Vizconde 'shooting for the moon': In bid to have SC reverse acquittal

MANILA, Philippines - Lauro Vizconde’s chances of convincing the Supreme Court (SC) to reverse its decision last month acquitting Hubert Webb and six others previously convicted for the massacre of his wife and daughters in 1991 are very slim, a law school dean said yesterday.

Far Eastern University Faculty of Law dean Andy Bautista, who also chairs the Presidential Commission on Good Government (PCGG), said Vizconde is shooting for the moon because of the principle of double jeopardy under Article 3, Section 21 of the Constitution.

Bautista said this rule, which provides that “no person shall be twice put in jeopardy of punishment for the same offense,” was created to protect a person from endless litigation.

The law dean said he could only recall one case where the SC made an exemption to this rule: when the suspects in the double murder case of the late former senator Benigno “Ninoy” Aquino Jr. and his alleged assassin Rolando Galman were convicted even after they had been acquitted by the Sandiganbayan in 1985.

The High Court found “grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction” on the part of the anti-graft court so much so that the “acquittal” did not really terminate the case.

Bautista believes “it would be difficult” to reverse the acquittal, “Will the (SC) turn around in such a short period of time and admit that it committed another lapse in judgment?” he said.

He issued his opinion on the issue after Vizconde filed a motion for reconsideration before the SC and sought to have his case exempted from the double jeopardy rule.

Vizconde to SC: Take a second look

The widower reiterated yesterday his appeal to the High Court through a “run for justice” in front of the SC building in Manila, with his supporters, led by former Vice President Teofisto Guingona Jr.

“I’m still hoping for a reconsideration and I’m inviting our justices to take a second look in this case and hopefully after studying the points that we have raised, they’ll reconsider it (ruling),” he told reporters after the event.

His supporters, who called themselves the “People’s Movement for Justice (PMJ),” issued a manifesto denouncing the SC ruling that acquitted Webb and six other accused – Hospicio “Pyke” Fernandez, Antonio “Tony Boy” Lejano, Michael Gatchalian, Peter Estrada, Miguel “Ging” Rodriguez and Gerardo Biong.

Led by Guingona, the group said the ruling “unleashed a national flood of social anger and outrage by the people against the SC” as they appealed to the justices to “urgently uphold our people’s justice.”

SC spokesman Jose Midas Marquez said the manifesto will be given to Chief Justice Renato Corona as the magistrates resume their full-court session today after a month-long holiday recess.

Vizconde’s lawyers questioned

Also yesterday, a group of concerned citizens trooped to the Department of Justice (DOJ) and filed a complaint against Public Attorney’s Office chief Persida Rueda-Acosta and other PAO lawyers who represented Vizconde in filing his appeal before the SC.

Led by “taxpayer” Rodelio Dabalos, they questioned why Acosta and her PAO lawyers represented Vizconde, who is not an indigent litigant. They said rules of court limit PAO clients to those who have property of not more than P300,000 in their current tax declaration.

They also said Acosta violated the PAO charter when she assigned 11 lawyers to give legal aid to Vizconde when “standard practice involves only one public attorney for a qualified indigent.”

Dabalos, who denied any links to the accused, said the public attorneys also violated PAO Circular No. 18, which prohibits them from handling the prosecution of criminal cases.

The complainants alleged that there was conflict of interest of the part of Acosta in representing Vizconde since she was a relative of his slain wife and had also served as a private counsel during trial of the case from 1995 to 2000.

Asked for reaction, the PAO chief said the complaint was “a form of harassment and obviously manipulated.”

“He (Vizconde) is indigent because he has no job and he has a barangay certificate. Even if he has a house, as long as he does not have an income-generating job he is qualified in PAO,” she explained.

Acosta said they are not prosecuting the case, which is not in the appeals stage.