Upload
atescandor
View
309
Download
5
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Copy of disbarment complaint against Justice Sec. Alberto Agra filed by 12 families of the Ampatuan Massacre at the Integrated Bar of the Philippines.
Citation preview
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINESINTEGRATED BAR OF THE PHILIPPINES
PASIG CITY
CAREN F. ARANETA, JULIET PALOR EVARDO, MA. CIPRIANA GATCHALIAN, GLENNA G. LEGARTA, MARY JEAN M. MERISCO, CATHERINE NUÑEZ, NOEMI E. PARCON, MYRNA P. REBLANDO, RAMONITA S. SALAYSAY, EDITHA MIRANDILLA TIAMZON, ERLYN IDALO UMPAD, AND JOVELYN DUHAY VILLACASTIN,
Complainants,
-- versus --Case No. ______________For: Disbarment
ATTY. ALBERTO C. AGRA, Respondent.
x -------------------------------------------x
COMPLAINT FOR DISABARMENT
COMPLAINANTS CAREN F. ARANETA, JULIET PALOR EVARDO, MA.
CIPRIANA GATCHALIAN, GLENNA G. LEGARTA, MARY JEAN M.
MERISCO, CATHERINE NUÑEZ, NOEMI E. PARCON, MYRNA P. REBLANDO,
RAMONITA S. SALAYSAY, EDITHA MIRANDILLA TIAMZON, ERLYN IDALO
UMPAD (FOR AND IN BEHALF OF HER MINOR CHILD JAPHET ELDIAN UMPAD
ARRIOLA), AND JOVELYN DUHAY VILLACASTIN AS HEIRS OF THE
JOURNALISTS SLAUGHTERED IN THE 23 NOVEMBER 2009 MAGUINDANAO
MASSACRE, through counsel, and unto this Honorable Office,
respectfully state that:
PARTIES
The Complainants are:
1
1) CAREN F. ARANETA, is of legal age, Filipino citizen, and wife
of HENRY ARANETA, who worked as a journalist for DZRH in General
Santos City.
2) JULIET PALOR EVARDO, is of legal age, Filipino citizen, and
mother of JULITO EVARDO, who worked as a journalist for UNTV in
General Santos City.
3) MA. CIPRIANA GATCHALIAN, is of legal age, Filipino citizen,
and is the wife of SANTOS “JUN” P. GATCHALIAN, JR. who worked as a
journalist for Metro Gazette in Davao City.
4) GLENNA G. LEGARTA, is of legal age, Filipino citizen, and
wife of BIENVENIDO LEGARTA, who worked as a journalist for Periodico
Ini in Koronadal City.
5) MARY JEAN M. MERISCO, is of legal age, Filipino citizen, and
is the wife of REY MERISCO, who worked as a journalist for for Periodico
Ini in Koronadal City.
6) CATHERINE NUÑEZ, is of legal age, Filipino citizen, and
mother of VICTOR NUÑEZ, who worked as a journalist for UNTV in
General Santos City.
7) NOEMI E. PARCON, is of legal age, Filipino citizen, and wife
of JOEL V. PARCON, who worked as a journalist for Prontiera News in
Koronadal City.
2
8) MYRNA P. REBLANDO, is of legal age, Filipino citizen, and
wife of ALEJANDRO “Bong” M. REBLANDO, who worked as a journalist
for Manila Bulletin in General Santos City.
9) RAMONITA S. SALAYSAY, is of legal age, Filipino citizen, and
wife of NAPOLEON SALAYSAY, who worked as a journalist for Mindanao
Gazette in Cotabato City.
10) EDITHA MIRANDILLA TIAMZON, is of legal age, Filipino
citizen, and wife of DANIEL BECOLLADO TIAMZON, who worked as a
crew for UNTV in General Santos City.
11) ERLYN IDALO UMPAD, is of legal age, Filipino citizen, and
live-in partner of McDELBERT ARRIOLA, who worked as a journalist for
UNTV in General Santos City. She is filing this Complaint for and in
behalf of her minor child with McDELBERT ARRIOLA, namely JAPHET
ELDIAN UMPAD ARRIOLA.
12) JOVELYN DUHAY VILLACASTIN, is of legal age, Filipino citizen,
and sister of JHOY DUHAY, who worked as a journalist for Goldstar
Daily in Cagayan De Oro City.
13) All the Complainants may be served with pertinent papers,
processes, and notices c/o the undersigned counsel, Atty. H. Harry L.
Roque, Jr. at Unit 1904 Antel 2000 Corporate Centre, 121 Valero
Street, Salcedo Village, Makati City.
Respondent:
3
14) The lone Respondent is ATTY. ALBERTO C. AGRA, Filipino, of
legal age, a member of the Philippine bar, and currently Acting
Secretary of the Department of Justice. He may be served with
pertinent papers, processes, and notices through the Department of
Justice, Padre Faura Street, Ermita, Manila 1000.
STATEMENT OF FACTS
15) In the afternoon of 22 November 2009, according to the
Sinumpaang Salaysay of Kenny B. Dalandag, he was inside the
compound of former Maguindanao Governor Datu Andal Ampatuan Sr.
to attend a meeting. In the said occasion he saw ARMM Governor
Datu Zaldy “Puti” Ampatuan, among other people.1 (Attached as
ANNEX A is the Sinumpaang Salaysay of Kenny B. Dalandag).
16) On 23 November 2009, Buluan Vice Mayor Esmael “Toto”
Mangudadatu (hereinafter “Vice Mayor Mangudadatu”) was scheduled
to file his Certificate of Candidacy (COC) for the forthcoming May 2010
elections before the Comelec office in Shariff Aguak, Maguindanao, for
the position of Governor of Maguindanao.
17) In order to ease the tension between the Mangudadatus
and the Ampatuans, Vice Mayor Mangudadatu decided to send his
wife, two sisters, aunt and two women-lawyers in the belief that their
womanhood will be respected. According to Vice Mayor Mangudadatu,
he received reports that the Ampatuans, whom he will challenge in
the gubernatorial race in next year’s elections, had threatened to
chop him into pieces once he filed his candidacy. So Vice Mayor
Mangudadatu sent an all-woman team and journalists, the Vice Mayor
1 Based on page 3 of Kenny B. Dalandag’s Sinumpaang Salaysay dated 07 December 2009 (Attached as ANNEX A).
4
reasoning that “Under our tradition, Muslim women are being
respected. They should not be harmed just like innocent children and
the elders.”2
18) The Mangudadatu women who were in the convoy were:
(a) Bai Genalin Mangudadatu (his wife);(b) Bai Eden Mangudadatu (his sister);(c) Bai Farina Mangudadatu (his sister);(d) Bai RoComplainantsna Mangudadatu (his aunt);(e) Atty. Cynthia Oquendo-Ayon (his lawyer); and(f) Atty. Connie Brizuela (his lawyer).
19) In order to cover the supposedly landmark filing of the
COC, journalists from all over Mindanao Complainantsre invited to join
the convoy to Shariff Aguak.
20) Twelve (12) of the thirty (30) journalists who joined the
Mangudadatu convoy are the family members of Complainants.
21) Complainants learned from press reports that the convoy
of Vice Mayor Mangudadatu was composed of six (6) vehicles:
(a) 4 Toyota Grandia vans (one grey, one green, and two white); and
(b) 2 two media vehicles – a Pajero owned by DZRH broadcast journalist Henry Araneta and a Mitsubishi L-300 van owned by UNTV.
There was a seventh vehicle, a Grandia boarded by mediamen, but it
lagged behind and decided to turn around once the passengers sensed
what was happening.
2 Based on http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/inquirerheadlines/nation/view/20091126-238432/Massacre-planned-says-Buluan-vice-mayor.
5
22) Complainants also learned from press reports that there
were two (2) other vehicles that were not part of the Mangudadatu
convoy but happened to be traveling on the same highway:
(a) a red Toyota Vios; and (b) a light blue Toyota Tamaraw FX.
The Vios had five (5) passengers: Eduardo Lechonsito, a
government employee who was bound for a hospital in Cotabato City
after suffering a mild stroke Monday morning. He was with his wife
Cecille, co-workers Mercy Palabrica and Daryll delos Reyes, and driver
Wilhelm Palabrica. The FX was driven by Anthony Ridao, employee of
the National Statistics Coordination Board, and son of Cotabato City
councilor Marino Ridao.
23) Complainants learned later from radio, television, and
newspaper reports that the Mangudadatu convoy was intercepted in
Ampatuan, Maguindanao by more than a hundred (100) armed men,
and that all the persons on board the vehicles were brought to a
nearby killing field. Fifty-seven (57) women and men were brutally
murdered on the hilly portion of Sitio Masalay, Brgy. Salman,
Ampatuan, Maguindanao.
24) Of the fifty-seven (57) people murdered in the
Maguindanao massacre, twelve (12) of the murdered journalists were
the family members of Complainants. The brutally mangled bodies of
Complainants’ slain journalist-family members were recovered on the
hilly portion of Sitio Masalay, Brgy. Salman, Ampatuan, Maguindanao.
The murdered journalist-family members of Complainants are:
6
(a)HENRY ARANETA (for DZRH in General Santos City);
(b)McDELBERT ARRIOLA (for UNTV in General Santos City);
(c) JHOY DUHAY (for Goldstar Daily in Cagayan De Oro City);
(d)JULITO EVARDO (for UNTV in General Santos City);
(e)SANTOS “JUN” P. GATCHALIAN, JR. (for Metro Gazette in Davao City);
(f) BIENVENIDO LEGARTA (for Periodico Ini in Koronadal City);
(g)REY MERISCO (for Periodico Ini in Koronadal City);
(h)VICTOR NUÑEZ (for UNTV in General Santos City);
(i) JOEL V. PARCON (for Prontiera News in Koronadal City);
(j) ALEJANDRO “Bong” M. REBLANDO (for Manila Bulletin in General Santos City);
(k)NAPOLEON SALAYSAY (for Clearview Gazette in Cotabato City); and
(l) DANIEL BECOLLADO TIAMZON (for UNTV in General Santos City).
25) Complainants are related to the nine (9) murdered
journalists as follows:
(a) COMPLAINANT CAREN F. ARANETA is the wife of HENRY ARANETA (for DZRH in General Santos City);
(b) COMPLAINANT JULIET PALOR EVARDO is the mother of JULITO EVARDO (for UNTV in General Santos City);
(c) COMPLAINANT MA. CIPRIANA GATCHALIAN is the wife of SANTOS “JUN” P. GATCHALIAN, JR. (for Metro Gazette in Davao City);
(d) COMPLAINANT GLENNA G. LEGARTA is the wife of BIENVENIDO LEGARTA (for Periodico Ini in Koronadal City);
(e) COMPLAINANT MARY JEAN M. MERISCO is the wife of REY MERISCO (for Periodico Ini in Koronadal City);
(f) COMPLAINANT CATHERINE NUÑEZ is the mother of VICTOR NUÑEZ (for UNTV in General Santos City);
7
(g) COMPLAINANT NOEMI E. PARCON is the wife of JOEL V. PARCON (for Prontiera News in Koronadal City);
(h) COMPLAINANT MYRNA P. REBLANDO, is the wife of ALEJANDRO “Bong” M. REBLANDO (for Manila Bulletin in General Santos City);
(i) COMPLAINANT RAMONITA S. SALAYSAY is the wife of NAPOLEON SALAYSAY (for Mindanao Gazette in Cotabato City);
(j) COMPLAINANT EDITHA MIRANDILLA TIAMZON is the wife of DANIEL BECOLLADO TIAMZON (for UNTV in General Santos City);
(k) COMPLAINANT ERLYN IDALO UMPAD is the mother of the minor child of McDELBERT ARRIOLA (for UNTV in General Santos City); and
(l) COMPLAINANT JOVELYN DUHAY VILLACASTIN is the sister of JHOY DUHAY (for Goldstar Daily in Cagayan De Oro City).
26) Under Department of Justice (DOJ) Department Orders No.
935 and 948, a panel of investigating prosecutors was constituted as
acting provincial prosecutors of Maguindanao.
27) On 26 November 2009, Complainants learned from reports
that Datu Andal “Unsay” was arrested, subjected to inquest, and
indicted for multiple murder.
28) Complainants subsequently learned that the National
Bureau of Investigation (NBI) filed a complaint dated 26 November
2009 for abduction, multiple murder, robbery and damage to property,
against Datu Andal “Unsay” Ampatuan, Jr., which was endorsed for
inquest to the DOJ panel of investigating prosecutors. The PNP-CIDG-
CIDD likewise filed a complaint before the DOJ panel of investigating
prosecutors.
8
29) Complainants subsequently learned that on 14 December
2009, the NBI filed before the DOJ additional sworn statements, which
includes the Sinumpaang Salaysay of Kenny B. Dalandag dated 07
December 2009.
30) On 28 December 2009, Complainants filed their respective
complaint-affidavits before the DOJ panel of investigating prosecutors.
In their respective complaint-affidavits filed before the DOJ,
Complainants have clearly indicated their corresponding addresses.
(Attached as ANNEX B and series are the respective complaint-
affidavits filed before the DOJ by nine of herein Complainants).
31) In a Joint Resolution dated 05 February 2010, the DOJ
panel of investigating prosecutors found probable cause for multiple
murder against, inter alia, respondents Datu Zaldy “Puti” U. Ampatuan
(hereinafter “Datu Zaldy”), and Datu Akmad “Tato” Ampatuan Sr.
(hereinafter “Datu Akmad”). The 05 February 2010 states inter alia
that:
The confluence of events before and immediately after the commission of the offense leads us to no other inference than that respondents Andal U. Ampatuan, Sr., Datu Zaldy “Puti” U. Ampatuan, Datu Akmad “Tato” Ampatuan, Sr., Datu Norodin Ampatuan, and Datu Jimmy Ampatuan connived with the actual perpetrators. The evidence on record established that these respondents instigated the plan to ambush members of the Mangudadatu clan who were to travel to the COMELEC office in the provincial capitol of Maguindanao.3
3 Pages 61-62 of the DOJ panel of investigating prosecutors’ 05 February 2010 Joint Resolution.
9
32) Further, the 05 February 2010 Joint Resolution of the DOJ
panel of investigating prosecutors did not lend credence to the defense
of alibi of respondents Datu Zaldy, and Datu Akmad, to wit:
There was unanimity among respondents Datu Zaldy “Puti” U. Ampatuan, Datu Saudi B. Ampatuan, Datu Akmad “Tato” Ampatuan and Datu Sajid Islam U. Ampatuan in refuting the allegations against them. They asseverated defenses of denial and alibi in order to escape culpability. However, such defenses will not sway the outcome in their favor. For one, positive identification when categorical and consistent and without any ill-motive on the part of the eyewitnesses testifying on the matter prevails over alibi and denial (People vs. Barlaan, 531 SCRA 849). Alibi is the weakest defense not only because of its inherent weakness and unreliability, but also because it is easy to fabricate (People vs. Pandapatam, 521 SCRA 304). Further, alibi and denial, if not substantiated by clear and convincing evidence, are negative self-serving evidence undeserving of weight in law (People vs. Tumulak, 539 SCRA 296).4
33) On 09 February 2010, the DOJ panel of State Prosecutors
filed a “motion with leave of court to admit the amended information”
before Branch 221 of the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Quezon City, so
as to include, inter alia, Datu Zaldy, and Datu Akmad.
34) The RTC Quezon City subsequently admitted the amended
information such that, inter alia, Datu Zaldy and Datu Akmad were
included in the information before the said court.
35) On 16 April 2010, Acting Justice Secretary Atty. Alberto C.
Agra (hereinafter “Respondent Atty. Agra”) issued a Resolution
4 Page 62 of the DOJ panel of investigating prosecutors’ 05 February 2010 Joint Resolution.
10
resolving the petitions for review filed by respondents Datu Zaldy, and
Datu Akmad.
36) Respondent Atty. Agra’s 16 April 2010 Resolution excludes
from indictment Datu Zaldy and Datu Akmad for the 23 November
2009 Maguindanao massacre. The dispositive portion of Respondent
Atty. Agra’s 16 April 2010 Resolution states:
xxx The Acting Provincial Prosecutors of Maguindanao are directed to immediately file amended informations in Criminal Case Nos. Q-09-162148 to Q-09-162172, Q-09-162216 to Q-09-162231 and Q-10-162652 to Q-10-162666, all for murder, to the exclusion of respondents Datu Zaldy “Puti” U. Ampatuan and Datu Akmad “Tato” Ampatuan Sr., and to report the action taken within five (5) days from receipt hereof.5
(Attached as ANNEX C is a copy of Respondent Atty. Agra’s 16
April 2010 Resolution)
37) Further, Respondent Atty. Agra’s 16 April 2010 Resolution
tried to explain the exclusion from indictment of Datus Zaldy and
Akmad by stating that:
Thus, with regard to respondents Datu Zaldy “Puti” Ampatuan and Datu Akmad “Tato” Ampatuan Sr., their defense of alibi is inherently weak and can easily be fabricated (people vs. Carullo, 289 SCRA 481; People vs. Tulop, 289 SCRA 316; People vs. Dacoba, 289 SCRA 265). However, complainants cannot profit from the weakness of their alibi. Complainants must rely on the strength of their evidence to establish the guilt of said respondents (People vs. Ragay, 277 106). xxx 6
5 Page 13 of Atty. Agra’s 16 April 2010 Resolution (ANNEX C).6 Page 12 of Atty. Agra’s 16 April 2010 Resolution (ANNEX C).
11
38) Respondent Atty. Agra rendered his Resolution even with
the glaring irregularity that herein Complainants were never served a
copy of the petitions for review filed by Datu Zaldy and Datu Akmad.
For the blatant failure of Datu Zaldy and Datu Akmad to serve copies
of their petitions to the Complainants, Respondent Atty. Agra should
have dismissed the said petitions.
39) Respondent Atty. Agra rendered his Resolution even
without requiring and hearing the comments of the Complainants, in
gross violation of the Complainants’ Constitutional rights to due
process which demand that they be heard first before they are
deprived of their rights. It is basic and elementary for any lawyer ---
like Respondent Atty. Agra --- that a lawyer is duty-bound to first
hear the side of the other party before said lawyer can rightfully
render a resolution. It was utterly unlawful, dishonest, deceitful,
immoral, and and certainly shameless to the legal profession that
Respondent Atty. Agra proceeded to railroad his Resolution without
consideration of the Complainants’ right to be heard.
40) Further, in the Manila Times newspaper dated 20 April
2010, Respondent Atty. Agra admitted that he used a “special lane” in
exonerating Datu Zaldy and Datu Akmad of involvement in the 23
November Maguindanao massacre.7 (Attached as ANNEX D is a copy
of the pertinent portion of the 20 April 2010 edition of Manila Times).
7 Page 1 of the 20 April 2010 Manila Times (ANNEX D).
12
41) According to the 20 April 2010 edition of the Manila Times,
Respondent Atty. Agra admitted that he did not follow the regular
administrative procedure in the resolution of the case in dismissing the
charges against the two Ampatuans.8 Respondent Atty. Agra admitted
that he acted on the Resolution even if it was glaring and blatant
that the administrative precondition and requirement of the prior
approval of Chief State Prosecutor Claro Arellano had not been
complied with and given.9 The Respondent’s wanton violation of the
administrative rules of government is unlawful, dishonest,
immoral, and evinces a brazen bias to fast-track a favorable
ruling for Datu Zaldy and Datu Akmad.
42) Coupled with (a) his disregard of the rule that the petition
for review should have been dismissed for failure to serve copies of
the same to the adverse parties, (b) his violation of the Complainants’
constitutional right to due process and to be heard, and (c) his
violation of administrative procedures to comply with the precondition
of the Chief State Prosecutor’s approval of the Resolution, Respondent
Atty. Agra’s finding of the lack of probable cause against Datu Zaldy
and Datu Akmad amounts to utterly unlawful, dishonest, and deceitful
disregard of the evidence. The positive identification of Kenny B.
Dalandag --- among other evidence found and relied upon by the
panel of state prosecutors --- of all the principal accused as part of
the conspiracy and planning of the massacre amount probable
cause against Datu Zaldy and Datu Akmad. Respondent Atty. Agra
8 Page 1 of the 20 April 2010 Manila Times (ANNEX D).9 Page 1 of the 20 April 2010 Manila Times (ANNEX D).
13
violated law and jurisprudence on probable cause when he
rendered his questioned Resolution.
43) Complainants respectfully pray that Respondent Atty. Agra
be disbarred for violating his oath and duties as a lawyer and the
Code of Professional Responsibility --- among others Rule 1.01,
Rule 1.02, --- in the highly irregular manner in which he issued his 16
April 2010 Resolution.
44) Complainants respectfully pray that Respondent Atty. Agra
be disbarred for deceit, and gross misconduct in office, for the
highly irregular manner in which he issued his 16 April 2010
Resolution.
45) Complainants respectfully pray that Respondent Atty. Agra
be disbarred for rendering a 16 April 2010 Resolution that is
manifestly contrary to law and jurisprudence.
PRAYER
WHEREFORE, Complainants respectfully pray that Respondent
Atty. Alberto C. Agra be DISBARRED from the practice of law.
Other relief just and equitable under the premises are likewise
prayed for.
14
Makati City for Pasig City. April 22, 2010.
by the Counsel for Complainants:
H. HARRY L. ROQUE, JR.PTR No. 0008545/Jan 13, 2010/Makati City IBP No. 499912/Lifetime/Makati CityRoll No. 36976(Certificate of Exemption is still under process) 1904 Antel 2000 Corporate Center121 Valero Street, Salcedo VillageMakati City 1200Email: [email protected]. Nos. 887-4445/887-3894 Fax No: 887-3893
15