Carpio’s judicial affidavit reform

The grant of habeas corpus petition filed by a female drug suspect who had been detained for over five years without a case being filed against her in court has brought to light anew the pervading ills of our country’s criminal justice system. In the precedent-setting ruling, the seventh division of the Court of Appeals (CA) last week granted a habeas corpus petition that freed Joanne Urbina from detention after five long years of being incarcerated with no case.

The CA Seventh Division described Urbina’s incarceration as “unreasonable, intolerable and shockingly unimaginable.” The Appellate Court deplored Urbina’s being deprived of her rights for a speedy and fair trial as enshrined in our 1987 Constitution.

What comes immediately to the public’s mind is to blame the courts for the slow grind of the wheels of justice. But the judiciary – or the courts – is just one of the five pillars of the criminal justice system. The four others are law enforcement, prosecution service, penal institution, and the public or citizenry.

The five pillars must move and work together in unison and in one direction to serve the ends of justice. Any weakest link can end the life and liberty of individual or persons going through the process of the criminal justice system.

But the dire consequence of such weak criminal justice system is much worse for the national interest and the country as a whole.

As it turned out now, a prosecutor of the Department of Justice (DOJ) owned up to the woes unjustly imposed upon Urbina. Assistant State Prosecutor Gerard Gaerlan admitted his grievous lapse that nearly caused the resolution of charges against Urbina being lost forever in the bureaucratic maze.

Gaerlan received on March 26, 2008 Urbina’s records of charges for violation of the Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002. The charges included possession of illegal drugs, equipment and apparatus in making drugs. This was after he was tasked by Senior Deputy State Prosecutor Miguel Gudio to review the resolution of the Quezon City prosecutor’s office that dismissed the same charges filed against Ben Ryan Chua, who was arrested along with Urbina on Dec. 14, 2007.

Based on his timeline, the DOJ fiscal recalled resolving the case and submitting the resolution to Gudio’s office on March 28, 2008. A draft resolution was forwarded for approval of then Chief State Prosecutor Jovencito Zuño, who submitted it to DOJ Undersecretary Jose Vicente Salazar. The case was returned to Gaerlan on Nov. 25, 2010 after Salazar ordered a revision on the resolution.

Between this timeline, Gaerlan attributed losing track of this case to the transfer of his office from the DOJ annex building to the new multi-purpose building in Padre Faura, Manila. Ironically, the DOJ is just a neighbor of fellow pillars of justice. The CA is located at the nearby Orosa Street while the Supreme Court is next-door neighbor of the DOJ in Padre Faura.

“It was an oversight on my part in mishandling the case folder after it was inadvertently mixed with other folders which were already resolved and finalized,” Gaerlan swore under oath in a judicial affidavit obtained by The STAR. Gaerlan submitted his judicial affidavit to the Office of the Solicitor General (Sol-Gen) as the government lawyer for the DOJ in Urbina’s petition as acted upon by the Appellate Court.

The Sol-Gen was supposed to submit Gaerlan’s judicial affidavit to the CA. But it was of no consequence anymore since the Appellate Court already ordered last week the immediate release of Urbina from detention in Camp Crame, Quezon City.

If there is any redeeming value from this miscarriage of justice is the fact that the DOJ should realize by now the significance of using judicial affidavits to cut short rather than prolong the process being followed in our criminal justice system. The submission of judicial affidavit is one of the judicial reforms introduced by the SC during the short-lived term of Antonio Carpio as acting Chief Justice.

As the most senior associate justice, Carpio took over the helms of the SC after erstwhile Chief Justice Renato Corona was ousted from post at the end of the impeachment trial at the Senate on May 29 last year. Carpio continued as acting Chief Justice until August 25 when President Benigno “Noy” Aquino III finally appointed Ma. Lourdes Sereno as Chief Justice.

The use of judicial affidavits was among the judicial reforms that Carpio wants instituted in all court proceedings. It is now being used in all civil and commercial cases but the DOJ has yet to apply this in criminal cases. DOJ Secretary De Lima has reportedly asked the SC for another six months’ extension before the prosecution service uses judicial affidavit starting this July 1.

In simple language, Carpio explained, the judicial affidavit saves time, energy and resources for all parties concerned. Judicial affidavit helps eliminate such lapses as in Urbina’s case as this requires the lawyers of both the prosecution and defense panels to present their entire evidence and witnesses all in one fell swoop.

In this way, he pointed out, the case will not suffer even if the evidence or the witnesses, including policemen could not be located anymore. Moreover, he cited, the case can be decided by the judge right away based on the judicial affidavits as submitted to the court. More than 80 percent, or two thirds of the trial is cut short and speedy dispensation of justice is served, he stressed, thus unclogging dockets as end-result.

Incidentally, both Carpio and Sereno were among the special guests in the testimonial dinner in honor of outgoing Senator Edgardo Angara last Friday night at the National Museum. As protocol, the Chief Justice was seated at the table with Angara. Carpio was at another table beside them. The professional feud between the two justices is public knowledge in and out of the sanctum of the SC. So that should explain the seating arrangement.

It’s been years since the last time I saw Carpio when he was still the Chief Presidential Legal Counsel of former President Fidel V.Ramos. It was during those Palace days when Carpio first planted the seeds of reform in the judiciary. But it was only now that Urbina’s case dawned on me why Carpio was so impassioned that night talking about judicial affidavit reform.