SC reopens case vs exec in Princess of the Stars sinking

MANILA, Philippines — The Supreme Court reinstated the petition filed against Sulpicio Lines owner Edgar Go for criminal liability in the sinking of M/V Princess of the Stars in 2008.

In a resolution dated August 18 and released Wednesday, the high court's Second Division granted the motion for reconsideration of the families of the victims of the sea tragedy, reversing its earlier decision in support of the Court of Appeals.

Go was earlier exonerated of any criminal liability for the death of the victims, while his civil liabilities were retained.

The tribunal, however, granted the motion for reconsideration filed by the Office of the Solicitor General and the Public Attorney's Office representing the Department of Justice and the families of the victims, respectively.

"Acting on the Office of the Solicitor General's motion for reconsideration of the Resolution dated 2 July 2014 which denied the petition for review on certiorari, the Court Resolved to : Grant the motion for reconsideration," the resolution said, as cited in a state news report.

The M/V Princess of the Stars sailed for Cebu City from the Port of Manila on June 20, 2008 ferrying 849 individuals, 709 of whom were passengers, 29 contractors and 111 crew members.

It capsized in the Sibuyan Sea at 11:30 p.m. on June 21, 2008. Only 32 people survived, 227 died and 592 were reported missing.

In its recent ruling, the SC Second Division, chaired by Senior Associate Justice Antonio Carpio, directed that the petition be reinstated and ordered Go to comment on the plea within 10 days from notice.

"Reinstate the petition and require respondent to file a Consolidated Comment thereon within 10 days from notice,” the resolution said.

The SC also allowed the withdrawal of appearance of Go's legal counsel, Arthur Lim, in view of his appointment as commissioner of the Commission on Elections.

In their motion for reconsideration, the petitioners argued that "there is probable cause to indict respondent Go for the crime of Reckless Imprudence Resulting in Multiple Homicide, Physical Injuries and Damage to Properties."

They also argued that Go's failure to implead an indispensable party, such as "the people" as a party-respondent renders the Court of Appeals action as "null and void for want of authority to act.”