Dacers take Ping case to SC

MANILA, Philippines - The daughters of slain publicist Salvador “Bubby” Dacer renewed their bid yesterday to hold Sen. Panfilo Lacson liable for the murders of their father and his driver Emmanuel Corbito in November 2000, this time taking the case to the Supreme Court (SC).

They also asked the High Tribunal to reverse a ruling of the Court of Appeals (CA) last month clearing Lacson in the double murder case.

In a petition for review, sisters Carina Dacer, Sabina Reyes, Emily Hungerford and Amparo Henson said that the appellate court abused its discretion when it nullified the warrant for Lacson’s arrest issued by Manila regional trial court Branch 18.

“The CA exceeded its authority in ruling there is no probable cause. It denied the prosecution and the Dacer family the fair opportunity to prosecute and prove their case in trial in violation of their right to due process of law,” Demetrio Custodio Jr., Dacers’ lawyer, said.

Petitioners said only the trial court has the power to determine existence of probable cause in a criminal case. They added that the CA also does not have the mandate to rule on the credibility of former senior superintendent Cezar Mancao II as a witness.

Custodio said that even the High Court, in a ruling, held that “an exhaustive debate on the credibility of a witness is not within the province of the determination of probable cause” and that matters that are evidentiary in nature are best examined in a full-blown trial.

“Even if you take away the statement of Mancao, there is still enough evidence to establish probable cause,” he argued.

He said the petitioners are also questioning the CA’s declaration that its ruling was already final and executory. He said the immediate lifting of the arrest warrant was “against the law on appellate procedure.”

The lawyer added that the appellate court also overrode the functions of the Department of Justice when it dismissed the double murder case the DOJ filed before the Manila court.

“Given that the information (double murder charges) were valid and there was no manifest error or arbitrariness on the part of the DOJ panel of prosecutors, it was improper for the Honorable Court to override the prosecutors by making an executive determination of probable cause and dismissing the cases against petitioner,” the Dacers’ petition read.

They also accused the CA of ignoring Lacson’s  “forum-shopping” when he sought redress from the CA even if he still had pending motions filed with a Manila court.

“When (Lacson) filed his Petition for Certiorari and Prohibition with the Honorable Court (CA), petitioner had a pending motion for reconsideration with the trial court that raised the same issues and prayed for the same reliefs as those raised and prayed for in this petition before (the CA),” the Dacers said.

Meanwhile, the DOJ has yet to decide whether to file a similar appeal of the CA ruling with the SC or to reinvestigate the case altogether.

Justice Secretary Leila de Lima said in an ambush interview yesterday she wanted to get assurance first that Lacson and other parties in the case would cooperate should she decide to order a reinvestigation instead of elevating the case to the SC.

“My direction really is reinvestigation. That is what I believe will be best for this case. But we have to make sure that it will prosper,” she explained.

She also said that her office, through the Office of the Solicitor General, would ask for an extension of today’s deadline for the filing of petition with the SC.