MANILA, Philippines (Updated: 3:14 p.m.) — Sen. Antonio Trillanes has challenged President Rodrigo Duterte’s order to nullify the amnesty granted to him before the highest court in the land.
On Thursday, Trillanes, through his lawyer, filed a petition for certiorari, prohibition and injunction to challenge the constitutionality of Duterte’s Proclamation 572.
Related Stories
The senator sought the SC for the issuance of a halt order to enjoin government officials from “acting in their behalf and/or under their orders from implementing Proclamation 572.”
Specifically, Trillanes’ camp seeks that the court issue a temporary restraining order—as immediate relief—on the proclamation’s clause that directs the Department of Justice and Armed Forces court-martial to pursue cases against the senator and apprehend him.
Named as respondents in the petition were:
- Executive Secretary Salvador Medialdea
- Defense Secretary Delfin Lorenzana
- Interior and Local Government Secretary Eduardo Año
- Justice Secretary Menardo Guevarra
- Armed Forces of the Philippines chief of staff Carlito Galvez Jr.
- Philippine National Police chief, Director General Oscar Albayalde
After hearing and due proceedings, Trillanes’ team asks that the Proclamation 572 be declared as null and the preliminary injunction be considered as permanent.
Guevarra, also the government’s officer-in-charge while Duterte is abroad, said that a review of records showed that Trillanes failed to comply with the requirements for amnesty: to fill out the application form personally and the admission of guilt on the specific crime charged.
This claim, however, is contradicted by a video showing Trillanes filing the application form.
In a press conference at the Senate before the filing, Trillanes also showed reporters documents from the Department of National Defense supporting his claim that he did file for an amnesty.
The same proclamation made public on Tuesday, September 4, also ordered the Department of Justice and Armed Forces to arrest Trillanes.
Arguments
Trillanes’ camp asserted that Duterte and the respondents “gravely abused their discretion” when they issued Proclamation 572 that contradicts the “existing jurisprudence to the effect” of the amnesty granted to Trillanes.
They stressed that an amnesty “looks backward and abolishes and puts into oblivion the offense itself, it so overlooks and obliterates the offense with which he is charged.”
They also said that the order to apprehend Trillanes is “clearly whimsical, malicious and/or capricious” since there are no valid warrants or pending cases against Trillanes.
The camp of the senator argued that the cases against him have been dismissed back in 2011 by two Makati courts.
READ: A duel of documents: DOJ, Trillanes cite different rulings
The DOJ was blocked in seeking an arrest warrant against Trillanes as a Makati court did not immediately grant the prosecutors’ plea and instead set a hearing on September 13.
A 2011 court ruling also said that the case of coup d’etat against Trillanes was dismissed due to the amnesty, which obliterates the crime of an accused.
They also said that Proclamation 572 is unconstitutional as it orders the arrest of Trillanes “on the basis of a mere proclamation, without a valid warrant of arrest or... any pending cases.”
It also violates Trillanes’ constitutional guarantee against double jeopardy, they said.
READ: Trillanes reminds Calida, Guevarra: Duterte will not be forever president
Political harassment
Reynaldo Robles, Trillanes’ lawyer, told reporters that the senator is clearly being targeted by the administration.
Trillanes is one of the most vocal critics of Duterte.
READ: Palace: Nothing political in the nullification of Trillanes’ amnesty
The Armed Forces said that the review of the amnesty was also prompted by Solicitor General Jose Calida.
The senator has initiated and is currently heading a legislative probe into the alleged impropriety of Calida’s stock ownership of a security agency that bagged contracts with government agencies.
“Why is it ‘void from the beginning?’ The person applied. It was approved. In fact, it was implemented as all cases have been dismissed,” Robles pointed out.
Robles, however, assured that they would continue to honor the proceedings at the Makati court.
“We are going to honor the jurisdiction of the RTC by filing a reply,” he said.
He added that should a warrant be issued—even though they are confident that the case has indeed been dismissed—they will “abide by the lawful decision of the court.”