The Palace said Thursday that the resignation of opposition Senator Antonio Trillanes IV from the military does not undo his violations of the Articles of War while he was still in the service.
In a statement sent to the press Thursday, Presidential Spokesman Harry Roque said President Rodrigo Duterte’s Proclamation No. 572 declared Trillanes’ amnesty invalid from the very beginning.
“In view of this, the Armed Forces of the Philippines has stated that the court-martial proceedings against Senator Trillanes will continue,” he said.
“As some of you may recall, he was charged both for offenses tried before civilian courts and service-related offenses that are punished under the Articles of War. The Court Martial has continuing jurisdiction over violations of the Articles of War,” he said.
Roque also said the government wants to see Trillanes behind bars as the former Navy officer committed sedition and coup d’etat.
“That’s what the government wants to happen [to see him in jail]. Of course, that’s why we have a motion filed in Makati Regional Trial Court to bring him back to jail. There’s also a possibility that the military court will be the one to imprison him as the military tribunal has a concurrent jurisdiction,” Roque said.
“Now, he said he has an application, but in truth, there’s a certification saying they cannot find his application. Anyone can get the document and say they filed it, but the point is where is the official copy?” Roque said.
“But more than that, did he already ask for forgiveness for his crimes? He attempted coup for two times both in Oakwood and Manila Peninsula,” he said.
Roque also denied that the revocation of Trillanes’ amnesty was an act of political oppression.
Trillanes on Thursday asked the Supreme Court to stop the AFP and the Philippine National Police from re-arresting him to face prosecution for cases arising rom his unsuccessful military coups against President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo in 2003, 2006 and 2007.
In his petition, Trillanes asked the Court to issue a restraining order to stop his arrest, after President Duterte issued a proclamation revoking the amnesty granted to him in 2011 by his political ally, President Benigno Aquino IV.
President Duterte’s arch critic also asked the 15-member bench to declare as null and void Proclamation 572 for alleged violation of the Constitution.
Trillanes also submitted documents that he said would prove he met the requirements of his amnesty, particularly his formal application and express admission of guilt on the crimes charged. He did not, however, submit the actual application form that is now missing in the records of the military.
Trillanes argued that the proclamation specifically violated the constitutional grant of “shared power” between the executive and legislative branches in issuance and withdrawal of amnesty grant.
“The power to grant amnesty is not just the sole prerogative of the Executive. Under the Constitution, this power, to be validly exercised, requires concurrence of both Houses of Congress,” the opposition senator said.
He also argued that the presidential order was political harassment that violates his rights to due process and equal protection since it “singled out and specifically targeted” him, which showed the “illicit and malicious” purpose of the order.
He also argued that the proclamation violated the rule on double jeopardy since the cases against him have already been dismissed by the Makati City regional trial courts.
Trillanes’ lawyer, Reynaldo Robles, said they sought relief from the Court even when they were told that the senator might not be able to win his case since most of the justices are alleged “allies of Duterte.”
“But I don’t believe in that. I believe that the justices of the Supreme Court and the judges in the trial court would act if they see this abuse and assault on our Constitution and defend our rights,” he said.
Justice Secretary Menardo Guevarra on Thursday challenged Trillanes to appear before the Makati City court and prove his claim that he complied with all the requirements to be eligible for amnesty in 2011.
Guevarra said the issuance of an order by Presiding Judge Andres Bartolome Soriano of Makati City Regional Trial Court, Branch 148, requiring Trillanes to comment on the Department of Justice’s
motion for the issuance of a hold departure order and an arrest warrant indicates that the trial court still has jurisdiction over him, contrary to his claim that the cases against him have already been dismissed.
“The court has issued certain orders. The case has in fact been revived,” Guevarra said in a text message to reporters.
“The RTC has set a hearing on Sept. 13. He should tell that to the court. He said he will go to the Supreme Court, he [should] tell that to the SC,” Guevarra said.
Guevarra said the coup d’etat cases against Trillanes were scheduled for promulgation in 2011, but this was canceled after he was given an amnest.
Acting Prosecutor General Richard Anthony Fadullon said the dismissal of the case by former presiding judge Ma. Rita Bascos Sarabia could no longer be given weight because Trillanes’ amnesty was considered void from the start.
“Yes it was dismissed by Judge Sarabia on the premise that he applied for amnesty. But the grant of amnesty as far as Trillanes is concerned has been declared void ab initio [void from the start],” Fadullon said.
“This being the case the decision as far as it dismissed the case against him has no leg to stand on,” he added.
Fadullon said the DOJ sought Trillanes’ arrest pursuant to the President’s directive under Proclamation 572.
Earlier Thursday, Trillanes said some members of the AFP are “extremely bothered” by the President’s move to have him arrested.
“They are bothered, extremely bothered by the Commander-in-Chief who has been placing them in danger,” Trillanes said.
Asked if he thinks the AFP is in conflict with Duterte’s order, Trillanes said: “Definitely, because they know this is just political.”
He noted that the soldiers whom he talked too were “conflicted and uncomfortable” with the President’s issuance of a proclamation that revoked his amnesty.
Vice President Leni Robredo on Thursday branded the President’s move an act of political harassment against members of the opposition.
“What is alarming not only for Senator Trillanes but for all those critical, those not amenable to the policies or decisions of the government, they’re using their strength and power to silence the opposition,” Robredo told reporters after a visit to Senate Minority Leader Franklin Drilon.
Robredo said she came from a speaking engagement in a summit at the nearby PICC so she opted to go to the Senate to visit Trillanes and extend to him her support.
Opposition senators slammed Duterte for focusing on Trillanes in the middle of a rice crisis.
“The administration’s response in the middle of the rice crisis? Arrest a vocal leader of opposition,” said Senator Francis Pangilinan.
The Liberal party president noted that when rice prices go up unabated, it means 25 million Filipinos will either have one less meal a day or no meal at all.
Drilon warned that revoking the amnesty granted to Trillanes and reopening of cases against him that were already dismissed by the courts are recipes for instability.
Drilon emphasized that Presidential Proclamation No. 572 cannot just invalidate an act performed altogether by the three branches of government.
“An amnesty was granted by the executive and the amnesty was concurred in by Congress. The judiciary reviewed and deemed valid the grant of the amnesty resulting in the dismissal of cases against Senator Trillanes, et. al.,” Drilon said in an interview with ANC’s Headstart.
“The three branches of government were on the same track. All acted in unison insofar as this case is concerned. Don’t tell me that we can just void that,” Drilon said.
“To say that it can be withdrawn unilaterally by the President can put to naught all of these institutions,” he added.
The minority leader cautioned of the danger and implications if Presidential Proclamation No. 572 is sustained.
“Think of the policy implication. After the government signs a peace agreement with rebel groups, by virtue of which amnesties were granted, concurred in by Congress,” said Drilon. “Now, I don’t think
that this is a correct proposition to say that ‘we can revoke this’ because this is a recipe for instability.”