SC affirms validity of UP Tribunal’s prelim inquiry vs 13 students in 2007 fatal hazing
MANILA, Philippines — The Supreme Court, through its second division, has upheld the validity of the preliminary inquiry of the University of the Philippines Student Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) in a 2007 fatal hazing case.
The SC dismissed the petition for review on certiorari filed by Ariel Paolo Ante that assailed the September 27, 2016 Resolution of the Court of Appeals where it reversed and set aside the November 19, 2009 Decision of the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Quezon City, Branch 83 nullifying the proceedings of SDT.
Four members of Sigma Rho fraternity, who were allegedly involved in the fatal hazing of Cris Anthony Mendez, were seeking to nullify the proceedings of the SDT.
The parties were debating over the phrase “by any member of the SDT” of the university’s Rules Governing Fraternities, which states that “No member or officer of a fraternity, sorority or student organization shall be formally charged before the SDT unless a preliminary inquiry has been conducted by any member of the SDT, which must be finished not later than five working days from the date of filing of the complaint.”
Petitioner Ante argued that the SDT violated the provision. He reportedly theorized that the preliminary inquiry was done by the University Prosecutor instead of the SDT, and the investigation was only done before the SDT.
The Regional Trial Court of Quezon City earlier nullified SDT proceedings but it was later set aside by the Court of Appeals, saying “the preliminary inquiries were validly conducted by the members of the Student Disciplinary Tribunal.”
SC ruling
The Supreme Court also affirmed the validity of the the proceedings of the SDT.
“Ante suggests that the terms ‘by’ and ‘before’ are mutually opposed; that one necessarily negates the other — they are not and do not,” the country’s highest court promulgated in its March 24 decision.
“As correctly held by the CA, simply because SDT stated in the formal charges that the preliminary inquiries were conducted ‘before’ them, does not mean that they themselves did not conduct nor participate in the same.”
The court also ruled that the SDT provided Ante and those involved a fair due process, contrary to his claims.
Associate Justice Ramon Paul Hernando penned the ruling, with concurrences from then-Senior Associate Justice Estela Perlas-Bernabe and Associate Justices Rodil Zalameda, Ricardo Rosario and Jose Midas Marquez. — Kaycee Valmonte with Kristine Joy Patag
- Latest
- Trending
