MANILA, Philippines — The Court of Appeals has upheld the ruling of the Makati Regional Trial Court that dismissed the coup d’etat case towards former Sen. Antonio Trillanes IV.
In a 67-page choice dated May 31, the Special eleventh Division of the court docket mentioned the petition filed by the federal government by means of the Office of the Solicitor-General (OSG) was “patently unmeritorious.”
The appeals court docket scored on the inconsistency on the a part of the OSG for arguing earlier than the decrease court docket that Trillanes didn’t adjust to the situation set underneath Proclamation No. 75 in order that he might get pleasure from the advantage of a conditional amnesty.
However, upon attraction, the OSG mentioned Proclamation No. 75 issued by then President Benigno Aquino III is unconstitutional.
“This Court cannot comprehend the mental calisthenics entailed by the Janus-faced position petitioner assumed in this case. Why would it invoke the provisions of a proclamation which it would later claim to be invalid due to being unconstitutional,” the court docket mentioned.
It identified that the query of the constitutionality of the proclamation ought to have been raised earlier than the Regional Trial Court.
The appeals court docket mentioned what was delegated to the navy and the Department of National Defense (DND) was the implementation of amnesty, not the granting of amnesty itself.
The appeals court docket additionally famous that Congress had concurred with Proclamation No. 75. Trillanes’ compliance with the necessities set underneath the Proclamation didn’t want congressional concurrence.
On Duterte’s Proclamation 572
Proclamation No. 572 particularly revoked the DND Ad Hoc Committee Resolution No. 2 issued on Jan. 31, 2011, insofar as it granted amnesty to Trillanes in step with Aquino’s Proclamation No. 75.
Duterte declared “void ab initio” the grant of amnesty to Trillanes underneath Proclamation No. 75 for his supposed failure to file the official amnesty utility kind and expressly admit his guilt for the crimes he had dedicated.
The appeals court docket agreed with the ruling of Makati RTC Judge Andres Soriano that affirmed the validity of Proclamation No. 572, saying: “There is nothing in the 1987 Constitution which prohibits the President to revoke the grant of a conditional amnesty if he finds that the grantee failed to comply with the conditions thereof.”
“Proclamation No. 572 is a valid exercise by the President of his Constitutional power of control over all executive departments, bureaus, and offices. This has been succinctly defined by the Supreme Court as essentially the power to alter or modify or nullify or set aside what a subordinate officer had done in the performance of his duties and to substitute the judgment of the former with that of the latter,” the appeals court docket added.
It added that Proclamation No. 572 didn’t violate Trillanes’ proper to due course of and equal safety of the legislation as the mentioned proclamation directed the Armed Forces of the Philippines and the Philippine National Police to “employ all lawful means” to apprehend the previous senator.
On Trillanes’ compliance
The appeals court docket gave weight to the findings of the trial court docket that Trillanes had complied with all of the situations of Proclamation No. 75, notably the submitting of an official amnesty utility kind and expressly admitting his guilt for the crimes he had dedicated.
“Taking into consideration all of the evidence presented, the Court holds that the fact of private respondent’s actual filing of his application for amnesty is duly established in this case per the judicious factual findings of the public respondent,” the appeals court docket famous.
It mentioned dangerous religion couldn’t be attributed to Trillanes for failure to current the unique or no less than a replica of his utility for amnesty. The appeals court docket identified that, lamentable as it was that the doc was misplaced, seven years had handed for the reason that precise submitting was made by Trillaes.
The ruling was penned by Associate Justice Edwin Sorongon and concurred in by Associate Justices Perpetua Susan Atal-Paño and Raymond Reynold Lauigan.
“Nagpapasalamat ako sa mga Court of Appeals Justices sa pagtataguyod ng hustisya sa gitna ng mga baluktot na paggamit ni Duterte ng batas laban sa mga miyembro ng oposisyon,” Trillanes mentioned.[I thank the Court of Appeals justices for making sure that justice is served amid the Duterte administration’s twisting of the law against the opposition.]
“Nagpapasalamat din akong muli kay Judge Andres Soriano sa kanyang pagtindig para sa tama at salungat sa mga panggigipit ng Duterte administration,” he added.[Again, I thank Judge Andres Soriano for standing up for what is right despite the harassment done by the Duterte administration.]
Soriano was the identical decide who not too long ago discovered Trillanes responsible of libel for his statements that tagged former Makati Mayor Jejomar Erwin “Junjun” Binay Jr. on the bribery allegation towards the Court of Appeals justices.
Subscribe to INQUIRER PLUS to get entry to The Philippine Daily Inquirer & different 70+ titles, share as much as 5 devices, take heed to the information, obtain as early as 4am & share articles on social media. Call 896 6000.
For suggestions, complaints, or inquiries, contact us.