BURGOS V.

MACAPAGAL-ARROYO
G.R. No. 183711
22 June 2010
PONENTE: Brion, J.
PARTIES:
1.
PETITIONER: EDITA BURGOS
2.
RESPONDENTS: PRESIDENT GLORIA MACAPAGAL-ARROYO, GEN.
HERMOGENES ESPERON, JR., LT. GEN. ROMEO P. TOLENTINO, MAJ. GEN.
JUANITO GOMEZ, MAJ. GEN. DELFIN BANGIT, LT. COL. NOEL CLEMENT, LT.
COL. MELQUIADES FELICIANO, and DIRECTOR GENERAL OSCAR
CALDERON
NATURE: Petition for Review on Certiorari
PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND: Court of Appeals: Petition for the Issuance
of the Writ of Habeas Corpus
FACTS:
At around 1:00 in the afternoon of April 28, 2007, Jonas Joseph T. Burgos a
farmer advocate and a member of Kilusang Magbubukid sa Bulacan was
forcibly taken and abducted by a group of four (4) men and a woman from
the extension portion of Hapag Kainan Restaurant, located at the ground
floor of Ever Gotesco Mall, Commonwealth Avenue, Quezon City.
On April 30, 2007, the petitioner, Edita Burgos, held a press conference and
announced that her son Jonas was missing. That same day, the petitioner
sought confirmation from the guard if the person abducted was her son
Jonas. In a subsequent police investigation and Land Transportation Office
(LTO) verification, it was discovered that plate number TAB 194 was
registered to a 1991 Isuzu XLT vehicle owned by a certain Mauro B. Mudlong.
The said vehicle was seized and impounded on June 24, 2006 for
transporting timber without permit. However, in May 2007, right after Jonas
abduction was made public, it was discovered that plate number TAB 194 of
this 1991 Isuzu XLT vehicle was missing, and the engine and other spare
parts were cannibalized. The police was likewise able to generate
cartographic sketches of two of the abductors of Jonas based on its interview
of eyewitnesses.
On August 29, 2007, the Philippine National Police-Criminal Investigation and
Detection Group (PNP-CIDG) presented Emerito Lipio a.k.a. Ka Tibo/Ka Cris,
Marlon D. Manuel a.k.a. Ka Carlo, and Melissa Concepcion Reyes a.k.a. Ka
Lisa/Ramil to support the theory that elements of the New Peoples Army
(NPA) perpetrated the abduction of Jonas.
In its July 17, 2008 decision, the Court of Appeals (CA) dismissed the petition
for the Issuance of the Writ of Habeas Corpus, denied the petitioners motion

to declare the respondents in contempt; and partially granted the privilege of

the Writ of Amparo in favor of the petitioner. Essentially, the CA found that
the evidence the petitioner presented failed to establish her claimed direct
connection between the abductors of Jonas and the military. It also found
that the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) and the PNP did not fully exert
their effort in the conduct of investigation. The CA ruled that the AFP has the
burden of connecting certain loose ends regarding the identity of Ka Ramon
and the allegation that Ka Ramon is indeed Jonas in the Order of Battle. As
for the PNP-CIDG, the CA branded its investigation as rather shallow and
conducted haphazardly.
PERTINENT ISSUE: Whether or not the failure of the PNP and AFP to
conduct an exhaustive and meaningful investigation and to exercise
extraordinary diligence in the performance of their duties is a fatal to the
grant of the privilege of the Writ of Amparo.
ANSWER: Yes.
SUPREME COURT RULINGS:
ON PRIVILEGE OF THE WRIT OF AMPARO
Effect of the failure of the PNP and AFP to conduct an exhaustive
and meaningful investigation and to exercise extraordinary
diligence in the performance of their duties Considering the findings
of the CA and our review of the records of the present case, we conclude that
the PNP and the AFP have so far failed to conduct an exhaustive and
meaningful investigation into the disappearance of Jonas Burgos, and to
exercise the extraordinary diligence (in the performance of their duties) that
the Rule on the Writ of Amparo requires. Because of these investigative
shortcomings, we cannot rule on the case until a more meaningful
investigation, using extraordinary diligence, is undertaken.
DISPOSITIVE:
In disposing of the case, the Supreme Court issued the following directives:
1.

DIRECTED the Commission on Human Rights to conduct appropriate

investigative proceedings, including field investigations acting as the
Courts directly commissioned agency for purposes of the Rule on the Writ
of Amparo

2.

REQUIRE the incumbent Chiefs of the Armed Forces of the Philippines

and the Philippine National Police to make available and to provide copies,

to the Commission on Human Rights, of all documents and records in their

possession and as the Commission on Human Rights may require,
relevant to the case of Jonas Joseph T. Burgos, subject to reasonable
regulations consistent with the Constitution and existing laws;
3.

DIRECTED the PNP-CIDG and its incumbent Chief to submit to the

Commission on Human Rights the records and results of the investigation
the PNP-CIDG claimed to have forwarded to the Department of Justice,
which were not included in their previous submissions to the Commission
on Human Rights, including such records as the Commission on Human
Rights may require, pursuant to the authority granted under this
Resolution;

4.

DIRECTED the PNP-CIDG to provide direct investigative assistance to

the Commission on Human Rights as it may require, pursuant to the
authority granted under this Resolution;

5.

AUTHORIZED the Commission on Human Rights to conduct a

comprehensive and exhaustive investigation that extends to all aspects of
the case (not limited to the specific directives as outlined above), as the
extraordinary measures the case may require under the Rule on the Writ
of Amparo; and

6.

REQUIRED the Commission on Human Rights to submit to this Court a

Report with its recommendations, copy furnished the petitioner, the
incumbent Chiefs of the AFP, the PNP and the PNP-CIDG, and all the
respondents, within ninety (90) days from receipt of the Resolution.

In light of the retirement of Lt. General Alexander Yano and the reassignment
of the other respondents who have all been impleaded in their official
capacities, all subsequent resolutions and actions from the Supreme Court
were served on, and directly enforceable by, the incumbents of the
impleaded offices/units whose official action is necessary. The present
respondents shall continue to be personally impleaded for purposes of the
responsibilities and accountabilities they may have incurred during their
incumbencies.
The Supreme Court likewise affirmed the dismissal of the petitions for
Contempt and for the Issuance of a Writ of Amparo with respect to President
Gloria Macapagal -Arroyo.