SC rules against De Lima’s petition to recall arrest

THE Supreme Court (SC) has voted 9-6 to dismiss for lack of merit detained Senator Leila M. de Lima’s petition to recall the arrest warrant issued against her by a Muntinlupa court early this year, a briefing by SC Spokesperson Theodore O. Te disclosed on Tuesday, Oct. 10.

A leading critic of President Rodrigo R. Duterte’s human-rights record, Ms. De Lima was arrested on Feb. 23, after Judge Juanito T. Guerrero of the Muntinlupa Regional Trial Court (RTC) Branch 204 issued an arrest warrant that day on the senator’s alleged violation of the Dangerous Drugs Act or Republic Act 9165.

Mr. Duterte and his allies have claimed that Ms. De Lima, as justice secretary in the previous administration, was herself involved in the drug trade at the national penitentiary. She is currently detained at the headquarters of the Philippine National Police in Camp Crame.

RTC’S JURISDICTION
The high court in its ruling said Ms. Guerrero, the respondent judge, “did not gravely abuse her discretion in finding probable cause to order the petitioner’s arrest.”

The SC said it “disagreed” with Ms. De Lima’s “assertion that respondent judge did not personally determine probable cause for the issuance of the warrant of arrest simply because the judge relied on the evidence presented during the preliminary investigation and not on the report and supporting documents submitted by the prosecution.”

“The Court noted that respondent judge considered all the evidence presented at the preliminary investigation and not simply the report and the supporting evidence the prosecution proposed to present at the trial, which was based on the evidence presented during the preliminary investigation,” it said.

“It cannot be said that the respondent judge was remiss in her duty to determine probable cause personally,” the high court added.

Lastly, the SC also ruled that, “procedurally, petitioner had violated the rule on hierarchy of courts and the prohibition against forum shopping and that her petition was also premature.”

“The Court also found that the petition was not properly executed under oath and that the certification was defective for not having subscribed to the same in the presence of the notary public.”

Also, according to the high court, the RTC and not the Sandiganbayan has jurisdiction over Ms. De Lima’s case.

“The Court did not agree with petitioner’s characterization of the offense as ‘direct bribery’ under the Revised Penal Code but maintained that the allegations in the information are sufficient to characterize the offense as a violation of the Dangerous Drugs Act (RA 9165),” Mr. Te said in his briefing.

The senator’s camp earlier argued that the case filed against Ms. De Lima constituted direct bribery and thus must be heard by the anti-graft court. But the SC said the allegations in the charges filed against the lawmaker “are sufficient to characterize the offense as a violation of the Dangerous Drugs Act.”

“For this reason, the Court pointed out that RA 9165 specified only one court with jurisdiction to try offenses under the law, the Regional Trial Court,” the high court said.

The SC also thumbed down the senator’s prayer to dismiss the illegal drug charges filed against her by the Department of Justice.

FOR AND AGAINST
Of the nine associate justices who voted against Ms. De Lima’s petition, four — Associate Justices Alexander Gesmundo, Samuel Martires, Andres Reyes, and Noel Tijam — are appointees of Mr. Duterte.

The rest are appointees of former president Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo: Lucas Bersamin, Teresita Leonardo-De Castro, Mariano del Castillo, Diosdado Peralta, and Presbitero Velasco, Jr.

Senior Associate Justice Antonio Carpio is the only appointee of Ms. Arroyo among the six justices who dissented from the main ruling — the others being Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno, and Associate Justices Estela Perlas-Bernabe, Alfredo Benjamin Caguioa, Francis Jardeleza, and Marvic Leonen, all appointees of former president Benigno S.C. Aquino III.

Before Mr. Te’s briefing on Tuesday afternoon, Solicitor-General Jose C. Calida issued a statement that said in part: “No one is above the law. This legal maxim perfectly encapsulates the 9-6 Decision of the Supreme Court dismissing the Petition of Senator Leila de Lima. This landmark case enthrones the majesty of the law which is no respecter of men and women however privileged they are.”

“Let me express my deepest gratitude to the learned Supreme Court Justices who penned the decision that will be entrenched in our jurisprudence,” Mr. Calida also said.

Malacañang for its part declined to comment further on the SC ruling on Ms. De Lima. “That is within the Supreme Court’s purview. It’s….We leave it to them to address that,” Presidential Spokesperson Ernesto C. Abella said.

In its statement, the opposition Liberal Party (LP), to which Ms. De Lima belongs, maintained that she is “innocent and is simply a victim of political persecution.” — reports by interaksyon.com, Andrea Louise E. San Juan, and Rosemarie A. Zamora.