Calida defends proclamation voiding Trillanes amnesty

MANILA, Philippines — Solicitor General Jose Calida yesterday defended before the Supreme Court (SC) the legality of President Duterte’s Proclamation No. 572 that voided the amnesty granted to Sen. Antonio Trillanes IV.

In his 81-page comment, the top government lawyer asked the SC to dismiss for lack of merit the petition filed by Trillanes earlier this month seeking to strike down the proclamation for alleged violation of the 1987 Constitution.

Calida argued that Proclamation No. 572 is valid as it correctly voided the amnesty grant under Proclamation No. 75 issued in January 2011 during the previous administration, which he said violated fundamental law.

He claimed that Proclamation No. 75 violated Article VII, Section 19 of the Constitution, which provides that only the President may grant amnesty, since it was signed only by former defense secretary Voltaire Gazmin and not by former president Benigno Aquino III as required by law.

“The power to grant clemency is a non-delegable power and solely the President’s prerogative, which must be exercised by the President personally and exclusively,” he explained.

“Neither the DND secretary nor a special committee could grant or approve amnesty,” Calida stressed.

As stated in Proclamation No. 572, the solicitor general told the SC that Trillanes did not comply with the minimum requirements for the amnesty.

“The petitioner neither filed a sworn application nor admitted his guilt, which would have entitled him to the benefits of the amnesty proclamation,” he reiterated, adding that the senator “failed to attach a copy of his application and its annexes in his petition” and “also did not submit a copy of that application as required by the Makati regional trial court (RTC) on Dec. 16, 2010.”

“More than the requisite formal requirement, the petitioner did not at all admit his guilt. He stated repeatedly in public that he does not admit committing the crimes charged against him and that the charges are erroneous,” the comment further read.

Calida also rebutted the claims of Trillanes in his petition that the President’s order violated the constitutional grant of “shared power” between the executive and legislative branches, his rights to due process and equal protection as well as the rule on double jeopardy.

Calida argued that revocation of amnesty does not require concurrence of Congress and that the move of the Department of Justice (DOJ) to file motions before the RTC where Trillanes could raise his defense only showed that the government has not violated the senator’s right to due process.

Calida also pointed out that the rule on double jeopardy does not apply in this case since Trillanes has given his “express consent” for the previous dismissal of the coup d’etat and rebellion cases against him before the Makati RTC as a result of the amnesty.

“The dismissal of a criminal case with the express imprimatur of the accused amounts to a waiver of his constitutional prerogatives against double jeopardy as he precludes the court from proceeding to trial on the merits and rendering a judgment of conviction against him,” he explained.

The solicitor general also raised several procedural grounds in seeking dismissal of the opposition senator’s petition.

He argued that Trillanes’ petition violated the hierarchy of courts, raised questions of facts that cannot be resolved by the SC and has defective notarial and forum shopping certifications.

Calida also accused the senator of forum shopping since he sought similar reliefs both from the SC and the Makati RTC where the DOJ has pending motions seeking his arrest.

“The relief asked by the petitioner in this petition as well as in the respective comments he filed before the trial courts are essentially founded on the validity of Proclamation No. 572. The eventual resolution of the RTCs on the motions for issuance of alias warrant and hold departure order would have the effect of res judicator on the present petition and vice versa,” Calida explained.

The solicitor general filed the comment for the respondents in the case –Executive Secretary Salvador Medialdea, Defense Secretary Delfin Lorenzana, Interior Secretary Eduardo Año, Justice Secretary Menardo Guevarra, AFP chief of staff Gen. Carlito Galvez Jr. and Philippine National Police chief Director General Oscar Albayalde.

The SC decided last Sept. 11 to deny the plea of Trillanes for issuance of a temporary restraining order on the implementation of the assailed proclamation.