EDITORIAL — Recantations

All 10 suspects accused of carrying out the massacre on March 4 that left then Negros Oriental governor Roel Degamo and nine others dead at his home in Pamplona town have recanted their statements. The 10 had initially tagged as the mastermind Negros Oriental 3rd District Rep. Arnolfo Teves Jr., whose family is locked in a political feud with the Degamos.

Confessions of suspects are generally unreliable, and with the personalities linked to the massacre, the recantations should have come as no surprise to prosecutors. With all 10 accused gunmen retracting their statements, prosecutors must make sure they have material evidence to make the multiple murder case stand in court.

And if the Department of Justice believes it has caught the real perpetrators of what has been described as one of the worst cases of political violence in this country, it must prepare additional charges of perjury and obstruction of justice against anyone who is lying to protect the brains.

Late last month, accused gunmen Joven Javier, Dahniel Lora, Romel Pattaguan, Jhudiel Rivero and Rogelio Antipolo Jr. recanted their statements before the prosecution panel. On July 3, former soldiers Winrich Isturis, Joric Labrador, Benjie Rodriguez, Eulogio and John Louie Gonyong affirmed their recantations through teleconference.

Courts supposedly give little weight to retractions, especially if issued rather late in the adjudication process. Yet the retractions of multiple witnesses against former justice secretary Leila de Lima, made years after the original sworn statements were given, were accepted by the trial courts, leading to the dismissal of two of the three drug-related cases filed against her.

The retractions of the suspected gunmen in Degamo’s assassination were announced before the indictments were filed in court. Law enforcement probers and prosecutors have said they have pieces of evidence that can still pin down the gunmen and the alleged mastermind, including surveillance video footage and the recovery of guns believed used in the massacre.

These recantations in high-profile cases should impart lessons on building a case that does not overly rely on statements made by suspects and witnesses. At best, such statements must simply lead probers to material evidence that cannot be withdrawn or invalidated during trial.

While working for stronger penalties against perjury, authorities must also review procedures on interrogation and getting sworn statements from crime suspects. Statements taken through coercion, intimidation and physical or mental torture are also common in this country, and can ruin the prosecution of a case. Law enforcement agencies need guidance on the proper procedures for conducting arrest, searches, seizures and custody of evidence as well as taking down statements from suspects and witnesses. Lapses can create reasonable doubt that will lead to the dismissal of a case even against the real culprit.