The DOJ panel has given Honasan and his co-respondents until May 3 to submit their counter-affidavits and evidence to controvert the allegations against them filed by the Philippine National Police (PNP).
In his motion, Honasan told the SC that the proceedings should be held in abeyance because the high tribunal’s decision recognizing the DOJ’s jurisdiction over his case was not yet final and executory.
Honasan said he still has until May 7 to file a motion for reconsideration on the SC’s April 13 ruling and until the appeal is resolved, the DOJ’s panel of prosecutors should not have scheduled a preliminary investigation.
"The respondent investigating panel’s order dated April 23 only confirms the fears of petitioner that his preliminary investigation, arrest and detention are being railroaded. The concatenation of events illustrates beyond question the railroading of prosecution and preliminary investigation," he said.
Honasan also noted that the DOJ’s overzealousness in prosecuting him amounts to persecution.
He argued that the DOJ panel should be cited with contempt because its action upset the status quo prevailing prior to the filing of his petition with the high tribunal.
Honasan said the same thing was done by government officials in implicating him in the failed mutiny. He said even before an investigation was conducted, he had already been tagged as the brains behind the military uprising even if he helped dissuade the mutinous soldiers from employing violence.
He has also filed another motion before the DOJ to stop the panel from proceeding with the preliminary investigation hearing on May 3.
Earlier, the DOJ’s panel of prosecutors, led by Leo Dacera III, said the "final extension" was meant to give Honasan and others allegedly involved in the failed uprising the opportunity to defend themselves.
The panel had given Honasan and his co-respondents additional time "in the interest of justice" as the case was expected to be resolved even without counter-affidavits or evidence from the defense since the senator’s camp refused to acknowledge the DOJ’s jurisdiction.
The DOJ started the preliminary investigation in August last year but this was suspended when Honasan filed a petition with the high tribunal questioning the DOJ’s authority to investigate him. The senator said the case should be transferred to the Ombudsman since it involved a public official.
But the SC dismissed Honasan’s petition and ruled that the DOJ can investigate cases against public officials concurrently with the Office of the Ombudsman.
Honasan faces coup d’etat charges while his civilian co-respondents were charged with rebellion for supporting the uprising.
Whether the cases will be filed in court will be known after the preliminary investigation is concluded, the DOJ panel said.
Aside from Honasan, the PNP-Criminal Investigation and Detection Group named in its complaint Ernesto Macahiya; retired Capt. Felix Turingan; retired Cols. Romeo Lazo and Virgilio Briones of the Philippine Guardians Brotherhood Inc.; Honasan’s staff George Duldulao and Lina Reyes; and about 1,000 John and Jane Does as supporters.
Honasan allegedly led meetings with the leaders of military officers and enlisted personnel who staged the mutiny in Makati City last July 27.
Witnesses said Honasan instigated the toppling of the Arroyo administration and even had a "blood compact" with the soldiers, who also distributed pamphlets of the outgoing senator’s National Recovery Program that contained supposed solutions to corruption and abuses in government.