'ron&, ou 'ere seated on the front passen&er side beside the driver (&t1 O/i,oso and behind ou 'as Col1 =<uino beside Beneral )acson, is that correctN =1 4o, sir1 On , bac. 'as Beneral )acson and on the left side 'as Col1 =<uino, (ir1 E1 =1 Jou 'ere seated in front1 Jes, sir1
E1 =re ou fa,iliar 5r1 @itness 'ith the protocol observed b P5=ers and P4P officers 'ith re&ard to ridin& a vehicle1 =1 E1 =1 6 a, fa,iliar but is not strictl observed, (ir1 6s it correct that the protocol is based on seniorit N Jes (ir1
E1 O.a , bet'een ou and Col1 5ichael Ra =<uino 'ho is ,ore seniorN =1 6 a,, (ir1
E1 =nd is it correct that based on protocol the ,ore senior officer should sit at the bac. 'hile the 0unior officers should sit in front, is that correctN =1 6tKs a &eneral rule, (ir1 / / / / / / E1 5r1 @itness ou said that ou 'ere seated in the front passen&er side of the vehicle, correctN =1 Jes (ir1
E1 =re ou a'are that the area 'as supposed to be the place of the aide of Beneral )acsonN
42
=1 (ir1
Gsuall but in so,e circu,stances it is not al'a s done, / / / / / /
E1 (o the aides of Ben1 )acson 'ere in the bac. up car and ou 'ere seated at the place reserved for the aide, correctN =1 E1 =1 Jes, (ir1 8ut ou 'ere not the aide of Ben1 )acson, correctN Jes, (ir1"!
"11 8ased on the above <uoted e/chan&e, 5ancaoKs state,ents 'ould not pass the si,ple test of credibilit 1 Protocol based on seniorit is strictl observed b P5=ers and senior officers of the P4P1 There is absolutel no 'a that 5ancao 'ould allo' a 0unior officer li.e Col1 5ichael Ra =<uino to sit in the bac. 'hile a ,ore senior officer li.e hi, 'ould sit in front1 5ancao, 'ould all his bravado at that ti,e, 'ould never sit in place reserved for an aide1 Ceril , these state,ents 'ould easil cru,ble 'hen placed under the test of protocol and seniorit 1 ""1 =lso fatal to 5ancaoKs credibilit 'as his i,a&ined alle&ation that he 7personall overheard9 the conversation 'hile he 'as seated in the front passen&er aide of the vehicle1 Gnder stress of cross e/a,ination, 5ancao testified as follo's2
=TTJ1 =C6(=-O E1 6n our testi,on , that incident inside the car ou said based on pa&e "9 of the transcript of steno&raphic notes dated (epte,ber %, "##9 ou said 76 have personall overheard )acson tal.in& to =<uino about the operation and another operation,9 do ou confir, thisN *@6T4:(( 5=C=O =4(@:R64B+ =1 Jes, (ir1
E1 (o there 'ere actuall t'o operations 5r1 @itness, is that correctN =1 Jes, (ir1
"!
T(4, pa&es "7-%1, %6-%7, (epte,ber 1#, "##9, Cri,inal Case 4o1 #1-191969, 6nitial Cross:/a,ination of Ce?ar 5ancao 661
43
E1 The operation 'herein ou alle&edl overheard Beneral )acson tell 5ichael Ra =<uino, 74o tirahin n o na si 8ero19 @ho 'as the tar&et of that operationN =1 Then Col1 Re naldo 8erro a, (ir1
E1 =nd the other operation 'herein ou alle&edl heard Col1 =<uino infor,ed Ben1 )acson, 7(ir unahin na natin si -elta, naiirita na si 8i&ote sa .an a19 @ho 'as the tar&et of this operationN =1 The then PR ,an (alvador 78ubb 9 -acer, (ir1
E1 (o 'ould ou a&ree 'ith ,e that initiall the operation 'hich Ben1 )aScTson 'as principall involved in 'as the operation re&ardin& 8erro a, is that correctN =1 6nitiall es sir1 overheard hi, sa in&,
E1 =nd then later on ou alle&edl 7pa&saba in n o na,9 is that correctN =1 Jes (ir1
E1 That is 'h accordin& to ou he is also involved in the delta operation, correctN =1 Jes, (ir1
E1 @ere ou facin& Ben1 )acson and Col1 5ichael Ra =<uino at that ti,eN =1 4o, (ir1
E1 Jou 'ere not, our bac. 'as turned a&ainst the,, is that correctN =1 Jes, (ir1 actuall reall overhear the 'hole
E1 (o could ou conversation, 'ill ouN =1
The 'hole 6 cannot recall, (ir1 / / / / / /
E1 -id ou actuall hear the 'hole conversation 'here ou heard that portionN
44
=1
6 heard that portion, (ir1
E1 Could it be possible 5r1 @itness that 'hat ou actuall overheard 'as 7pa&saba in .o na9 and not 7pa&saba in n o na,9 'ould that be possibleN / / / / / / =1 There is a possibilit , (ir1"5
"%1 @ith a clear ad,ission that 5ancao 'as not at all certain of 'hat he actuall overheard, then , alle&ed involve,ent no' beco,es rather doubtful1 = 'itness 'ho is certain of his narrations 'ill re,ain staunch, the assiduous efforts of the defense to de,olish his credibilit not'ithstandin&1 On the other hand, a 'itness 'ho prevaricates 'ill find it hard to stic. to his stor and 'ill find hi,self eventuall entan&led in the 'eb of lies he has 'oven1 "6 :asil 5ancao falls under this cate&or 1 "!1 5oreover, 5ancaoKs 1% Februar "##9 =ffidavit, even if its alle&ations 'ere assu,ed ar-%endo to be true, sho's that for,er President :strada, rather than 6, 'as behind the alle&ed ,urder of -acer1 4othin& in that =ffidavit i,plicates ,e as a conspirator or as a principal b induction1 "51 8ased on 5ancaoKs 1% Februar "##9 =ffidavit, the reason for 7operation -:)T=9 is 7because :R=P 'as alread peeved at hi, *-:)T=+91 Clearl , 5ancao is not clai,in& that 6 'as the ,aster,ind behind 7operation -:)T=9 but another person called 7:R=P91 6n fact, the onl state,ent attributed to ,e b 5ancao, 'hich co,plainants clai, to lin. ,e to the cri,e, is , alle&ed state,ent )#pa-saba* .o na at tin-nan natin /%n- sino na an- .a%na., 8ut this state,ent *assu,in& ar-%endo that 6 had uttered it and 5ancao heard it+ actuall sho's that 6 'as not part of the plan to .ill -acer1 =t ,ost, it 'ould onl sho' a desire that such a plan, as to 'hich 6 had no involve,ent, should be e/ecuted to&ether 'ith the alle&ed plan to .ill 8erro a1"7 "61 5 counsel advised ,e that to hold so,eone &uilt as a co-principal b reason of conspirac , it ,ust be established that
"5
"6 "7
T(4 pa&es %1-%5, (epte,ber 1#, "##9, Cri,inal Case 4o1 #1-191969, 6nitial Cross:/a,ination of Ce?ar 5ancao 661 People vs. Capitle, B1R1 4o1 1%7#!6, Februar "6, "##11 Of course, 6 also vehe,entl and specificall den an involve,ent in an plan to .ill 8erro a, but this is not the issue in this preli,inar investi&ation1

he 7perfor,ed an overt act in pursuance or in furtherance of conspirac 1 The overt act ,a consist of active participation in the actual co,,ission of the cri,e itself or ,oral assistance to coconspirators b e/ertin& ,oral ascendanc over the, b ,ovin& the, to e/ecute or i,ple,ent the conspirac 19"D The alle&ed state,ent attributed to ,e does not su&&est an of these thin&s1 6n fact 'hat 5ancao attests to is that it 'as President :strada 'ho ordered the .illin&, and that it 'as upon his orders that the co,,itted the cri,e1 =ll that 5ancaoKs 1% Februar "##9 =ffidavit su&&ests is that 6 /ne5 of the plan1 8ut ,ere .no'led&e, ac<uiescence or approval, 'ithout a&ree,ent to cooperate, is not conspirac 1"9 "71 )i.e'ise, the alle&ed state,ent attributed to ,e is also not an induce,ent to co,,it the cri,e1 5 counsel infor,ed ,e that to hold petitioner liable as a principal b induce,ent, it ,ust be sho'n that he pro,ised a price or re'ard to others to co,,it the cri,e, or that he co,,anded others to co,,it the cri,e1%# =nd the induce,ent or co,,and ,ust be the deter,inin& cause of the cri,e1 6n other 'ords, it ,ust be such that the act 'ould not have been perfor,ed, 'ithout it1%1 "D1 The alle&ed state,ent attributed to ,e did not pro,ise an price or re'ard1 4or did it co,,and the .illin& of -acer1 The co,,and had been &iven b President :strada accordin& to 5ancao1 5 alle&ed su&&estion that it be e/ecuted to&ether 'ith the plan a&ainst 8erro a related onl to the ti,in& of the act, 'hich the others 'ere &oin& to co,,it an 'a , because President :strada *their Co,,ander-in-Chief+ had alread co,,anded it1 :ven 'ithout , alle&ed state,ent, there is no sho'in& that the others 'ould not have e/ecuted the plan a&ainst -acer1 "91 8esides, the conclusions dra'n b 5ancao and the co,plainants fro, , alle&ed state,ent are si,pl interpretations and speculative inferences1 There are no e/press, direct and
"D
45
"9
%#
%1
People v. +allesta, B1R1 4o1 1D16%", (epte,ber "5, "##D, citin& People v. Santia-o, %96 Phil1 "## *"###+, citin& People v. +a%tista, %D7 Phil1 1D%, "#!-"#5 *"###+, People v. Ra-%ndia<, %D9 Phil1 5%", 551 *"###+ and Salvatierra v. Co%rt of Appeals, %D9 Phil1 66, 7! *"###+1 Taer vs. Co%rt of Appeals, 1D6 (CR= 6#! *19D#+H People v. Rafael, B1R1 4o1 1"%176, October 1%, "###H adon-a v. People, B1R1 4o1 1!1#66, Februar 17, "##5, citin& People vs. $atividad, B1R1 4o1 151#7", (epte,ber "%, "##%, !11 (CR= 5D7, 5951 People vs. Peralta, "5 (CR= 759 *196D+H Santos v. People, B1R1 4o1 167671, (epte,ber %, "##D, citin& People v. &anson67%.an4as, %7D Phil1 %!1, %51 *1999+1 People vs. Castillo, B1R1 4o1 )-19"%D, $ul "6, 1966H People v. Rafael, B1R1 4o1 1"%176, October 1%, "###1

cate&orical state,ents assi&ned to ,e 'hich declare that 6 alle&edl ordered or participated in an ,anner in the &rueso,e cri,e1 %#1 Thus, it is cr stal clear that the alle&ations of 5ancao in his affidavit did not directl i,plicate ,e in the perpetration of the &rueso,e cri,e1 6t is ver 'ell-settled in our 0urisprudence that conspirac cannot be established b ,ere inferences or %" con0ectures1 6t is incu,bent upon co,plainants to prove that 6 perfor,ed an overt act in pursuance or furtherance of the alle&ed co,plicit 1 Io'ever, 5ancaoKs &eneral accusation a&ainst ,e does not constitute proof of conspirac and neither 'ill co,plainantsK s'eepin& conclusions that 6 orchestrated the sa,e1 6C1 The =ffidavit 'as convenientl drafted b the unseen hands of the &overn,ent in an atte,pt to persecute ,e in a cri,e of 'hich 6 have no participation1 ----------------------------------%11 The char&es filed a&ainst ,e 'ere not ,ade in pursuit of 0ustice in findin& the truth behind the incidents of the -acerCorbito -ouble 5urder case, but 'ere ,ade in a desperate atte,pt b the =rro o =d,inistration to persecute ,e1 This 'as in fact affir,ed b 5ancao 'hen he testified on 17 (epte,ber "##9, as follo's2
=TTJ1 C=$GCO5 E2 5r1 @itness, 6 'ill refresh ou on our deposition 'hich ou e/ecuted last 5a "1, "##91 -id ou e/ecute this deposition, 5r1 @itnessN / / / / / / E2 8ut 5r1 @itness, do deposition ta.in&N ou confir, that ou attended the
46
*@6T4:(( 5=4C=O =4(@:R64B+ =2 Jes, (ir1
E2 =nd 'ould ou affir, that 'hen ou 'ere as.ed on Pa&e "" of this deposition, 7Euestion2 =nd one of the reasons ou did
%"
People v. Mal%enda, %51 Phil1 !67, !9% *199D+1

not 'ant to return to the Philippines is that ou 'ere concerned that ou 'ould not be treated fairl b the Bovern,ent of President Bloria =rro o1 6snKt that trueN9 and ou ans'ered, 7Bloria =rro o, sirN9 Euestion2 Jes1 =ns'er2 Jes, (ir1 =ns'er2 Jes, (ir1 Euestion2 $ust M 6K, 0ust &oin& to repeat that <uestion 0ust to be clear1 One of the reasons that ou did not 'ant to return to the Philippines 'as that ou 'ere afraid ou 'ould not be treated b the =rro o Bovern,entN9 =nd ou ans'ered, 7Jes, sir19 -o ou confir, that, 5r1 @itnessN =2 Jes, sir1
47
E2 =nd then after that another <uestion, 7@h did ou feel that 'a N =nd ou ans'ered, 78ecause the are persecutin& people 'ho are .no'n or allied 'ith the no' (enator Panfilo )acson, sir1 Euestion2 =nd that 'ould include ourself, correctN =ns'er2 Jes, sir1 Euestion2 =nd 5ichael Ra =<uinoN =ns'er2 Jes, sir1 Euestion2 =nd Blenn, Blenn -u,laoN =ns'er2 Jes, sir1 Euestion2 =nd ou in fact 'ere ver afraid that if ou 'ere sent bac. to the Philippines that ou 'ould be persecuted as 'ellN =ns'er2 Jes19 -o ou confir, thatN =2 Jes, sir1%%
%"1 Ta.in& into consideration the incidents leadin& to the e/ecution of the 1% Februar "##9 =ffidavit belatedl i,plicatin& ,e in this case, it is ,anifest that the unseen hands of the &overn,ent are bus at 'or. in persecutin& ,e1 6n the process, the had no choice but to use 5ancao for their ,alicious ends1 The &overn,entKs fin&erprints could be found all over the place1 %%1 First, there 'ere threats ,ade to 5ancao and his fa,il 1 =s earl as "##1, efforts 'ere bein& e/erted to pressure hi, to testif a&ainst ,e1 This fact 'as cate&oricall affir,ed and testified to b 5ancao hi,self in a cross-e/a,ination dated 17 (epte,ber "##9, as follo's2
=TTJ1 =T6:4;= TO TI: @6T4:((2 / / / / / / E1 5r1 @itness, ou earlier testified that ou e/ecuted and si&ned our counter affidavit dated $une "##1 in order to save our nec.1 6s that correct, 5r1 @itnessN *@6T4:(( 5=4C=O =4(@:R64B+
%%
T(4 pa&es D5-D7, (epte,ber 17, "##9, Cri,inal Case 4o1 #1-191969, Cross-:/a,ination of Ce?ar 5ancao 661
48
=1
Jes, sir1
E1 =nd ou e/ecuted and si&ned our counter affidavit because ou 'ere receivin& inti,idation at that ti,e1 6s that correct, 5r1 @itnessN =1 Jes, sir1
E1 Jou li.e'ise testified, 5r1 @itness that several cases 'ere bein& prepared a&ainst ou includin& possible char&es of rebellion1 6s that correct, 5r1 @itnessN =1 Jes, sir1 cases bein& readied b the current
E1 =re these ad,inistrationN
=1 The (upre,e Court at that ti,e ruled that there 'as no state of rebellion and that the 'arrant of arrest that 'e feared of 'as nullified1 E1 8ut , <uestion, 5r1 @itness, that the cases that 'ere bein& prepared a&ainst ou and our ,en are bein& underta.en b the current ad,inistrationN 5eanin& the =rro o =d,inistration at that ti,e and even up to no'N =1 Jes, sir1%!
%!1 (econd, as previousl discussed, there 'ere efforts ,ade on the part of the &overn,ent to persuade 5ancao to i,plicate ,e in the -acer-Corbito -ouble 5urder case b fabricatin& char&es a&ainst ,e1 %51 Third, the present &overn,ent cannot den that it is the architect of this pro0ect1 4o less than then -epart,ent of $ustice (ecretar Raul Bon?ales hi,self 'as personall involved in this special operation1 6n fact, as <uoted in a ne's report of 6n<uirer14et%5 dated 1# $une "##9, he e/pressed his intention to serve as counsel for Ce?ar 5ancao and Blen -u,lao1 6n no uncertain ter,s, he declared that )# a. 5illin- to resi-n and offer .*self as 4o%nsel for Man4ao and 7%.lao., =s evidence of the
%!
%5
T(4, pa&es !!-!5, (epte,ber 17, "##9, Cri,inal Case 4o1 #1-191969, Cross-:/a,ination of Ce?ar 5ancao 661 6n<uierer1net, 8rea.in& ne's A 4ation, 7Bon?ales offers to serve as 5ancaoKs counsel9 8 2 Tetch Torres, $une 1#, "##9, http2AAne'sinfo1in<uirer1netAbrea.in&ne'sAnationAvie'A"##9#61#"#97#1ABon?ales-offers-to-serve-as-counsel1

&overn,entKs efforts to ,aneuver the outco,e of the case, he also stated that )# a. the ar4hite4t of this 4ase. # 5o%ld ass%.e that Man4ao and 7%.lao are doin- this be4a%se of 4onfiden4e to .* 4o..it.ent., %61 5oreover, even at the ti,e he 'as to leave his post as $ustice (ecretar , he 'as ver 'orried that his i,pendin& transfer to the Office of the Chief )e&al Counsel ,i&ht affect the -acer-Corbito double ,urder case1 6n recountin& his discussion 'ith inco,in& $ustice (ecretar =&nes -evanadera, he stated that 7(he said she is not ver sure of the para,eters1 6 told her 'hat 6 'anted19 6n a ne's report fro, 6n<uirer1net %6, he 'as <uoted sa in& that 76f this case 'ill not be handled 'ell M not because of the inco,petence of the prosecutors but because of so,e other reasons M 6 can al'a s resi&n and offer , self as la' er19 Co,in& fro, no less than the $ustice (ecretar hi,self, 6 alread .ne' 'hat to e/pect1 On the contrar , 6 actuall .ne' 'hat not to e/pect, 6 C=44OT :QP:CT TO B:T $G(T6C: G4-:R TI6( =-5646(TR=T6O41 %71 Finall , sho'in& his &reat spite to'ards ,e, for,er $ustice (ecretar Raul Bon?ales, in his valedictor speech, 7e/pressed hope that 'hen -evanadera &oes to the Co,,ission on =ppoint,ents, she 'ould not suffer 7the tribulations9 'hich he e/perienced in the hands of )acson19%7 %D1 =ll these circu,stances ta.en to&ether, it is eas to conclude that the &overn,ent is hell bent in pursuin& this case a&ainst ,e1 @orse, the iron of it all, it is still the -epart,ent of 0ustice 'hich is tas.ed to find probable cause a&ainst ,e, a tas. 'hose outco,e had alread been deter,ined fro, the ver be&innin&1 %91 The active participation of for,er $ustice (ecretar 'as confir,ed b 5ancao 'hen he testified under oath on 17 (epte,ber "##9 'hen he 'as cross-e/a,ined b =tt 1 Ca0uco,, as follo's2
=TTJ1 C=$GCO5
49
%6
%7
6n<uirer1net, 6n<uirer Ieadline A 4ation, 7Bon?ales 'onKt let &o of -acer-Corbito case9 b 2 4or,an 8ordadora, $une 11, "##9, http2AAne'sinfo1in<uirerheadlinesAnationAvie'A"##9#611"#9D57ABon?ales-'ont-let-&o-of--acer-Corbito-case1 '''1business,irror1co,1ph1 7Bon?ales ields port to -evanadera9 8 2 $oel (an $uan, $une 15, "##9, http2AAbusiness,irror1co1phAnationA117D%ABon?ales- ields--O$-post1

E2 5r1 @itness, 'ould ou confir, if ou have personall tal.ed to (ecretar Bon?ales or b telephone 'hen ou 'ere in the Gnited (tates, 5r1 @itnessN *@6T4:(( 5=4C=O =4(@:R64B+ =2 E2 =2 Jes, 6 did, sir1 @hen 'as that, 5r1 @itnessN :arl -ece,ber, sir1 ou e/ecuted that affidavit, 5r1
50
E2 (o that 'as before @itnessN =2 Jes, sir1%D
!#1 Ta.in& into consideration all these incidents precedin& the e/ecution of the supposed =ffidavit, there is no doubt that 5ancao e/ecuted the sa,e 'hile he 'as under a tre,endous pressure fro, the Bovern,ent led b no less than the for,er $ustice (ecretar 1 !11 The affidavit itself 'as prepared b a panel of -epart,ent of $ustice prosecutors and 5ancao 'as ,erel as.ed to si&n it1 5ancao confir,ed this in open court as follo's2
=TTJ1 =C6(=-O E1 5r1 @itness, ou testified ou e/ecuted an =ffidavit in Florida before the Ionorable Consul 5acatan&a on Februar 1!, "##9, do ou affir, thisN *@6T4:(( 5=4C=O =4(@:R64B+ =1 Jes, (ir1 / / / / / / E2 5r1 @itness, 'ould ou ad,it that ou spo.e 'ith the prosecutor and other -O$ officials in the Gnited (tates before ou prepared this affidavitN =2 E2
%D
Jes, (ir1 =nd can ou tell us 'hat did the tell ou before ou
T(4 Pa&e D%, (epte,ber 17, "##9, Cri,inal Case 4o1 #1-191969, Cross-:/a,ination of Ce?ar 5ancao 661

prepared this affidavitN =2 That 6 have to tell the truth so 6 can receive the 0ustice that 6 'ant1 E2 (o can ou tell the Court 'ho actuall prepared this affidavit 'hen ou 'ere in the Gnited (tatesN =2 6t 'as prepared b the panel, 'e read the draft, it 'as ,ade ,ore than "! hours1 / / / / / / E2 -id the panel of prosecutors &ive inputs in preparin& this affidavitN =2 Buidance, (ir1%9
51
!"1 This fact 'as a&ain confir,ed b (epte,ber "##9 'hen he testified as follo's2
=TTJ1 =T6:4;=
5ancao on 17
Jour Ionor, 6 a, no' in the sta&e 'here Februar 1! 'hen the -O$ representatives ca,e to 0ail1 =nd on pa&e !9 the 7Euestion 'as 7Jes, prettier1 *sic+ 5r1 @itness 'ould ou ad,it that ou spo.e 'ith the prosecutor and other -O$ officials in the Gnited (tates before ou prepare this =ffidavitN9 and the 7=ns'er2 Jes, (ir19 =nd in another <uestion in the sa,e pa&e, 7Euestion2 Can ou tell the court 'ho actuall prepared this affidavit 'hen ou 'ere in the Gnited (tatesN =ns'er2 6t 'as prepared b the panel, 'e read the draft, it 'as ,ade ,ore than "! hours1 =nd on pa&e 5#, second to the last <uestion, 7-id the panel of prosecutors &ive inputs in preparin& this affidavitN =ns'er2 Buidance, (ir1 Euestion2 4ot inputs, &uidanceN Jes, (ir19 (o, it is ver 'ell established, Jour Ionor, that the -O$ officials111 TI: COGRT2 The <uestion isN =TTJ1 =T6:4;=2 @ho 'ere 'ith Prosecutor Calde? at the ti,eN TI: COGRT2 =ns'er1
%9
T(4 pa&es !D-5#, (epte,ber 1#, "##9, Cri,inal Case 4o1 #1-191959, 6nitial Cross:/a,ination of Ce?ar 5ancao 661

*@6T4:(( 5=4C=O =4(@:R64B+ =2 =t the ti,e 'hen 'e first ,et on Februar 1" before a proper a&ree,ent on the .ind of i,,unit ,eetin& bet'een =ssistant G1(1 (tate =ttorne $effer Lin and , Public -efender )ope?, sir, 6 cannot e/plain full ho' supposed to be, sir1 8ut it is a .ind of e/plorator ,eetin& 'here in the state,ent that 6 'ill be ,a.in& 'ill be used for a case, it could be ta.en a&ainst ,e but if 6 'ill tell a lie or per0ure a state,ent those people 'ho 'ere there as 6Kve ,entioned earlier the people fro, the Philippines 'ho 'ere led b =ssistant or Gndersecretar :rnesto Pineda, Gndersecretar Oscar Calderon 'ho is also under the -O$, the )ad Prosecutor, 486 Re&ional -irector Ric -ia? 'ho is also present, sir, and an 6C: =&ent or 6,,i&ration and Custo,s :nforce,ent =&ent in the na,e of Ric 5atthe' 'as there, sir1 / / / / / / =TTJ1 =T6:4;= E1 =nd as ou earlier testified there 'as &uidance in the preparation of the affidavitN =1 Jes, sir1!#
52
!%1 :/pectedl , instead of prosecutin& 5ancao for the cri,inal char&e a&ainst hi, in the -acer-Corbito -ouble 5urder case, the &overn,ent .no'in&l allo'ed hi, to freel roa, in the Gnited (tates for ei&ht *D+ ears1 4o', after successfull pressurin& 5ancao to si&n his supposed affidavit on 1% Februar "##9, the &overn,ent in return, i,,ediatel initiated the process for his e/tradition to the Philippines1 =s pro,ised, the &overn,ent as.ed for the dischar&e of 5ancao as state 'itness1 Iavin& these in ,ind, it is eas to see 'h 5ancao fabricated a fictitious stor to i,plicate ,e in this unfounded suit1 C1 The affidavitsAstate,ents presented in Cri,inal Case 4o1 1#-191969 failed to i,plicate ,e in the -acer-Corbito -ouble 5urder case1 ------------------------------!!1 -urin& the hearin& on 1! =u&ust "##9, this Ionorable Panel directed co,plainants to produce the persons 'ho e/ecuted
!#
T(4 pa&es 56-61, (epte,ber 17, "##9, Cri,inal Case 4o1 #1-191969, Cross-:/a,ination of Ce?ar 5ancao 661

the purported s'orn affidavits attached to their 5otion and (upple,ental to =d,it =dditional :vidence1 !51 Co,plainants co,,itted that the 'ill onl adopt and utili?e the affidavits of the persons 'ho 'ill appear before the Ionorable Panel and s'ore on their affidavits1 For this purpose, co,plainants re<uested for the issuance a subpoena upon the follo'in&2
11 "1 %1 !1 51 $i,, )1 )ope?H @illia, )1 )ope?H =le/ 81 -ilo H @ill B1 Cabu&uinH Blenn -u,lao1
53
!61 Considerin& that the re<uest for subpoena has been li,ited to the afore,entioned individuals, it necessaril follo's that the purported affidavitsAstate,ents of the follo'in& persons ,ust be e/cluded pursuant to then 1! =u&ust "##9 directive of this Ionorable Panel2
11 Sin%.paan- Sala*sa* of 5auro TorresH "1 Sin%.paan- Sala*sa* of 5arino (oberanoH %1 Sin%.paan- Sala*sa* of Ruperto 4e,eFoH !1 Sin%.paan- Sala*sa* of Crisosto,o PurificacionH 51 Sin%.paan- Sala*sa* of Renato 5alabananH 61 Sin%.paan- Sala*sa* of $ovencio 5alabananH 71 Sin%.paan- Sala*sa* of Ro,,el RollanH D1 @ritten state,ent as contained in the letter dated 11 =pril "##1 of -r1 Rac<uel -el Rosario-Fortun to 486 -irector Ben1 Re naldo B1 @ cocoH
!71 =ccordin&l , the affidavitsAstate,ents ,entioned above ,ust be e/cluded fro, the proceedin&s of the case because of the directive of this Ionorable Panel includin& the affidavit of $i,, )1 )ope? for his failure to affir, his state,ent because of his unti,el de,ise1 8e that as it ,a , all the fore&oin& affidavitsAstate,ents do not i,plicate ,e in the -acer-Corbito ,urder as in fact the aforesaid affiants never attributed a sin&le act of an alle&ed participation on , part in the said ,urder1 6n fact, their o'n 'itness Col1 Blen -u,lao even cleared ,e of an involve,ent in this case 'hen he revealed that it 'as actuall then President 7:R=P9 :strada 'ho &ave the order to Col1 5ichael Ra =<uino to neutrali?e -acer1 C61 The ph sical evidence presented in Cri,inal Case

4o1 #1-191969 failed to i,plicate ,e in the -acer-Corbito ,urder case1 --------------------------------!D1 =ccordin& to , counsel, the corpus delicti includes t'o thin&s2 first, the ob0ectiveH second, the sub0ective ele,ent of cri,es1 6n ho,icide *b dolo+ and in ,urder cases, the prosecution *in this case the co,plainants+ is burdened to prove2 *a+ the death of the part alle&ed to be deadH *b+ that the death 'as produced b the cri,inal act of so,e other then the deceased and 'as not the result of accident, natural cause or suicideH and *c+ that defendant co,,itted the cri,inal act or 'as in so,e 'a cri,inall responsible for the act 'hich produced the death1 !91 The burden of co,plainants 'as not dischar&ed even at this sta&e 'here the issue is ,erel probable cause1 The result of the -4= :/a,ination conducted b the GP 4ational (cience Research 6nstitute *GP4(R6+ sho's that2
(P:C65:4 11 (everal pieces of burnt tires contained in a sealed transparent plastic ba& 'ith ,ar.in&s1 =shes contained in a sealed transparent plastic ba& 'ith ,ar.in&s1 =lle&ed charred bones contained in three *%+ sealed transparent plastic ba&s all 'ith ,ar.in&s1 :i&ht *D+ pieces of teeth contained in a transparent plastic ba& 'ith ,ar.in&s1 (peci,en 1-% W 5arch "D, "##1 at 12!5 p1,1 (peci,en ! W 5arch "D, "##1 at 12!5 p1,1 Re2 FO- Case, 486, 5anila Cicti,2 8G88J -=C:R and his driver
54
"1 %1
!1
-=T: (G856TT:-2 =)):B:- C=(:2
R:EG:(T64B P=RTJ2 (6 % =ntonio :ru, 4oted2 =tt 1 5arianito Pan&aniban FO---6(, 486, Chief, FO-, 486, 5la1 5la1 PGRPO(: OF :Q=564=T6O42 F64-64B(2 -eo/ ribonucleic acid For -4= =nal sis anal sis conducted on the above-

,entioned speci,ens all &ave 4:B=T6C: R:(G)T( for the presence of IG5=4 -4=1
55
5#1 Ceril , assu,in& ar-%endo that state,ents of the above-,entioned affiants should be included in the proceedin&s, the (tateKs o'n investi&ation, throu&h the 486, sho's the alle&ed charred bones of -acer and Corbito &ave ne&ative results for the presence of hu,an -4=, 'hich necessaril ,eans that speci,en &athered b the investi&ators *charred bones, teeth, etc1+ are not hu,an1 This necessaril contradicts the alle&ations of @illia, )1 )ope? and =le/ 81 -ilo in their respective =ffidavits that -acer and Corbito 'ere ,urdered and burned at an )ilat, in 6ndan&, Cavite1 6f it 'ere true that -acer and Corbito 'ere .illed, and their re,ains burned, at the site 'here the charred bones 'ere alle&edl discovered, then the site should have been littered 'ith re,ains, 'hether charred bones or other'ise, that could be traced to -acer or Corbito or at the ver least, to the re,ains of hu,an bein&s1 511 =nent the dentures alle&edl recovered fro, the alle&ed cri,e scene, suffice it to sa that the circu,stances b 'hich the 'ere recovered are hi&hl suspect1 Consider the follo'in&2
51111 4e'spaper reports stated that 'hen -r1 Ra<uel Fortun 'ent to the cri,e scene on 7 =pril "##1, she observed that the area 'as not preserved and a&reed that the dental plate she alle&edl found could have possibl been planted1 511"1 The dental plate 'as suspiciousl ,issed b the 486 a&ents at the ti,e the scoured the alle&ed cri,e scene before the visit of -r1 Fortun1 6t is hi&hl i,probable that 'hat a co,posite tea, of P4P and 486 officers failed to find, -r1 Ra<uel Fortun 'as able to ,iraculousl retrieve after five *5+ ,onths in a cri,e scene that 'as ad,ittedl not preserved1 = cop of the ne'spaper reports published in Manila Standard and Toda* on "# =pril "##1 is hereto attached and ,ade inte&ral part hereof as =nne/es 7B9 and 7B-191 511%1 Per report of the 486 pursuant to the subpoena issued b this Ionorable Panel, the 486 has no record of the reports prepared relative to search of the cri,e scene on 7 =pril "##1 or an proof of the proper transfer of the chain of custod thereof, 'hich renders the inte&rit of the thin&s recovered fro, such search, includin& the alle&ed dentures of -acer and Corbito, hi&hl suspect1 511!1 5ore i,portantl , it 'as not the personal and fa,il dentist of -acer and Corbito 'ho 'as able to positivel identif that the dental

plate 'as indeed that of -acer but onl -r1 Ra<uel Fortun 'ho is not even a dentist1 (uch failure is fatal to their case1 8esides, as ,entioned earlier, -r1 Ra<uel FortunKs 'ritten state,ents contained in her letter dated 11 =pril "##1 to 486 -irector Ben1 Re naldo B1 @ coco, as to her alle&ed findin&s about the case, are not even ad,issible since she did not verif the sa,e under oath or e/ecute an affidavit affir,in& the sa,e1
56
5"1 Further,ore, in a (enate investi&ation conducted b the Co,,ittee on $ustice on Iu,an Ri&hts on 19 =pril "##1, then 486 -irector Re naldo @ coco ad,itted that in the course of their investi&ation, the have no evidence lin.in& ,e to the -acer ,urder case1 Ie even stated that , na,e 'as not even ,entioned b an of the 'itnesses or suspects1!1 5%1 =ll in all, the evidence presented could not pri,a facie establish , involve,ent in the -acer-Corbito case1 C661 There is no violation of P1-1 4o1 1D"91 --------------------------------5!1 6 vehe,entl den the accusation that 6 &ave instructions to 5ancao to cover up the investi&ation of the -acerCorbito ,urder case and that 6 instructed hi, and 5ichael Ra =<uino to flee the countr 1 6 also stron&l den that 6 provided ,one or rei,bursed their e/penses in the Gnites (tates1 4onetheless, since the ele,ents of ,urder have not been laid out in the affidavits in this case, the char&e of obstruction of 0ustice is 'orthless1 551 Pertinent to , defense, 5ancao, in his testi,on in open court on 1# (epte,ber "##9 testified as follo's2
=TTJ1 =C6(=-O E2 @ill ou a&ree that Ben1 )acson never reall &ave ou an order to cover up it 'as 0ust our personal interpretation, is that correctN *@6T4:(( 5=4C=O =4(@:R64B+ =2 The 'a 'e operate is not all verbal1 6t could be ,anifestation of actions but since that 'e have been to&ether for a 'hile 'e .no' each other and 'e .no' ho' to deal on so,e
!1
=nne/ 7B-19 of the Counter-=ffidavit1

proble, li.e this so 6 'as ,ade to i,press that the order carr out 'as to protect or cover up our ,en, sir1 E2 8ut Ben1 )acson never e/pressl said do a cover up, do ou a&reeN =2 4ot e/pressl , (ir1!"
57
561 6t ,ust e,phasi?ed that 5ancao ad,itted that 6 never e/pressl &ave an order to cover up the said investi&ation1 :ven then, no actual cover up 'as ,ade b 5ancao because it 'as the 486 'ho alread too. char&e of the investi&ation1 571 6 'as advised b , counsel that the (upre,e Court in #l%sorio vs. #l%sorio, et al., citin& (ection 1 of Presidential -ecree 4o1 1D"9, other'ise .no'n as )Penali<in- Obstr%4tion Of Apprehension and Prose4%tion Of Cri.inal Offenders, rules that2
(ection 11 The penalt of prision correccional in its ,a/i,u, period, or a fine ran&in& fro, 1,### to 6,### pesos, or both, shall be i,posed upon an person 'ho .no'in&l or 'illfull obstructs, i,pedes, frustrates or dela s the apprehension of suspects and the investi&ation and prosecution of cri,inal cases b co,,ittin& an of the follo'in& acts2 /// /// /// *b+ alterin&, destro in&, suppressin&, or concealin& an paper, record, docu,ent, or ob0ect, 'ith intent to i,pair its verit , authenticit , le&ibilit , availabilit , as evidence in an investi&ation of or official proceedin&s in, cri,inal cases, or to be used in the investi&ation of, or official proceedin&s in, cri,inal casesH *c+ harborin& or concealin&, or facilitatin& the escape of, an person he .no's, or has reasonable &round to believe or suspect, has co,,itted an offense under e/istin& penal la's in order to prevent his arrest, prosecution, and conviction1 @e hold that the evidence adduced does not support a findin& of probable cause for the offenses defined in the provisions cited above1 5arietta failed to prove, b co,petent evidence, that2 *1+ Penthouse Gnit !%-C 'as the d'ellin& place of :rlindaH *"+ she has
!"
T(4 pa&e !", (epte,ber 1#, "##9, Cri,inal Case 4o1 #1-191969, 6nitial Cross-e/a,ination of Ce?ar 5ancao 661

authorit over the said unitH *%+ ( lvia and Cristina had no authorit to enter the unit and conduct acts of ,aintenance thereonH and *!+ ( lvia and Cristina 'ere ar,ed 'hen the effected entrance1 8ased on these circu,stances, the char&es of robber and <ualified trespass to d'ellin& ,ust inevitabl fail1 Perforce, the char&e a&ainst $ovito for violation of P1-1 4o1 1D"9 should also be dis,issed1 Q//
58
5D1 6n this case, co,plainantsK reliance on 5ancaoKs alle&ation that 6 told the, to &o to the Gnited (tates is absolutel false1 6t ,ust be stressed that 5ancao left the countr because he .ne' of the i,pendin& rebellion char&es a&ainst hi, and not because 6 as.ed hi, to1 Contrar to his state,ents, he voluntaril left the countr for his o'n safet and convenience1 591 Co,plainantsK alle&ations re,ain as ,ere alle&ations 'ith nothin& to support the,1 (uch an i,putation of violation of a la' cannot and should not be pre,ised on pure assu,ptions and inference, but on concrete facts1 Gnfortunatel , this 'as not sufficientl established b the facts at hand1 Co,plainants failed to dischar&e this burden1 CO4C)G(6O4 6#1 The alle&ations of the co,plainants and 5ancao nor the belatedl sub,itted affidavits cannot en&ender probable cause a&ainst ,e1 Co,plainantsK alle&ations that 6 )e=er4ised as4endan4* over all .e.bers of the tas/ for4e, and that .illin& of their father and 5r1 Corbito )4o%ld onl* be done %pon, , alle&ed )dire4tion, are but ,ere conclusions, 'hich are unsupported b an piece of evidence1 Certainl , probable cause de,ands ,ore than bare suspicion and can never left to presupposition, con0ecture, or even convincin& lo&ic1!% 611 6t should be reali?ed, ho'ever, that 'hen a ,an is haled to court on a cri,inal char&e, it brin&s in its 'a.e proble,s not onl for the accused but for his fa,il as 'ell1 Therefore, it behooves a prosecutor to 'ei&h the evidence carefull and to deliberate thereon to deter,ine the e/istence of a pri,a facie case before filin& the infor,ation in court1 =n thin& less 'ould be a dereliction of dut 1!!
!% !!
2ilosba*an #n4. v. COME EC, %!5 Phil1 11!1, 117! *1997+1 +ernardo v. Mendo<a, 9# (CR= "1!5 S1979TH >da. 7e Ja4ob v. P%no, 1%1 (CR= 1!D-1!9 S19D!T1

6"1 6n vie' of all the fore&oin&, it is evident that the real purpose in filin& this cri,inal co,plaint for double ,urder is to punish ,e for , relentless and unco,pro,isin& stand a&ainst &raft and corruption and not to see. redress for a cri,e 6 never co,,itted1 6%1 6 a, e/ecutin& this =ffidavit to attest to the truth of the fore&oin& state,ents and in support of , pra er for the outri&ht dis,issal of this cri,inal co,plaint and for 'hatever le&al purpose this ,a serve1 =FF6=4T FGRTI:R (=J:TI 4=GBIT1 64 @6T4:(( @I:R:OF, 6 have hereunto set , hand this "6th da of October "##9 at 5anila1 *(B-1+ (:4=TOR P=4F6)O 51 )=C(O4 Affiant (G8(CR68:- =4- (@OR4 to before ,e on this "6th da of October "##9, at 5anila1 *(B-1+ IO41 P:T:R O4B *(B-1+ IO41 5=R5=R6: P1 (=T64-C6C=(
59
*(B-1+ IO41 5=R6 :)C6R= 81 I:RR:R= C:RT6F6C=T6O4 @e hereb certif that 'e have personall e/a,ined the affiant and 'e are satisfied that he understood the fore&oin& counter-affidavit and that the sa,e is his voluntar act and deed1 *(B-+ IO41 P:T:R O4B *(B-+ IO41 5=R5=R6: P1 (=T64-C6C=(
*(B-+ IO41 5=R6 :)C6R= 81 I:RR:R=9
60
6nitiall , the -O$ panel of prosecutors set the hearin&s on -ece,ber 1 and 1D, "##9, but cancelled the hearin&s and declared the case sub,itted for resolution1 On -ece,ber ", "##9, the -O$ Panel denied petitionerXs 5otion for Reconsideration =d Cautela,1 On -ece,ber 1D, "##9, the -O$ panel of prosecutors issued a Resolution findin& probable cause for t'o counts of ,urder a&ainst petitioner1 The co,plaint for violation of (ection 1*c+ of Presidential -ecree 4o1 19"9 'as dis,issed for lac. of ,erit1!5 On $anuar 7, "#1#, t'o separate but identical infor,ations for ,urder 'ere filed a&ainst petitioner for alle&edl conspirin& 'ith the other accused in Cri,inal Case 4o1 #1-1919691 The 6nfor,ation in Cri,inal Case 4o1 1#"7"9#5 reads2 7The undersi&ned (tate Prosecutors hereb accuse P=4F6)O 51 )=C(O4 for the cri,e of 5urder, defined and penali?ed in =rticle "!D of the Revised Penal Code, as a,ended, co,,itted as follo's2
That on or about 4ove,ber "!, "###, in the Cit of 5anila, Philippines and 'ithin the 0urisdiction of this Ionorable Court, accused P=4F6)O 51 )=C(O4, conspirin&, confederatin& and actin& to&ether 'ith, aidin& and helpin&, and 'ith the aid and help of, the accused in Cri,inal Case 4o1 #1-191969, pendin& before the Re&ional Trial Court, 8ranch 1D, 5anila, na,el , PA((upt 5ichael Ra 81 =<uino, PA((upt Ce?ar Ochoco 5ancao 66, PA((upt Teofilo CiFa, (PO" =llan C1 Cillanueva, (PO! 5arino (oberano, (PO% 5auro Torres, (PO% $ose :scalante, Crisosto,o 51 Purificacion, -i&o -e Pedro, Renato 5alabanan, $ovencio 5alabanan, 5ar&arito Cueno, Ro,,el Rollan, PA(6nsp Roberto )an&cauon, (PO! 8en0a,in Taladua, (PO1 Rolando )acasandile, (PO1 5ario (ar,iento, (PO1 @illia, Reed, PO" Tho,as $1 (ar,iento, (PO1 Ruperto =1 4e,eFo, PAC6nsp Cicente =rnado and several $ohn -oes, abducted (=)C=-OR 78G88J9 -=C:R and :,,anuel Corbito at the corner of Os,eFa Ii&h'a *for,erl (outh (uper Ii&h'a + and ;obel Ro/as (treet, in 5anila, and brou&ht the, to 6ndan&, Cavite, and 'ith treacher , evident pre,editation, abuse of superior stren&th, ni&htti,e and re,oteness of place, ,alice and intent to .ill, did then and there .no'in&l ,
!5
Rollo, pp1 !D5-5%5, -O$ Resolution dated -ece,ber 1D, "##91

'ilfull , unla'full and feloniousl .ill (=)C=-OR 78G88J9 -=C:R b stran&ulation 'hich 'as the direct and i,,ediate cause of his death and then burned his bod to the da,a&e and pre0udice of said (=)C=-OR 78G88J9 -=C:R and his le&al heirs19
!6
61
The 6nfor,ation in Cri,inal Case 4o1 1#"7"9#6 reads2 7The undersi&ned (tate Prosecutors hereb accuse P=4F6)O 51 )=C(O4 for the cri,e of 5urder, defined and penali?ed in =rticle "!D of the Revised Penal Code, as a,ended, co,,itted as follo's2
That on or about 4ove,ber "!, "###, in the Cit of 5anila, and 'ithin the 0urisdiction of this Ionorable Court, accused P=4F6)O 51 )=C(O4, conspirin&, confederatin& and actin& to&ether 'ith, aidin& and helpin&, and 'ith the aid and help of, the accused in Cri,inal Case 4o1 #1191969, pendin& before the Re&ional Trial Court, 8ranch 1D, 5anila, na,el , PA((upt 5ichael Ra 81 =<uino, PA((upt Ce?ar Ochoco 5ancao 66, PA((upt Teofilo CiFa, (PO" =llan C1 Cillanueva, (PO! 5arino (oberano, (PO% 5auro Torres, (PO% $ose :scalante, Crisosto,o 51 Purificacion, -i&o -e Pedro, Renato 5alabanan, $ovencio 5alabanan, 5ar&arito Cueno, Ro,,el Rollan, PA(6nsp Roberto )an&cauon, (PO! 8en0a,in Taladua, (PO1 Rolando )acasandile, (PO1 5ario (ar,iento, (PO1 @illia, Reed, PO" Tho,as $1 (ar,iento, (PO1 Ruperto =1 4e,eFo, PAC6nsp Cicente =rnado and several $ohn -oes, abducted (alvador 78ubb 9 -acer and :55=4G:) COR86TO at the corner of Os,eFa Ii&h'a *for,erl (outh (uper Ii&h'a + and ;obel Ro/as (treet in 5anila, and brou&ht the, to 6ndan&, Cavite, and 'ith treacher , evident pre,editation, abuse of superior stren&th, ni&htti,e and re,oteness of the place, ,alice and intent to .ill, did then and there .no'in&l , 'ilfull , unla'full and feloniousl .ill :55=4G:) COR86TO b stran&ulation 'hich 'as the direct and i,,ediate cause of his death and then burned his bod to the da,a&e and pre0udice of said :55=4G:) COR86TO and his le&al heirs19!7
The aforesaid cases, doc.eted as Cri,inal Cases 4os1 1#"7"9#5 > 1#"7"9#6, 'ere raffled to RTC-8ranch %", 5anila1
!6 !7
Rollo, p1 5%D1 Rollo, p1 5!11
62
On $anuar 7, "#1#, petitioner filed an O,nibus 5otion for Consolidation and $udicial -eter,ination of Probable Cause1 On Februar !, "#1#, then RTC-8ranch 1D $ud&e 5 ra Fernande? issued an Order findin& probable cause and directed the issuance of 'arrant of arrest a&ainst petitioner1 On Februar 1#, "#1#, petitioner filed a 5otion for Reconsideration 'ith pra er for the voluntar inhibition of RTC $ud&e 5 ra Fernande?1 6n 5arch "#1#, RTC $ud&e Fernande? 'as pro,oted =ssociate $ustice of the Court of =ppeals1 On 5a "1, "#1#, petitioner filed a 5otion for Reinvesti&ation1 Thereafter, he filed a (upple,ental 5otion for Reinvesti&ation1 On $ul "%, "#1#, RTC-8ranch 1D =ctin& Presidin& $ud&e Thel,a 8un i-5edina issued an Order den in& petitionerXs 5otion for Reconsideration and his 5otion for Reinvesti&ation1 On (epte,ber "!, "#1#, 'ithin the re&le,entar period, petitioner filed the instant petition for certiorari and prohibition 'ith application for a te,porar restrainin& order and preli,inar in0unction1 =fter the filin& of private respondentsK Co,,ent dated 4ove,ber 17, "#1#, this Court issued a Resolution den in& in0unctive relief1 On 4ove,ber "6, "#1#, the Court directed the parties to sub,it their respective ,e,oranda on the ,erits1 Petitioner sub,itted his 5e,orandu, dated -ece,ber 16, "#1#1 Private respondents sub,itted their 5e,orandu, dated -ece,ber "1, "#1#1 The Office of the (olicitor Beneral opted to adopt its Co,,ent dated 4ove,ber "6, "#1# as its 5e,orandu,1 Petitioner cites the follo'in& &round for the &rantin& of the instant petition, vi?2 7BROG4- FOR TI: P:T6T6O4
PG8)6C R:(PO4-:4T CO556TT:- BR=C: =8G(: OF -6(CR:T6O4 =5OG4T64B TO )=CL OR :QC:(( OF

$GR6(-6CT6O4 @I:4 6T FOG4- PRO8=8): C=G(: FOR TI: 6((G=4C: OF @=RR=4T( OR =RR:(T =B=64(T P:T6T6O4:R1 =1 Public respondent &ravel abused its discretion in speculatin& and inferrin& petitionerKs cri,inal liabilit fro, his position as head of P=OCTF and P4P1 Public respondent &ravel abused its discretion in findin& probable cause based chiefl , if not solel , on 5ancaoKs 1% Februar "##9 =ffidavit, 'hich is patentl incredible and unreliable, considerin& that2 *1+ *"+ 6t 'as contrar to 5ancaoKs previous affidavitsH 6t 'as the product of undue pressure on 5ancao to i,plicate petitioner, 'hich 5ancao hi,self has ad,ittedH and 5ancaoKs account is inherentl unbelievable and i,probable and has been contradicted in i,portant details1
63
81
*%+
C1
Public respondent &ravel abused its discretion in blindl rel in& on 5ancaoKs 1% Februar "##9 =ffidavit and re0ectin& circu,stances indicatin& the incredibilit and unreliabilit thereof, on the supposition that 7,atters of credibilit of 'itnesses are best resolved durin& the trial proper19 *1+ 6n deter,inin& probable cause, a court has a dut to 7e/a,ine evidence 'ith care19 This dut 'as violated 'hen public respondent relied on the patentl* incredible and unreliable =ffidavit of the prosecutionKs sole 'itnessH The circu,stances pointed out b petitioner under,ine not onl 5ancaoKs personal credibilit as a 'itness, but also the inherent credibilit of his a44o%nt1 6t 'ould be hi&hl un0ust to still sub0ect an accused to trial proper, 'hen it is i..ediatel* obvious that the testi,on of the prosecutionKs sole 'itness is incredible and unreliable1
*"+
*%+

*!+ This Ionorable Court and the (upre,e Court have previousl ruled that a cri,inal case should be dis,issed for lac. of probable cause if the testi,on of the prosecutionKs 'itness is incredible and unreliable1
64
-1
:ven assu,in& ar&uendo that 5ancaoKs 1% Februar "##9 =ffidavit could be accepted at face value, the alle&ed state,ents purportedl uttered b petitioner and overheard b 5ancao are not sufficient to establish probable cause a&ainst hi, for ,urder19!D
=t the outset, it ,ust be pointed out that up to no' petitioner is at lar&e and is evadin& arrest fro, the ti,e of the issuance of a 'arrant of arrest on Februar !, "#1#1 4onetheless, @e are entertainin& the instant petition, in accordance 'ith the rulin& of the (upre,e Court in the case of Miranda vs. T%liao *!D6 (CR= %D%+, that an accused 'ho is at lar&e 'ith a pendin& 'arrant of arrest can le&all see. affir,ative relief fro, the Court throu&h a petition for certiorari and prohibition1 4o', on the instant petition1 The pivotal issue for resolution is 'hether or not the public respondent court co,,itted &rave abuse of discretion a,ountin& to e/cess of 0urisdiction in findin& the e/istence of probable cause for the issuance of a 'arrant of arrest a&ainst petitioner for the death of (alvador -acer and :,,anuel Corbito1 Traditionall , b &rave abuse of discretion is ,eant such capricious and 'hi,sical e/ercise of 0ud&,ent as is e<uivalent to lac. of 0urisdiction, and it ,ust be sho'n that the discretion 'as e/ercised arbitraril or despoticall 1!9 The abuse of discretion ,ust be patent and &ross as to a,ount to an evasion of positive dut or to a virtual refusal to perfor, a dut en0oined b la', as not to act at all in conte,plation of la' or 'here po'er is e/ercised in an arbitrar and despotic ,anner b reason of passion or hostilit 15# 6ts e/panded
!D !9 5#
Rollo, pp1 1#-111 PM# Colle-es vs. $ RC and Ale;andro 3alvan, 3.R. $o. ?@?4AA, A%-%st ?B, ?CCD. Panali-an vs. Adolfo, 67 (CR= 1761
65
,eanin&, ho'ever, alread includes acts done contrar Constitution, the la', or 0urisprudence151
to the
To be&in 'ith, (ection 6 of Rule 11" of the Revised Rules of Cri,inal Procedure, provides for the &uidelines to be follo'ed b the RTC $ud&e in the issuance of a 'arrant of arrest, vi?2 7(:C1 61 @hen 'arrant of arrest ,a issue1- *a+ 8 the Re&ional Trial Court1- @ithin ten *1#+ da s fro, the filin& of the co,plaint or infor,ation, the 0ud&e shall personall evaluate the resolution of the prosecutor and its supportin& evidence1 Ie ,a i,,ediatel dis,iss the case if the evidence on record clearl fails to establish probable cause1 6f he finds probable cause, he shall issue a 'arrant of arrest, or a co,,it,ent order if the accused has alread been arrested pursuant to a 'arrant issued b the 0ud&e 'ho conducted the preli,inar investi&ation or 'hen the co,plaint or infor,ation 'as filed pursuant to section 7 of this Rule1 6n case of doubt on the e/istence of probable cause, the 0ud&e ,a order the prosecutor to present additional evidence 'ithin five *5+ da s fro, notice and the issue ,ust be resolved b the court 'ithin thirt *%#+ da s fro, the filin& of the co,plaint or infor,ation1 Q// /// ///9 =ptl , in the case of Teresita Tan-hal O/abe vs. "on Pedro 7e eon 3%tierre<, et al.,5" the (upre,e Court declared that2 7The purpose of the ,andate of the 0ud&e to first deter,ine
probable cause for the arrest of the accused is to insulate fro, the ver start those falsel char&ed of cri,es fro, the tribulations, e/penses and an/iet of a public trial2 K6t ,ust be stressed, ho'ever, that in e/ceptional
cases, the Court too. the e/traordinar step of annullin& findin&s of probable cause to prevent the ,isuse of the stron& ar, of the la' or to protect the orderl ad,inistration of 0ustice1 The constitutional dut of this Court in cri,inal liti&ations is not onl to ac<uit the innocent after trial but to insulate, fro, the start, the innocent fro, unfounded char&es1 For the Court is a'are of the strains of
51
5"
#nfor.ation Te4hnolo-* !o%ndation of the Philippines vs. Co..ission on Ele4tions, !19 (CR= 1!11 B1R1 4o1 15#1D%, 5a "7, "##!, citin& the -issentin& Opinion of 5r1 $ustice Re nato Puno in the case of Roberts vs. Co%rt of Appeals, "5! (CR= %#71

a cri,inal accusation and the stresses of liti&ations 'hich should not be suffered b the clearl innocent1 The filin& of an unfounded cri,inal infor,ation in Court e/poses the innocent to severe distress especiall 'hen the cri,e is not bailable1 :ven the ac<uittal of the innocent 'ill not full bleach the dar. and deep stains left b a baseless accusation for reputation once tarnished re,ains tarnished for a lon& len&th of ti,e1 The e/pense to establish innocence ,a also be prohibitive and can be ,ore punishin& especiall to the poor and the po'erless1 6nnocence ou&ht to be enou&h and the business of this Court is to shield the innocent fro, senseless suits fro, the start1K9
66
6n the case of 7oris Teresa "o vs. People of the Philippines,5% the (upre,e Court :n 8anc clarified the ,eanin& of probable cause for the issuance of a 'arrant of arrest and declared that it ,ust be based on substantial evidence, vi?2 7Q// Probable cause for the issuance of a 'arrant of arrest is the e/istence of such facts and circu,stances that 'ould lead a reasonabl discreet and prudent person to believe that an offense has been co,,itted b the person sou&ht to be arrested1 Ience, the 0ud&e, before issuin& a 'arrant of arrest, K,ust satisf hi,self that based on the evidence sub,itted, there is sufficient proof that a cri,e has been co,,itted and that the person to be arrested is probabl &uilt thereof1K =t this sta&e of the cri,inal proceedin&, the 0ud&e is not et tas.ed to revie' in detail the evidence sub,itted durin& the preli,inar investi&ation1 6t is sufficient that he personall evaluates such evidence in deter,inin& probable cause1 6n @ebb v1 -e )eon, 'e stressed that the 0ud&e ,erel deter,ines the probabilit , not the certaint , of &uilt of the accused and, in doin& so, he need not conduct a de novo hearin&1 Ie si,pl personall revie's the prosecutorKs initial deter,ination findin& probable cause to see if it is supported b substantial evidence19 Corollaril , in the case of 2ilosba*an, #n4. et al. vs. Co..ission on Ele4tions et al.,B4 the (upre,e Court also declared that2 7The deter,ination of probable cause in an
prosecution, is ,ade indispensable b
5% 5!
cri,inal the 8ill of Ri&hts 'hich
B1R1 4o1 1#66%", October 9, 19971 B1R1 4o1 1"D#5!, October 16, 1997, "D# (CR= D9", 9"1, 9""1

enshrines ever citi?enKs ri&ht to due process, the presu,ption that he is presu,ed innocent, and the inad,issibilit a&ainst hi, of an da,a&in& evidence obtained in violation of his ri&ht a&ainst self incri,ination1 =s $ustice Re nato (1 Puno has pointed out, probable cause is not an Kopa<ue concept in our 0urisdictionK or a Khi&h level le&al abstraction to be the sub0ect of 'arrin& thou&ht1K 6t constitutes those Kfacts and circu,stances 'hich 'ould lead a reasonabl discreet and prudent ,an to believe that an offense has been co,,ittedK b the person sou&ht to be 0udiciall indicted1 6n deter,inin& probable cause, ho'ever, the public prosecutor ,ust have been apprised b the co,plainant of his evidence in support of his accusator alle&ations1 6n other 'ords, deter,inin& probable cause is an intellectual activit pre,ised on the prior ph sical presentation or sub,ission of docu,entar or testi,onial proofs either confir,in&, ne&atin& or <ualif in& the alle&ations in the co,plaint1 6t follo's, therefore, that in the instant case, petitioner Lilosba an ,ust have necessaril tendered evidence, independent of and in support of the alle&ations in its letter-co,plaint, of such <ualit as to en&ender belief in an ordinaril prudent and cautious ,an that the offense char&ed therein has been co,,itted b herein respondents1 6ndeed probable cause need not be based on clear and convincin& evidence of &uilt, neither on evidence establishin& &uilt be ond reasonable doubt and definitel , not on evidence establishin& absolute certaint of &uilt, but it certainl de,ands ,ore than Kbare suspicionK and can never be Kleft to presupposition, con0ecture, or even convincin& lo&ic1 The efforts of petitioner Lilosba an, thus, in order to successfull lead to the 0udicial indict,ent of respondents, should have &one be ond a lar&el decla,ator conde,nation of respondents and dili&entl focused on its t'o-fold obli&ation of not onl substantiatin& its char&es a&ainst respondents but also profferin& before the Co,elec substantial evidence of respondentsK utili?ation, throu&h conspiratorial, cooperative andAor interrelated acts, of (event 5illion Pesos fro, the C-F for electioneerin& activities in violation of the pertinent provisions on election offenses as enu,erated in the O,nibus :lection Code19
67
6n the case of 7iosdado Jose Allado and Roberto . Mendo<a vs. "on. Roberto 7io/no, et al.,55 the (upre,e Court, spea.in& throu&h 5r1 $ustice $osue 8ellosillo, revisited the concept of probable cause for the filin& of infor,ation and the issuance of a 'arrant of
55
B1R1 4o1 11%6%#, 5a 5, 199!, "%" (CR= 19%1
68
arrest1 6n the said case the prosecution filed the infor,ation for .idnappin& 'ith ,urder a&ainst the petitioners based on the s'orn state,ent of (ecurit Buard :scolastico G,bal 'ho i,plicated petitioners as 7the brains behind the alle&ed .idnappin& and sla in& of one :u&ene =le/ander Can T'est, a Ber,an national19 =fter findin& that 7the e/tra0udicial state,ent of G,bal suffers fro, ,aterial inconsistencies9, ta.in& into account that the 7respondent 0ud&e co,,itted &rave abuse of discretion in issuin& the 'arrant for the arrest of petitioners it appearin& that he did not personall e/a,ine the evidence nor did he call for the co,plainant and his 'itnesses in the face of their incredible accounts9, the (upre,e Court nullified the 'arrant of arrest issued a&ainst petitioners1 The (upre,e Court ,ade the follo'in& pronounce,ents, vi?2 7For sure, the credibilit of G,bal is badl battered1 Certainl , his bare alle&ations, even if the (tate invo.es its inherent ri&ht to prosecute, are insufficient to 0ustif sendin& t'o la' ers to 0ail, or an bod for that ,atter1 5ore i,portantl , the P=CC operatives 'ho applied for a 'arrant to search the d'ellin&s of (antia&o never i,plicated petitioners1 6n fact the clai,ed that accordin& to G,bal, it 'as (antia&o, and not petitioners, 'ho ,aster,inded the 'hole affair1 @hile there ,a be bits of evidence a&ainst petitionersK co-accused, i1e1, referrin& to those sei?ed fro, the d'ellin&s of (antia&o, these do not in the least prove petitionersK co,plicit in the cri,e char&ed1 8ased on the evidence thus far sub,itted there is nothin& indeed, ,uch less is there probable cause, to incri,inate petitioners1 Fo# the$ to stan% t#ial an% be %ep#i&e% in the $eanti$e of thei# libe#t'" ho(e&e# b#ief" the la( app#op#iatel' e)acts $uch $o#e to sustain a (a##ant fo# thei# a##est * facts an% ci#cu$stances st#on+ enou+h in the$sel&es to suppo#t the belief that the' a#e +uilt' of a c#i$e that in fact happene%. Euite obviousl , this has not been ,et19 *:,phasis ours1+ )i.e'ise, earlier in the case of Jovito Salon-a vs. "on. Ernani Cr%< PaEo, et al.,56 the (upre,e Court :n 8anc, after notin& that 7*T+he testi,on of Cictor )ovel a&ainst petitioner (alon&a is full of inconsistencies9, cate&oricall declared that 7this Court 'ill not validate the filin& of an infor,ation based on the .ind of evidence a&ainst the petitioner found in the records19 =lthou&h, the case for
56
4o1 )-595"!, Februar 1D, 19D5, 1%! (CR= !%D1
69
subversion filed a&ainst petitioner 'as rendered ,oot and acade,ic after the RTC $ud&e dropped the subversion case a&ainst petitioner on ,otion of the prosecution, nonetheless, the (upre,e Court une<uivocall declared that2 7The purpose of a preli,inar investi&ation is to secure the innocent a&ainst hast , ,alicious and oppressive prosecution, and to protect hi, fro, an open and public accusation of cri,e, fro, the trouble, e/pense and an/iet of a public trial, and also to protect the state fro, useless and e/pensive trials1 *Trocio v1 5anta, 11D (CR="!1H citin& Iashi, v1 8oncan, 71 Phil1 "16+1 The ri&ht to a preli,inar investi&ation is a statutor ri&ht, and to 'ithhold it 'ould be to trans&ress constitutional due process1 *(ee People v1 Oandasa, "5 (CR= "77+ Io'ever, in order to satisf the due process clause it is not enou&h that the preli,inar investi&ation is conducted in the sense of ,a.in& sure that a trans&ressor shall not escape 'ith i,punit 1 = preli,inar investi&ation serves not onl the purpose of the (tate1 5ore i,portant, it is part of the &uarantees of freedo, and fair pla 'hich are birthri&hts of all 'ho live in our countr 1 6t is, therefore, i,perative upon upon the fiscal or the 0ud&e as the case ,a be, to relieve the accused fro, the pain of &oin& throu&h a trial once it is ascertained that the evidence is insufficient to sustain a pri,a facie case or that no probable cause e/ists to for, a sufficient belief as to the &uilt of the accused1 =lthou&h there is no &eneral for,ula or fi/ed rule for the deter,ination of probable cause since the sa,e ,ust be decided in the li&ht of the conditions obtainin& in &iven situations and its e/istence depends to a lar&e de&ree upon the findin& or opinion of the 0ud&e conductin& the e/a,ination, such findin& should not disre&ard the facts before the 0ud&e nor run counter to the clear dictates of reasons *(ee )a Che,ise )acoste, (1=1 v1 Fernande?, 1"9 (CR= %91+1 !he ,u%+e o# fiscal" the#efo#e" shoul% not +o on (ith the p#osecution in the hope that so$e c#e%ible e&i%ence $i+ht late# tu#n up %u#in+ t#ial fo# this (oul% be a fla+#ant &iolation of a basic #i+ht (hich the cou#ts a#e c#eate% to uphol%. It bea#s #epeatin+ that the ,u%icia#' li&es up to its $ission b' &itali-in+ an% not %eni+#atin+ constitutional #i+hts. (o it has been before1 6t should continue to be so1 *5ercado v1 Court of First 6nstance of Ri?al, 116 (CR= 9%+19 *:,phasis ours1+ Clearl , the findin&s of probable cause either b the prosecution for the filin& of an infor,ation or the RTC $ud&e for the issuance of a 'arrant of arrest, ,ust be supported b substantial evidence1 =s
70
defined, substantial evidence refers to 7that a,ount of relevant evidence 'hich a reasonable ,ind ,i&ht accept as ade<uate to 0ustif a conclusion157 =ccordin&l , in deter,inin& the e/istence of probable cause for the issuance of a 'arrant of arrest, the (upre,e Court declared in the case of Teresita Tan-hal O/abe vs. "on. Pedro 7e eon 3%tierre<,BF that 7*T+he 0ud&e should consider not onl the report of the investi&atin& prosecutor but also the affidavitsAaffidavits *sic+ and the docu,entar evidence of the parties, the counteraffidavit of the accused and his 'itness, as 'ell as the transcript of steno&raphic notes ta.en durin& the preli,inar investi&ation, if an , sub,itted to the court b the investi&atin& prosecutor upon the filin& of the infor,ation19 To 0ustif the issuance of a 'arrant of arrest, as ruled in the case of Allado vs. 7io/no,59 7the la' appropriatel e/acts ,uch ,ore to sustain a 'arrant for their arrest M facts and circu,stances stron& enou&h in the,selves to support the belief that the are &uilt of a cri,e that in fact happened19 Buided b the fore&oin& pronounce,ents of the (upre,e Court, after a painsta.in& evaluation of the evidence on record vis-Yvis the ar&u,ents of the parties e,bodied in their pleadin&s sub,itted to the Court, this Court finds that respondent $ud&e co,,itted &rave abuse of discretion a,ountin& to e/cess of 0urisdiction 'hen it ruled that there e/ists probable cause for the issuance of a 'arrant of arrest a&ainst petitioner 'ho 'as i,plicated as a co-conspirator in the -acer-Corbito ,urder1 6n other 'ords, after a thorou&h and careful evaluation of the evidence on records, @e do not find the e/istence of substantial evidence, or the e/istence of facts and circu,stances stron& enou&h to support the belief that 'ould 0ustif the filin& of t'o separate infor,ations for ,urder and the issuance of a 'arrant of arrest a&ainst petitioner1 Ostensibl , fro, the evidence on records, petitioner 'as i,plicated as a co-conspirator for the first ti,e in the -acer-Corbito ,urder, onl after Ce?ar 5ancao e/ecuted his =ffidavit dated Februar 1%, "##9, subscribed on Februar 1!, "##9 before
57
5D 59
(ection 5 of Rule 1%% of the Revised Rules of CourtH +an4o !ilipino vs. Central +an/, "#! (CR= 7671 (upra1 (upra1
71
Philippine Ionorar Consul Beneral =n&elo (1 5acatan&a , Fort )auderdale, Florida G(=1 Prior to the e/ecution of Ce?ar 5ancaoKs =ffidavit dated Februar 1%, "##9, the 486 'ho conducted an e/tensive investi&ation and police 'or. and the -O$ panel of prosecutors 'ho conducted a preli,inar investi&ation and thereafter a reinvesti&ation, never i,plicated the petitioner as a co-conspirator in the -acer-Corbito ,urder1 Onl after Februar 1%, "##9, or after ,ore than ei&ht ears fro, 4ove,ber "!, "###, that the petitioner 'as i,plicated for the first ti,e in the -acer-Corbito ,urder1 The private co,plainants, dau&hters of (alvador -acer, ta&&ed the petitioner 'ho 'as then the P4P Chief and concurrent Iead of the P=OCTF, as the person 'ho alle&edl 7orchestrated9 and 7ordered the .illin&9 of their father based pri,aril on the =ffidavit dated Februar 1%, "##9 of Ce?ar 5ancao1 The Court, after &oin& over the records and the circu,stances obtainin& in the instant case, entertains serious doubt on the e/istence of probable cause for the filin& of t'o separate infor,ations for ,urder and the issuance of a 'arrant of arrest a&ainst the petitioner1 The -O$ panel of prosecutors and the RTC $ud&e relied pri,aril on the alle&ed conversation bet'een )=C(O4 and =EG64O 'hich Ce?ar 5ancao alle&edl overheard and divul&ed for the first ti,e ei&ht ears after the occurrence of the event1 The reliance of the -O$ panel of prosecutors and the RTC $ud&e on the =ffidavit dated Februar 1%, "##9 of Ce?ar 5ancao is ,isplaced1 !irst1 The aforesaid conversation alle&edl bet'een )=C(O4 and =EG64O, as narrated b Ce?ar 5ancao in para&raph 1# of his Februar 1%, "##9 =ffidavit transpired 7(o,eti,e in October "###9, or ,ore than ei&ht *D+ lon& ears after the alle&ed conversation1 6t is doubtful and unnatural for Ce?ar 5ancao to re,e,ber and recall the e/act 'ords alle&edl uttered b )=C(O4 and =EG64O ei&ht *D+ ears before he reduced in 'ritin& 'hat he overheard and <uoted in para&raph 1# of his =ffidavit1 6n his =ffidavit dated Februar 1%, "##9, and in his testi,onies in court on (epte,ber %, "##9 and (epte,ber 1#, "##9, there is no sho'in& that he recorded the conversation he alle&edl overheard so,eti,e in October "###1 On cross-e/a,ination, Ce?ar 5ancao even testified that he 7cannot
72
recall9 the 'hole conversation bet'een )=C(O4 and =EG64O16# Se4ond1 6n his Februar 1%, "##9 =ffidavit, Ce?ar 5ancao declared cate&oricall that he overheard the conversation 7(o,eti,e in October "###91 Io'ever, 'hen he testified on direct e/a,ination on (epte,ber %, "##9, Ce?ar 5ancao contradicted hi,self 'hen he declared that he 7can recall on (epte,ber to earl October, it 'as the ti,e 'hen the then President 'as out of the countr , , self, Beneral )acson, Col1 =<uino and O/i,oso 'ere in route to &o to a restaurant in Breenhills and inside the car, 6 have personall overheard the operation and another operation1961 Obviousl , barel si/ *6+ ,onths fro, the e/ecution of his =ffidavit dated Februar 1%, "##9, Ce?ar 5ancao co,,itted a contradiction b chan&in& the period he alle&edl overheard the conversation fro, 7(o,eti,e in October "###9 to 7(epte,ber to earl October91 Certainl , the chan&e in the period and the <ualification that he overheard the conversation bet'een )=C(O4 and =EG64O 'hen the 7President 'as out of the countr 9 creates serious doubt on the credibilit of Ce?ar 5ancao and the credibilit of his stor 1 =lso, the <ualification that the 7President 'as out of the countr 9, bolsters the defense of petitioner that he could not be 7present in the car 'ith 5ancao9 because as sho'n in the Certification issued b the 8ureau of 6,,i&ration *=nne/ 7:9 to (enator Panfilo )acsonKs Counter-=ffidavit+ and corroborated b the =ffidavit of (enator 5anuel =1 Ro/as *=nne/ 7F9 to (enator Panfilo )acsonKs Counter-=ffidavit+, petitioner 'as in the Gnited (tates to&ether 'ith for,er President $oseph :strada fro, (epte,ber !, "### up to (epte,ber 1%, "###1 Thereafter, President :strada did not leave the countr for the rest of (epte,ber and October "###16" Third1 The state,ent of Ce?ar 5ancao in his =ffidavit dated Februar 1%, "##9, that he 'as 7seated at the front seat of the car then driven b (BT1 OQ65O(O9 'hen he overheard the alle&ed conversation bet'een 7)=C(O49 and 7=EG64O9 creates doubt on the credibilit of his stor 1 =s pointed out b the petitioner, in his Counter-=ffidavit dated October "6, "##9, 7*P+rotocol based on seniorit is strictl observed b P5=ers and senior officers of the
6# 61 6"
T4(, (epte,ber 1#, "##9, pa&es %1-%5, cited p1 1D, Counter-=ffidavit (enator Panfilo )acson1 6bid1 (enator Panfilo )acsonKs Counter-=ffidavit dated October "6, "##9, p1 1%1
73
P4P19 6n his =ffidavit dated 5arch 1, "##7, Ce?ar 5ancao declared that he &raduated in 19D6 and 75ichael Ra =<uino &raduated t'o ears after9 in 19DD fro, the Philippine 5ilitar =cade, *P5=+1 Ce?ar 5ancao also ad,itted in court 'hen he testified on (epte,ber 1#, "##9, that 7protocol is based seniorit 9 and that he is ,ore senior than 7Col1 5ichael Ra =<uino91 Jet, stran&el he 'as 7seated in the front passen&er side of the vehicle9 'hen he 'as not the 7aide of Ben1 )acson91 Iis e/planation that 7based on protocol the ,ore senior officer should sit at the bac. 'hile the 0unior officer should sit in front9 is 7a &eneral rule9 is but a fli,s e/cuse and an afterthou&ht that deserves scant consideration1 6t is contrar to the hallo'ed tradition of seniorit 'hich is strictl observed and ?ealousl &uarded b &raduates of the Philippine 5ilitar =cade, 1 !o%rth1 The self-contradiction and ,aterial inconsistencies of Ce?ar 5ancao seriousl cast doubt on his credibilit and the credibilit of his stor 1 6nconsistencies and ,aterial contradictions en&ender doubt on the culpabilit of the petitioner1 The contradictions or inconsistencies on ,aterial points are evident in the =ffidavits he e/ecuted 'hich for, part of the records in the instant case1 6n his Counter-=ffidavit dated $une "9, "##1 and =ffidavit dated 5arch #1, "##7, Ce?ar 5ancao never i,pliedl or indirectl i,plicated petitioner in the -acer-Corbito ,urder1 =s a ,atter of fact, Ce?ar 5ancao cate&oricall declared under oath that Blenn -u,lao i,plicated hi, in the -acer-Corbito ,urder in a desperate atte,pt 7to i,plicate (enator-elect Panfilo )acson9 in the &rueso,e ,urder1 6n his Counter-=ffidavit dated $une "1, "##1, Ce?ar 5ancao ,ade the follo'in& state,ents under oath, vi?2 7191 Further to the alle&ations of -u,lao as indicated in his affidavit, the alle&ed 7special operations9 dealt 'ith the instructions and co,,unications fro, =<uino to -u,lao, =rnado to -u,lao, -u,lao to =rnado, -u,lao to Cina and the ,inor officers1 Thereafter, -u,lao reported to =<uino and the latter instructed -u,lao to secure or &et the docu,ents1 Ta.e note that in 1999 'hen -u,lao alle&edl started this operation as indicated in his

affidavit, the ,ission 'as to retrieve docu,ents fro, -acerKs office1 No(" in his atte$pt to i$plicate Senato#-elect Panfilo .acson" Du$lao" %espe#atel' lin/s #espon%ent Mancao fo# hi$ to %i#ectl' lin/ Senato#-elect .acson as (ell as P0Supt. ina (ho is un%e# the custo%' of the police autho#ities. In this (a'" the police autho#ities can utili-e ina" A1uino an% Mancao to testif' one (a' o# the othe# a+ainst ulti$atel' Senato#-elect .acson" the onl' c#e%ible opposition lea%e# at this ti$e. "#1 Finall , -u,lao alle&es that he tal.ed or reported to respondent 5ancao after the alle&ed abduction1 Ie li.e'ise said that 5ancao tal.ed to PA(upt1 Teofilo Cina over the cellular telephone1 @orst, respondent 5ancao alle&edl instructed -u,lao to dispose the retrieved docu,ents and reported the ,atter to (enator-elect )acson1 This stor line concocted b -u,lao in his o'n initiative or b the coercive force of his captors is not onl false, incredible but also ridiculous1 Fro, the ver inception of -u,laoKs affidavit, respondent 5ancao 'as never part of the 7special operations9 in an ,anner but later to his affidavit respondent 5ancao suddenl pla ed a ver crucial role in that he reported the ,atter to )acson and ordered the disposal of the docu,ents1 These state,ents co,in& fro, PA(upt1 -u,lao ne&ate the instruction of =<uino to secure the docu,ents retrieved fro, -acer and contrar to the ob0ective of the alle&ed ,ission that is to retrieve the docu,ents as narrated in -u,laoKs affidavit1 Du$lao2s penulti$ate state$ents (e#e $eant to lin/ #espon%ent Mancao an% ulti$atel' to lin/ Senato#-elect .acson in the Dace#-Co#bito %ouble $u#%e# case. Ob&iousl'" this is a si$ple %e$olition ,ob to pa#al'-e a possible st#on+ opposition lea%e# in the pe#son of Senato#-elect Panfilo .acson.3 *:,phasis ours1+
74
6n his =ffidavit dated 5arch 1, "##7, Ce?ar 5ancao never i,plicated petitioner in the -acer-Corbito ,urder1 Ie ,ade the follo'in& state,ents under oath involvin& the -acer-Corbito ,urder, vi?2 76661
6n 4ove,ber "###, 5ichael =<uino and 6 'ere a&ain e,broiled in controvers in a case .no'n as 7-acerCorbito91 8ubb -acer 'as a 0ournalist 'ho had ,ade public co,,ents a&ainst President :strada and Corbito 'as his driver1 -acerKs car 'as du,ped into a ravine in Cavite Province and a ,urder investi&ation ensued 'ith =<uino and , self a,on& those suspected of involve,ent1 6n the ,idst

of the ,urder investi&ation in Februar of "##1, President :strada 'as re,oved fro, office and the P=OCTF 'as disbanded and its for,er ,e,bers 'ere reassi&ned to far flun& areas of the countr 1 (o,eti,e =u&ust of "##1 in a )as Ce&as hotel, 5ichael =<uino 'as bla,in& fello' officer Teofilo Cina for sloppil du,pin& 8ubb -acerKs car into a ravine in Cavite 'here it 'as easil discovered1 =<uino 'as co,plainin& that the tas. had not been carried out correctl 1 This slopp 'or. resulted in an investi&ation 'hich later i,plicated 5ichael =<uino in -acer and CorbitoKs disappearance1
=1 =fter -acer and CorbitoKs disappearance, 6 'as as.ed to investi&ate the case1 -urin& , investi&ation 6 spo.e 'ith Teofilo Cina and Blen -u,lao1 6 called Cina and as.ed hi, if he had an involve,ent in the disappearance and he told ,e that he had been tas.ed b 5ichael =<uino to &et 8ubb -acer1 6 understood this to ,ean that =<uino had tas.ed Cina to neutrali?e -acer1 @hen spea.in& to BlenSnT -u,lao about 5ichael =<uinoKs possible involve,ent, 5r1 -u,lao bla,ed =<uino for ille&al orders1 6 understood the ille&al orders to be conspirin& in the abduction and ,urder of -acer and Corbito19
75
6ronicall and stran&el , ei&ht ears after, in total contradiction to the aforestated state,ents ,ade under oath, in his =ffidavit dated Februar 1%, "##9, Ce?ar 5ancao lin.ed and i,plicated petitioner for the first ti,e in the -acer-Corbito ,urder, vi?2
(o,eti,e in October "###, 6 heard )=C(O4 order =EG64O to li<uidate 8:RROJ=, his publicl -.no'n ne,esis, sa in&2 )$o*, tirahin ni*o na si +ero., )=C(O4 said this 'hile 'e 'ere on board his car en route to a $apanese restaurant in Breenhills, (an $uan, for lunch1 6 'as seated at the front seat of the car then driven b (BT1 OQ65O(O *7O/ 9 as 'e usuall called hi,+, 'hile =EG64O and )=C(O4 sat at the bac.1 =EG64O responded to )=C(O4 that he intends to neutrali?e or li<uidate -:)T= first because :R=P 'as alread peeved at hi,, sa in&2 7Tapusin ,una na,in si -elta, (ir, .asi naiirita na si 8i&ote sa .ani a19 7-:)T=9, referred to ,edia and PR ,an (=)C=-OR 78G88J9 -=C:R *-=C:R+, 'hile 786BOT:9 'as co,,onl -.no'n pseudon , of :R=P1 )=C(O4 ho'ever insisted that =EG64O rather operate on both 8:RROJ= and -=C:R (65G)T=4:OG()J, sa in& )#pa-saba* .o na at tin-nan natin /%n- sino na an- .a%%na.,, 'hich obviousl ,eant that =EG64O
71#1

operate on -=C:R and 8:RROJ= at the sa,e ti,e and to 0ust see 'ho bet'een the, is .illed first19
76
The propensit of Ce?ar 5ancao to contradict hi,self under oath is further ,anifested in his state,ents den in& an .no'led&e or infor,ation on the e/istence of the so-called 7special operations91 6n his Counter-=ffidavit dated $une "1, "##1 and in his =ffidavit dated 5arch 1, "##7, he never ,entioned or i,plicated )=C(O4 in the socalled 7special operations91 6n his Counter-=ffidavit dated $une "9, "##1, Ce?ar 5ancao even denied ,eetin& =EG64O and in<uirin& about the 7special operations9, vi?2
6n a fa,iliar tone, -u,lao no' ,iserabl tried to lin. respondent herein 'ith =<uino in the alle&ed 7special operations9 and in a blan.et date of Octobe# 4555" he alle+es that in his p#esence #espon%ent he#ein pe#sonall' in1ui#e% f#o$ A1uino about the sai% special ope#ations3 and thereafter ,ade co,,ents in relation to the conversation1 !his alle+e% $eetin+ ne&e# happene%. Respondent herein 'ill never and 'ill not consent to or be a part of an cri,inal activities1 Q//9 *:,phasis supplied1+
7171
8ut, stran&el in para&raph 7 of his =ffidavit dated Februar 1%, "##9, Ce?ar 5ancao contradicted hi,self 'hen he declared under oath, vi?2 771 (o,eti,e in the earl part of October "###, 6 found out fro, , operativesK dispatch slips that =EG64O 'as utili?in& so,e of , personnel at Tas. Broup )u?on in his 7special operations9 'ithout , .no'led&e1 Ri&ht then and there, 6, to&ether 'ith -G5)=O 'ho happened to be in , office at that ti,e, 'ent to&ether to =EG64OKs office and in<uired about the ,atter1 =EG64O infor,ed us that these 7special operations9 had been previousl approved and cleared b )=C(O4 and b 5=)=C=R=4B itself1 -G5)=O ,entioned to ,e that the 7special operations9 had for its tar&et a certain ,edia ,an critical of :R=P, 'ho, the referred to as 7-:)T=91 8ein& in the nature of a special operation, 6 decided not to in<uire further1 For purposes of clarit , P=OCTFKs 7special operations9 then pertained to operations that

did not follo' the nor,al channels of co,,and and did not co,e under the purvie' of its ,andate19
77
6ndubitabl , to add flavor to the alle&ed ,eetin&, 'hich Ce?ar 5ancao denied to have transpired in his =ffidavit dated $une "9, "##1, in an obvious effort to i,plicate petitioner, Ce?ar 5ancao asserted ei&ht ears after that =EG64O alle&edl told hi, that the socalled 7special operations9 'as 7previousl approved b )=C(O4 and b 5=)=C=4=4B itself19 =s sho'n above, Ce?ar 5ancao is not a credible and trust'orth 'itness1 Gnder oath he contradicted hi,self on ,aterial points1 6nconsistencies and ,aterial contradiction affect the credibilit of Ce?ar 5ancao and the veracit of his state,ents1 Gnder, the circu,stances, 'ith the above-cited conflictin& state,ents or serious discrepanc on a ,aterial fact, the RTC $ud&e should have denied the issuance of a 'arrant of arrest and dis,issed the case a&ainst petitioner for lac. of probable cause1 =side fro, the fore&oin& contradictions on ,aterial points, despite the assertion of Ce?ar 5ancao in para&raph % of his =ffidavit dated Februar 1%, "##9 that he 7freel , voluntaril and intelli&entl , 'ithout an force, inti,idation, threats, or an for, of duress bein& e/erted on , self or an of , fa,il ,e,bers b the &overn,ent of the Republic of the Philippines or an of its officials or e,plo ees,9 nonetheless, the Court entertains serious doubt on the veracit and reliabilit of his state,ents1 There are facts and circu,stances ad,itted b Ce?ar 5ancao sho'in& be ond a penu,bra of doubt that e/traneous factors or other persons ,a have influenced hi, in the preparation of his =ffidavit dated Februar 1%, "##9 thereb dilutin& the veracit and trust'orthiness of his state,ents i,plicatin& petitioner as a co-conspirator in the -acer-Corbito ,urder1 Firstl , apart fro, the undisputed fact that it too. Ce?ar 5ancao ei&ht lon& ears before he i,plicated petitioner for the -acer-Corbito ,urder, prior to the e/ecution of the Februar 1%, "##9 =ffidavit, Ce?ar 5ancao ad,itted on redirect-e/a,ination that on (epte,ber "7, "##7, 6(=FP Chief 8ri& Ben1 Ro,eo Presto?a called hi, and as.ed hi, 7to fabricate so,e infor,ation or char&es a&ainst (enator
78
)acson9 pro,isin& hi, his reinstate,ent to the police force, financial support and relocation of his fa,il to (in&apore16% =lso, petitioner pointed out that in an intervie' on =u&ust 6, "##D 'ith B5= 4e'scaster 5a.i Pulido and on =u&ust 1", "##D 'ith Ta,balan& Failon at (anche? in -;55, 'hich 'as confir,ed b Ce?ar 5ancao 'hen he testified in court on (epte,ber 1#, "##9, he revealed the offer for hi, to ,i&rate to (in&apore 'ith his fa,il in e/chan&e for testif in& a&ainst petitioner in the -acer-Corbito ,urder ,ade b then 6(=FP Chief 8ri& Ben1 Ro,eo Presto?a16! (econdl , Ce?ar 5ancao ad,itted on cross-e/a,ination that before he e/ecuted his =ffidavit in the earl part of -ece,ber he tal.ed to then -O$ (ecretar Bon?ales b phone165 Thirdl , Ce?ar 5ancao declared on cross-e/a,ination on the e/istence of 7e/plorator ,eetin&9 so,eti,e in 7Februar 1"9 before he e/ecuted his =ffidavit 'herein his state,ents 7'ill be used for a case9 attended b 7people fro, the Philippines9 led b 7=ssistant or Gndersecretar :rnesto Pineda, Gndersecretar Oscar Calderon 'ho is also under the -O$, the )ad Prosecutor, 486 re&ional -irector Ric -ia?1966 Fourthl , as pointed out b the petitioner in his Counter-=ffidavit dated October "6, "##9, on cross-e/a,ination, in ans'er to the <uestion 'ho prepared the =ffidavit he subscribed before Consul 5acatan&a on Februar 1!, "##9, Ce?ar 5ancao replied 76t 'as prepared b the panel, 'e read the draft, it 'as ,ade ,ore than "! hours1967 @hen as.ed 'hether the panel of prosecutors &ive inputs in the preparation of the =ffidavit he ans'ered 7Buidance, (ir196D Cie'ed in its proper perspective, considerin& the facts and circu,stances leadin& to the e/ecution of Ce?ar 5ancaoKs =ffidavit dated Februar 1%, "##9 as 'ell as ,aterial contradictions and inconsistencies affectin& his credibilit and the credibilit of his stor , there is no probable cause that could le&all 0ustif the filin& of t'o separate infor,ations for ,urder and the issuance of 'arrant of
6%
6! 65 66 67
6D
T(4 (epte,ber 17, "##9, pp1 1#!-1#5, cited p1 7, Counter-=ffidavit of (enator Panfilo )acson1 T(4 (epte,ber 1#, "##9, p1 67, cited in (enator Panfilo )acsonKs Counter- =ffidavit1 6bid, p1 D%1 6bid1 pp1 5D-611 T(4, (epte,ber 1#, "##9, pa&es !D-5#, cited in the Counter-=ffidavit dated October "6, "##9 of (enator Panfilo )acson1 6bid1
79
arrest a&ainst petitioner1 =lso, it ,ust be pointed out that the private co,plainantsK alle&ation that petitioner orchestrated the .illin& because their father opposed petitionerKs appoint,ent as Chief of the P4P is nothin& but an inference or con0ecture not supported b substantial evidence on record1 =s held in the case of Pa%l Roberts, Jr., et al. vs. The Co%rt of Appeals, et al.,AC the (upre,e Court :n 8anc declared that 7presu,ption, con0ecture, or even convincin& lo&ic9 cannot le&all 0ustif the issuance of a 'arrant of arrest 'hich ,ust be based on a specific findin& of probable cause 7in co,pliance 'ith a constitutional re<uire,ent for the protection of individual libert 19 =lso, the (upre,e Court, in the case of People vs. Ce<ar 3alve<,DG opined that the presu,ption of innocence 7is founded upon the first principle of 0ustice, and is not a ,ere for,al but a substantial part of the la'1 6t is not overco,e b ,ere suspicion or con0ectureH a probabilit that the defendant co,,itted the cri,eH nor b the fact that he had the opportunit to do so19 6n fine, there bein& no probable cause to le&all 0ustif the filin& of t'o separate infor,ations for ,urder a&ainst petitioner, consistent 'ith his constitutional ri&ht to be presu,ed innocent and in consonance 'ith e/istin& 0urisprudence, he should be relieved fro, the pain and a&on of trial1 =ptl , in the case of Salon-a vs. PaEo,71 the (upre,e Court cate&oricall declared that 7*6+t is therefore i,perative upon the fiscal or the 0ud&e as the case ,a be, to relieve the accused fro, the pain of &oin& thru a trial once it is ascertained that the evidence is insufficient to sustain a pri,a facie case or that no probable cause e/ists to for, a sufficient belief as to the &uilt of the accused19 4HEREFORE, the instant petition is GRANTED1 The Orders dated Februar !, "#1# and $ul "%, "#1# of public respondent court findin& probable cause for the issuance of 'arrants of arrest a&ainst petitioner are NULLIFIED and SET-ASIDE1 The 6nfor,ations in Cri,inal Cases 4os1 1#"7"9#5 > 1#"7"9#6 are hereb DISMISSED1 SO ORDERED1
69 7# 71
B1R1 4o1 11%9%#, 5arch 5, 19961 B1R1 4o1 157""1, 5arch "#, "##71 (upra1
80
RAMON M. 6A!O" 7R. Associate Justice 4E CONCURH
78AN 9. ENRI98E:" 7R. Associate Justice
ISAIAS P. DICDICAN Associate Justice
CERTIFICATION
Pursuant to =rticle C666, (ection 1% of the Constitution, it is hereb certified that the conclusions in the above decision 'ere reached in consultation before the case 'as assi&ned to the 'riter of the opinion of the Court1
-UAN +. ENRI+UE,, -R. =ssociate $ustice Chairperson, (pecial (i/th -ivision

Ca Ruling On Dacer Case PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Ca Ruling On Dacer Case PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Republic of the Philippines

Pr/(u01!2e#* 3333333333333333333 FEB 03, 2011

CA-G.R. SP NO. 116057 DECISION

CA-G.R. SP NO. 116057 DECISION

CA-G.R. SP NO. 116057 DECISION

CA-G.R. SP NO. 116057 DECISION

CA-G.R. SP NO. 116057 DECISION

CA-G.R. SP NO. 116057 DECISION

CA-G.R. SP NO. 116057 DECISION

CA-G.R. SP NO. 116057 DECISION

Rollo, pp1 !!#-!!91

CA-G.R. SP NO. 116057 DECISION

CA-G.R. SP NO. 116057 DECISION

CA-G.R. SP NO. 116057 DECISION

CA-G.R. SP NO. 116057 DECISION

CA-G.R. SP NO. 116057 DECISION

CA-G.R. SP NO. 116057 DECISION

CA-G.R. SP NO. 116057 DECISION

On (epte,ber 1!, "##1, after the reinvesti&ation, the -O$

CA-G.R. SP NO. 116057 DECISION

CA-G.R. SP NO. 116057 DECISION

CA-G.R. SP NO. 116057 DECISION

CA-G.R. SP NO. 116057 DECISION

(tate of Florida Countr of 8ro'ard

CA-G.R. SP NO. 116057 DECISION

CA-G.R. SP NO. 116057 DECISION

CA-G.R. SP NO. 116057 DECISION

CA-G.R. SP NO. 116057 DECISION

CA-G.R. SP NO. 116057 DECISION

CA-G.R. SP NO. 116057 DECISION

CA-G.R. SP NO. 116057 DECISION

On "! 4ove,ber "###, our father and his driver,

Rollo, pp1 9!-1#"1

CA-G.R. SP NO. 116057 DECISION

CA-G.R. SP NO. 116057 DECISION

=ffidavit dated 1% Februar "##9, par1 !, p1 11

CA-G.R. SP NO. 116057 DECISION

CA-G.R. SP NO. 116057 DECISION

*(B-+ C=R64= )1 -=C:R Affiant

*(B-+ (=864= -=C:R-R:J:( Affiant

CA-G.R. SP NO. 116057 DECISION

Rollo, pp1 !#1-!%91

CA-G.R. SP NO. 116057 DECISION

CA-G.R. SP NO. 116057 DECISION

CA-G.R. SP NO. 116057 DECISION

719 =&ain, under oath, 5ancao testified as follo's2

*@6T4:(( 5=4C=O =4(@:R64B+ =1 Once, 5aKa, on (epte,ber "7, "##71 / / / / / E1 =1

CA-G.R. SP NO. 116057 DECISION

CA-G.R. SP NO. 116057 DECISION

CA-G.R. SP NO. 116057 DECISION

CA-G.R. SP NO. 116057 DECISION

CA-G.R. SP NO. 116057 DECISION

CA-G.R. SP NO. 116057 DECISION

CA-G.R. SP NO. 116057 DECISION

Gsuall but in so,e circu,stances it is not al'a s done, / / / / / /

CA-G.R. SP NO. 116057 DECISION

E1 (o could ou conversation, 'ill ouN =1

The 'hole 6 cannot recall, (ir1 / / / / / /

CA-G.R. SP NO. 116057 DECISION

6 heard that portion, (ir1

CA-G.R. SP NO. 116057 DECISION

CA-G.R. SP NO. 116057 DECISION