Leila appeals for release

MANILA, Philippines — Detained Sen. Leila de Lima appealed yesterday to the Supreme Court (SC) to reconsider its earlier decision dismissing her petition to nullify the arrest warrant issued in connection with what she said were “trumped-up” illegal drug charges the government had filed against her.

In her 24-page motion for reconsideration, De Lima said the SC should immediately rectify the continuing grave injustice committed against her because the majority of its members cannot even agree on the nature and cause of action against her.

“The absence of a majority on the nature of the charges against Petitioner is the clearest possible indicator – coming from the Supreme Court itself – that the accusation ‘is blatantly a pure invention’ and ‘a fake charge,’ to borrow from Justice Carpio. This is an institutional admission of the gravest consequence,” the senator said, referring to the dissenting opinion of Senior Associate Justice Antonio Carpio. 

“If the members of the majority could not even agree on the nature of the accusation reflected in the Information (drug charges), such fact is an objective indicator that respondent judge could not possibly have had probable cause to issue the warrant of arrest against Petitioner,” she said.

The SC last Oct. 10 voted 9-6 in dismissing De Lima’s petition to nullify the arrest warrant issued against her by Muntinlupa Regional Trial Court Branch 204 for the charge of illegal drug trade allegedly committed at the New Bilibid Prison when she was justice secretary.

Many observed the SC ruling is “one of the grossest injustices,” borrowing the words of Carpio who, along with Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno, Associate Justices Marvic Leonen, Francis Jardeleza, Alfredo Caguioa and Estela Perlas-Bernabe, dissented from the high court’s majority decision.     

De Lima explained that five of the nine justices who voted to dismiss her petition maintained the crime charged against her is “illegal drug trading,” while three other justices asserted it is the crime of “conspiracy to commit drug trading.”

She said if at least three of the nine justices constituting the majority that voted against her petition believe the charges are for “conspiracy to commit drug trading,” then it only follows they must have concluded that respondent Judge Juanita Guerrero of RTC Branch 204 issued a warrant of arrest for an entirely different, and wrong, case. 

To keep her in continued pre-trial detention is patent abuse of judicial authority, De Lima added. 

In De Lima’s Summation of Votes, Justices Presbitero Velasco Jr., Lucas Bersamin, Samuel Martires, Andres Reyes Jr. and Alexander Gesmundo agreed the charge was for the “crime of illegal drug trading,” which is the original accusation of the Department of Justice (DOJ).

On the other hand, Associate Justices Teresita Leonardo-de Castro, Noel Tijam and Diosdado Peralta argued for the “crime of conspiracy to commit drug trading,” which is the subsequent formulation of the Office of the Solicitor General.

“We, therefore, face a situation where the DOJ originally charged Petitioner with Trading in Illegal Drugs, which charge was later ‘re-angled’ into Conspiracy to Commit Drug Trading, which in turn is incompatible with the ponente’s (and four other Members’) understanding of the Information, which they believe charges Trading in Illegal Drugs. This is a circus only madmen can enjoy,” De Lima said.

De Lima also pointed out that Associate Justice Mariano del Castillo is confused as to whether the charge is “illegal drug trading” or “conspiracy to commit drug trading” as he changed his mind from one to the other in a matter of four paragraphs.

“Bluntly put, in the absence of a majority to sustain the validity of the Information, Petitioner is entitled to an immediate release from pre-trial detention as a matter of right,” she said.

She reiterated her appeal to the SC to seize the “opportunity to rectify the injustice” committed against her for her continued “reckless and impulsive prosecution” which she has suffered for the past 253 days in detention.

She said she is a lawyer, a lawmaker and a human rights defender “who is vigilant of her rights, who fights for her liberty and freedom not otherwise available to those who cower in fear and subjection, otherwise, the opportunity to rectify the injustice might have never even arisen.” 

She warned that failure to remedy what she believes was injustice “will go down in history as a tragically novel case where the Supreme Court – the last bastion of the Rule of Law – stood aside and willingly allowed a citizen, a human rights lawyer and a dissenter to be incarcerated under charges that are demonstrably false based on the opinions of the members of the Honorable Court.”

She also maintained that the SC should not allow itself to become an instrument of injustice by allowing the proceedings that are undeniably political persecution and abuse of governmental power.

De Lima pointed out that she has complained all throughout the proceedings about the undeniable political persecution and abuse of government power attendant in her case.

She said she has reasonable grounds to worry about the SC itself being an instrument of injustice of which she speaks.

“Everyone (believes that it is) unfair to be held for 253 days on charges that nobody understands, not even members of the Supreme Court,” De Lima said.

De Lima claimed that she is entitled to immediate release and the charges against her should be reviewed.

“At the most basic level, nobody can say there was probable cause for the issuance of the warrant of arrest because a judge can only issue such for a specific charge,” she said.

De Lima said while charges were filed against her, solid evidence that proved her alleged drug transactions was not presented.  – Ghio Ong