DOJ starts probe of NBI chief for kidnapping, extortion

MANILA, Philippines - The Department of Justice (DOJ) has started the preliminary investigation against dismissed National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) Director Magtanggol Gatdula and other officials of the bureau over the alleged kidnapping and extortion of an undocumented Japanese woman last year.

Prosecutor General Claro Arellano created a three-man panel of state prosecutors to immediately conduct the investigation on the formal complaint filed recently by the victim, Noriyo Ohara.

The panel composed of Assistant Prosecutors Juan Pedro Navera, Hazel Decena-Valdez and Irwin Maraya were directed to determine if there is probable cause to file charges of kidnapping and serious illegal detention against Gatdula, dismissed NBI-Security Management Division chief Mario Garcia, his executive officer Jose Odelon Cabillan, their assets Chona Elen Esplana and Virgelito Gutierrez; and Gatdula’s special assistant Raul Dimaano.

Garcia and Esplana would also undergo preliminary investigation for grave coercion, falsification and robbery, while Cabillan and Gutierrez were also facing falsification and robbery charges, respectively.

The DOJ cited the “interest of service and pursuant to the provisions of existing laws” as basis for the start of the preliminary investigation.

Arellano explained that the department is not violating an outstanding temporary restraining order (TRO) issued by the Manila Regional Trial Court (RTC) last Jan. 30 in favor of Gatdula enjoining the DOJ from conducting a preliminary investigation on the Ohara case based on the findings and recommendations of the fact-finding committee headed by Justice Undersecretary Francisco Baraan III.

He explained that the TRO does not cover the preliminary investigation stemming from Ohara’s complaint since the court order was based on the fact-finding panel report.

“The basis of this preliminary investigation is the formal complaint of Ohara. It is our duty to act on that. The TRO covers the result of fact-finding probe. Those are two different things,” he explained.

Gatdula’s lawyer Abraham Espejo assailed the order to conduct the preliminary investigation that violates the existing TRO issued by the Manila court.

“That is a glaring evidence that she (Justice Secretary Leila de Lima) is out to persecute Director Gatdula. There is a still existing TRO preventing the DOJ from conducting and yet here she is ordering a probe. They have no respect for the rule of law,” he said.

Espejo said they would question the DOJ’s action on the Ohara case before the Manila RTC.

In his petition for certiorari and prohibition filed with the Manila RTC, Gatdula also sought to declare null and void the DOJ’s fact-finding committee’s proceedings and recommendations in connection with the Ohara case.

Named respondents in his petition were Secretary De Lima, Baraan, Assistant Secretary Zabedin Asis and Quezon City Prosecutor Donald Lee.

Gatdula also asked Judge Felixberto Olalia, presiding judge of Manila RTC Branch 8, to declare Department Order Nos. 1007, s. 2011 and 047, s. 2012 as null and void for being unconstitutional and restrain the respondents from transmitting any report to other government agencies, including the Office of the Ombudsman.

He also prayed for the court to consider all evidence, whether documentary or testimonial evidence, as inadmissible in any proceedings before the court.

In its report, the panel said based on the testimony of NBI special investigator Cabillan, Gatdula “appears to have prior knowledge and participation as well as in its cover-up” in the operation to abduct and extort P6 million from Ohara.

Gatdula, a member of the Iglesia ni Cristo, earlier blamed politics for the decision of the fact-finding panel, which recommended his prosecution for kidnapping and serious illegal detention.

Earlier, De Lima ordered the fact-finding committee to review its findings insofar as the criminal culpabilities of Gatdula are concerned.

The DOJ chief said a further review is necessary to determine the extent of participation of Gatdula in the Ohara case.