Republic of the Philippines - Campaign
Republic of the Philippines - Campaign
Republic of the Philippines - Campaign
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
APPELLANTS’ BRIEF<br />
People <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Philippines</strong> vs. Fortuna, et. al.<br />
S. C. G. R. No. 141660-64<br />
In <strong>the</strong> case at bar, <strong>the</strong>re was o<strong>the</strong>r evidence indicative <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> truthfulness <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />
ABB’s repeated and consistent claims <strong>of</strong> responsibility for <strong>the</strong> Abadilla killing, such as<br />
those already outlined above. Any fair and impartial tribunal would not have missed it.<br />
But <strong>the</strong> trial court had its “eyes wide shut.”<br />
It allowed “technical procedure, unreasoned rules <strong>of</strong> evidence… to overcome <strong>the</strong><br />
truth” when it ruled that “The requisites on <strong>the</strong> applicability <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> rule on declaration<br />
against interest, as an exception to <strong>the</strong> hearsay rule, were not convincingly shown before<br />
this court as being present in such alleged press statements <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> ABB.” The January<br />
26, 2000 hearing, revealed that <strong>the</strong> trial court was referring to <strong>the</strong> requirement <strong>of</strong> “unable<br />
to testify”, i.e. ABB leaders or spokespersons were not unable but only unwilling to<br />
testify. (TSN, 1/26/03, 14-16)<br />
But <strong>the</strong> reason <strong>of</strong> unwillingness is practically tantamount to inability in <strong>the</strong> face <strong>of</strong><br />
what may be likened to <strong>the</strong> justifying circumstance <strong>of</strong> “avoidance <strong>of</strong> greater evil”<br />
(Revised Penal Code, Art. 11[4]) – in this case an ABB leader or member who takes <strong>the</strong><br />
witness stand to claim command or direct responsibility for <strong>the</strong> murder <strong>of</strong> Col. Abadilla<br />
faces <strong>the</strong> very real risk <strong>of</strong> lethal retaliation from friends and supporters <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> late<br />
Colonel, as well as that <strong>of</strong> arrest, detention, prosecution, conviction, imprisonment and<br />
execution under <strong>the</strong> criminal justice system. It is a matter <strong>of</strong> self-preservation,<br />
considered a supreme law <strong>of</strong> necessity. If “avoidance <strong>of</strong> greater evil” can justify an act<br />
which would o<strong>the</strong>rwise be felony, including grave ones, <strong>the</strong>n with more reason can it<br />
justify <strong>the</strong> omission <strong>of</strong> not taking <strong>the</strong> witness stand.<br />
The trial court <strong>the</strong>n reversed <strong>the</strong> proper order <strong>of</strong> things when it stated “While <strong>the</strong><br />
records do not indicate that accused were ABB operatives, <strong>the</strong> same records do not bear<br />
that <strong>the</strong>y are not.” The trial court imposed on <strong>the</strong> accused <strong>the</strong> burden <strong>of</strong> proving that <strong>the</strong>y<br />
were not ABB operatives! In <strong>the</strong> first place, <strong>the</strong> accused were not charged with a<br />
political <strong>of</strong>fense such as rebellion, which would have favored <strong>the</strong>m. But <strong>the</strong> truth <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />
matter is that <strong>the</strong>y were/are not rebels.<br />
Page 116 <strong>of</strong> 127<br />
116