Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Zarate V Aquino III 2015
Zarate V Aquino III 2015
~upreme QI:ourt
;ffflanila
EN BANC
NOTICE
Sirs/Mesdames:
'\"~~
Notice of Resolution -2- G.R. No. 220028
November 10, 2015
RESOLUTION
Before the Court is a Petition for a Writ of Amparo and for a Writ of
Habeas Data filed by the following petitioners: Bayan Muna Party-List Rep.
Carlos Isagani Zarate (petitioner Zarate), Gabriela Women's Party Rep.
Emerenciana De Jesus (petitioner De Jesus), former Anakpawis Party-List
Rep. Rafael Mariano (petitioner Mariano), former Bayan Muna Party-List
Rep. Teodoro Casifio (petitioner Casino), Karapatan Secretary General
Cristina Palabay (petitioner Palabay), Sr. Mary Francis Afiover (petitioner
Afiover) of the Rural Missionaries of the Philippines, Rev. Irma Balaba
(petitioner Balaba) of the United Church of Christ in the Philippines,
Children's Rehabilitation Center (CRC) Executive Director Jacquiline Ruiz
(petitioner Ruiz), and the Heirs of Crispin Beltran (petitioner Heirs of
Crispin Beltran).
2
Rollo, p. 10.
Id. at 18-19.
~y
~~
Id. at 19.
4
Id.
Notice of Resolution -3- G.R. No. 220028
November 10, 2015
Certain Manobos claimed, on the other hand, that they were deceived
into going to Davao City; that, upon reaching UCCP Haran, they were
deprived of their freedom of locomotion and were held there against their
will from 3 February 2015 to 25 February 2015; that during said period they
were forced to listen to lectures and join rallies; that their repeated pleas to
go home fell on deaf ears until a fellow tribe member was found dead,
hanging lifeless on a tree, inside the UCCP Haran compound; and that it was
only then that they were allowed to go home with the body of the deceased. 5
Petitioners now aver that the inclusion of their names and photographs
in the "lists" indicates that they are and have been the subject of State
surveillance. 8 Coupled with instances of harassment in the past, attempts to
Rollo, pp. 80-101; In the Joint Affidavit-Complaint of Datu Kalumpot Dalon and Datu Laris
Landahay, as well as in the Joint Affidavit-Complaint ofLibara Angkomog, Limar Mansomoy-At,
Toto Angkomog, and Juvanie Angkomog, these Manobos averred that sometime in January 2015,
they received a letter from a Kumander Jose inviting them to go to Davao City to attend a dialogue
with President Aquino, Manny Pacquiao, and Mayor Duterte. They were told that the dialogue is
of great urgency, and that they will be away for just three days. Moreover, they were promised
free transportation, food, and accommodations, plus sacks of rice, grocery items, kitchen utensils,
and farm tools if they will attend said dialogue.
Enticed by the offer, they went to Davao City, assisted by certain persons, and were brought to
UCCP Haran. Therein, they were told that they were not allowed to go out of the compound
without permission and, in fact, the compound was with a concrete fence and a steel gate which
was padlocked. Those who had cellphones were also forced to surrender the same.
6
Id. at 51-52.
'~
7
In the list, the name is that of petitioner Mariano, but the corresponding photograph is that of the
late Beltran.
8
Rollo, p. 24.
t''('~
.
~
After a careful review of the averments of the petition and the records
of the case, we dismiss the petition.
9
Id. at 31.
10
Id. at 31-32.
II
Sec. 1, A. M. No. 07-9-12-SC.
12
577 Phil. 636, 652 (2008). ~
13
In re: Petition for the Issuance of a Writ ofAmparo in favor of Lilibeth 0. Ladaga, 13 November
2012, 685 SCRA 322, 340. /
()-1>
~~~
Notice of Resolution -5- G.R. No. 220028
November 10, 2015
Petitioner Zarate avers that his inclusion in the "lists," coupled with
his previous inclusion in the Order of Battle (OB) of the military, the filing
of two charges of serious illegal detention and violation of R. A. No. 7610
(Anti-Child Abuse Law) in connection with the detention of the Manobos in
UCCP Haran, and the fact of his being a former representative of
Bayanmuna Party-list which has been labeled by the Government, through
.,.<:~
14
Id. at 344.
15
Rollo, p. 11.
16
Id. at 12.
17
Id. at 13.
18
Id. at 31.
"<'t'
Notice of Resolution -6- G.R. No. 220028
November 10, 2015
As for petitioner De Jesus, she merely cites her status as the current
party-list representative of Gabriela Women's Party. Similarly, petitioner
Ruiz cites her position as Executive Director of the CRC.
~~
22
Id. at 262, and 286-287.
23
Id. at 252-256 and 277-281.
24
Batasan 5.
25
G. R. Nos. 210759, 211403 & 211590, 23 June 2015.
't'\')-x<\
Notice of Resolution -7- G.R. No. 220028
November 10, 2015
Petitioner Balaba, for her part, reports that after the dialogue at .the
Commission on Human Rights regarding the detention of the Manobos in
UCCP Haran, three unidentified men believed to be agents of the State went
to the Pastoral House to look for her in four different occasions; and also
that she noticed a vehicle with red plates (SLB 383) parked just six meters
away from the gate of the parsonage, with a man who was always on his
cellphone, and which left after a couple of hours.
26
27
Rollo, p. 30.
Id. at 31.
~'\~
\M/ .
Notice of Resolution -8- G.R. No. 220028
November 10, 2015
Time and again, we have held that "[t]he alleged threat to herein
petitioners' rights to life, liberty and security must be actual, and not merely
one of supposition or with the likelihood of happening."29 The writ of
amparo, being an extraordinary remedy, "[a]ccordingly, the remedy ought to
be resorted to and granted judiciously, lest the ideal sought by the Amparo
Rule be diluted and undermined by the indiscriminate filing of amparo
petitions for purposes less than the desire to secure amparo reliefs and
protection and/or on the basis of unsubstantiated allegations." 30
Let us now discuss petitioners' prayer for the writ of habeas data.
The writ of habeas data is a "remedy available to any person whose right to
privacy in life, liberty or security is violated or threatened by an unlawful act
or omission of a public official or employee, or of a private individual or
entity engaged in the gathering, collecting, or storing of data or information
regarding the person, family, home and correspondence of the aggrieved
party."31
28
In re: Petition for the Issuance of a Writ ofAmparo in favor of Lilibeth 0. Ladaga,, supra note 13
at 342.
29
Id. at 344.
30
Chairperson Siegfred B. Mison vs. Hon. Paulino Q. Gallegos and Ja Hoon Ku, supra note 25.
31
Sec. 1, A. M. No. 08-1-16-SC.
32
In re: The Petition for the Writ of Amparo and Habeas Data in favor of Noriel H. Rodriguez, 676
Phil. 84 (2011 ).
33
Sec. 16 states that: The court shall render judgment within ten (10) days from the time the petition
is submitted for decision. If the allegations in the petition are proven by substantial evidence, the
court shall enjoin the act complained of, or order the deletion, destruction, or rectification of the
erroneous data or information and grant other relevant reliefs as may be just and equitable;
otherwise, the privilege of the writ shall be denied. (Emphasis ours)
-~
Upon its finality, the judgment shall be enforced by the sheriff or any lawful officers as
may be designated by the court, justice or judge within five (5) working days. V
a-//
"t'~K
Notice of Resolution -9- G.R. No. 220028
November 10, 2015
Although the petition for a writ of habeas data may be filed by family
member, or even relatives, on behalf of the aggrieved party, 35 the Habeas
Data Rule presupposes that the aggrieved party is still alive as Section 6 of
the said Rule requires the petitioner to show how the violation of the
aggrieved party's right to privacy or threats of such violation affect the
aggrieved party's right to life, liberty or security. Given the obtaining
circumstances, petitioner Heirs of Crispin Beltran do not have the legal
standing to file the present petition.
In conclusion, let us recall the case of In re: The Petition for the Writ
of Amparo and the Writ of Habeas Data in favor of Francis Saez, 36 where
the Court recognized that "in view of the evidentiary difficulties attendant to
the filing of a petition for the privilege of the writs of amparo and habeas
data, not only direct evidence, but circumstantial evidence, indicia, and
presumptions may be considered, so long as they lead to conclusions
consistent with the admissible evidence adduced." In the present case,
however, the allegations of petitioners do not even constitute circumstantial
evidence as to justify the issuance of the extraordinary writs.
M.~~~-~
tELIPA ~. ANAMA
1
34
Rollo, p. 7.
35
Rule on the Writ of Habeas Data, A. M. No. 08-1-16-SC, Sec. 2.
36
G. R. No. 183533, 25 September 2012, 681 SCRA 678, 690.
Notice of Resolution -10- G.R. No. 220028
November 10, 2015
ATTYS. EDRE U. OLALIA, JULIAN F. OLIVA, JR., H.E. BENIGNO SIMEON C. AQUINO Ill (reg)
EPHRAIM B. CORTEZ, JOBERT I. PAHILGA, CARLOS Malacanan Palace, Manila
MONTEMAYOR, JR., MINERVA F. LOPEZ, JOSALEE
S. DEINLA and FRANK LLOYD B. TIONGSON (reg) HON. VOLTAIRE GAZMIN (reg)
National Union of Peoples' Lawyers ONO Building, Segundo Avenue
Counsel for Petitioners Camp Aguinaldo, Quezon City
3rd Floor Erythrina Building
No. 1 Maaralin corner Matatag Streets GEN. HERNANDO IRIBERRI (reg)
Central District, Quezon City MAJ. GEN. VIRGILIO A. HERNANDEZ (reg)
General Headquarters Building
ATTY. MA. CRISTINA P. YAMBOT (reg) Camp Aguinaldo, Quezon City
Co-Counsel for Petitioner Zarate
Bayan Muna National Headquarters P/DIR RICARDO MARQUEZ (reg)
#25 Victoria St. New lntramuros Village PNP General Headquarters
Brgy. Old Balara, Quezon City 1119 Camp Crame, Quezon City
PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICE (x) BRIG. GEN. HONORATO DE LOS REYES (reg)
LIBRARY SERVICES (x) General Headquarters, Camp Aguinaldo
[For uploading pursuanttoA.M. No.12-7-1-SC] Quezon City
~~