MANILA, Philippines —Justice Secretary Menardo Guevarra on Monday said that he and Solicitor General Jose Calida will discuss what the government's next move will be in its bid to have Sen. Antonio Trillanes IV arrested on cases he was facing when he was granted amnesty in 2011.
President Rodrigo Duterte's Proclamation 572 declared Trillanes' amnesty as void from the beginning.
Acting Prosecutor General Richard Anthony Fadullon transmitted the joint order of Makati Regional Trial Court Branch 148 Judge Andres Soriano dated November 22 to the Office of the Solicitor General.
“We are transmitting the Joint order for your office to consider the filing of a petition for certiorari with the higher courts within the time allowed under the Rules of Court,” Fadullon’s letter to the OSG read.
The order junked the motion for reconsideration filed by the DOJ urging it to reconsider its ruling that held that Trillanes had filed for amnesty and admitted his guilt. Soriano, on October 22, rejected the DOJ’s bid for warrant and travel ban against the senator.
The camp of Trillanes, meanwhile, urged the court to reconsider its ruling that Proclamation 572 is legal.
Both camps failed to get a nod from Soriano.
EXPLAINER: Trillanes amnesty: Two courts and two rulings that may meet at SC
“We are transmitting the Joint order for your office too consider the filing of a petition for certiorari with the higher courts within the time allowed under the Rules of Court,” Fadullon’s letter to the OSG read.
Petition for certiori not the government's only option
Guevarra, after the Court’s ruling, said: “I still have to discuss the next legal move with the solicitor general.”
It was Solicitor General Jose Calida who initiated the review of amnesty papers of Trillanes.
Guevarra, however, stressed that the DOJ is not limited to just one option.
“A petition for certiorari (grave abuse of discretion in issuing an interlocutory order) is not the only option available to the DOJ,” he said in a message to reporters.
A Petition for Certiorari, under Rule 65 of the Rules of Court, holds: “When any tribunal, board or officer exercising judicial or quasi-judicial functions has acted without or in excess its or his jurisdiction, or with grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction.”