Former Pasig Regional Trial Court Judge Harriet Demetriou, who in 1995 convicted rapist and murderer Antonio Sanchez, said Wednesday Presidential Spokesman Salvador Panelo should resign from his post.
READ: Ex-mayor may gain freedom on ‘good conduct’
Demetriou, who sentenced Sanchez, then mayor of Calauan, Laguna to seven terms of reclusion perpetua for the 1993 rape-slay of UP student Eileen Sarmenta and killing of her friend Allan Gomez, insisted Panelo, one of Sanchez’s defense lawyers then, had a hand in the possible release of his former client.
READ: Panelo denies role in Sanchez case
“As a public official, he showed his loyalty to Sanchez and not to the country he’s supposed to serve with utmost fidelity,” Demetriou added.
In Malacañang, Panelo described Demetriou’s call for him to resign as “silly, if not absurd.”
In a statement, Panelo said: “I serve at the pleasure of the President, and as his alter ego, I will not be distraught nor derailed by any unfounded remark raised against me.
“I will instead continue to faithfully perform my duties in accordance with the law, the functions attached to my office as well as the directives given me by the President.
“At the inception of my being part of this administration, I have made it a point to provide legal advice to the President based solely on what the law provides and allows.
“It is for this reason that when the President asked for my opinion on whether Mr. Antonio Sanchez was covered by the benefit granted to inmates under Republic Act No. 10592, I categorically stated that by express provision of the law, Mr. Sanchez and those similarly situated, meaning inmates charged and convicted of heinous crimes, as well as those recidivists, habitual delinquents, and escapees, are excluded from the coverage of the law. On behalf of the Office of the President, I thereafter issued an official statement on the matter expressing such view.”
In related developments:
Senator Panfilo Lacson wondered if the alleged tara or pay off system in the Bureau of Customs had been transferred to the Bureau of Corrections following reports Sanchez could be released from prison.
“From release of smuggled goods to release of convicts. Has the Bureau of Customs “tara system” migrated to the Bureau of Corrections?” Lacson said in a Twitter post.
The senator did not mention any names but he earlier accused the office of former Customs Commissioner Nicanor Faeldon of allegedly receiving P5,000 to P10,000 in payola per container. The latter has since denied this.
Faeldon is the current director of the Bureau of Corrections which has jurisdiction over the New Bilibid Prison.
Sanchez claimed his release documents had been signed, even citing as proof that he was no longer included in Bilibid’s food rations.
Senator Juan Edgardo Angara called for the immediate review of Republic Act 10592 or the Good Conduct Time Allowance (GCTA) Law to avoid a miscarriage of justice like what almost happened with former Calauan, Mayor Antonio Sanchez.
READ: Task force to review convicts’ GCTA rules
“For someone who has been convicted of rape and murder and still continued to commit crimes while in prison, Angara noted that Sanchez should not have been considered for any reduction in his sentence,” said Angara.
He said there was something wrong with the situation where an individual under preventive imprisonment or still undergoing trial could be excluded from the GCTA but for convicted criminals, including those who committed heinous crimes like Sanchez, they are treated differently.
“It is strange that a person who is entitled to presumption of innocence (not yet convicted) will be given good conduct allowances, exempting those who are recidivist, meaning they are repeat offenders,” said Angara.
Angara was deeply affected by the reports about the impending release of Sanchez from prison, supposedly as a result of the provisions of RA 10592 because when he was still a congressman, he filed the bill that covered Section 1 of the law.
That particular section dealt only with GCTA for persons under preventive imprisonment, which excluded “recidivists, habitual delinquents, escapees and persons charged with heinous crimes” from its coverage.
When the law was passed in 2013, the Senate’s version was adopted by the House of Representatives, which expanded the scope beyond persons under preventive imprisonment.
Angara also cited a joint DOJ-DILG Uniform Manual on Time Allowances and Service of Sentence, which states that if a prisoner violates any of the listed 49 violations within a month, he/she shall not be entitled for the grant of GCTA for the said month only.
“Meaning, he would only forfeit his allowances for that month. If we are to be overly-technical, in the case of Sanchez, if he did that terrible violation of placing drugs inside the statue of the Virgin Mary, he would only forfeit (his GCTA) for that said month. For me that is totally absurd,” he said.
“That is interpreting the law totally against the spirit of the Constitution, totally against the spirit of our philosophy on penal laws,” Angara added.
“If we interpret these rules technically, he could commit all kinds of crimes, he could even kill somebody in prison and would only lose his good conduct allowances for the month. So I think, we should have some qualifiers if not in the law, then perhaps in the implementing rules,” Angara explained.
Angara said that for convicted criminals like Sanchez, it would make more sense for the law to wipe the slate clean as far as their GCTAs are concerned.
“That makes more sense but perhaps that should be enshrined to prevent any absurd interpretation. That is the purpose of laws; that is the purpose of rules; that is the purpose of institutions,” Angara said.
“As a great man once said: the life of the law is experience, it’s not logic. So experience shows that a recidivist will tend to commit repeat violations. So, someone who has been convicted of seven life sentences certainly does not deserve to lose his good conduct allowances just for one month. He deserves to lose it; he deserves to start from zero or even from negative,” he added.
Senator Nancy Binay also called on the Bureau of Corrections to be more meticulous and thorough in computing GCTA to avoid reckless errors.
According to Binay, there is a need to fully review the procedures in granting GCTAs to prisoners since the operations manual being used by BuCor, BJMP, and provincial jails may have been wrongly interpreted or implemented.
In the rules on serving successive sentences under Article 70 of the Revised Penal Code, the period of reclusion perpetua is set to a maximum of 40 years.
In RA 10592, Credits for Preventive Imprisonment (CPI) and GCTA would commute the term of imprisonment of convicts. And once these allowances are granted, they cannot be revoked.
Families of victims of heinous crimes are yet to see that justice is fully served and Binay noted the colatilla for “heinous crimes” disqualification only refers to CPIs, not to GCTAs.
READ: 'Nightmares' over Sanchez
Binay said the law should have a provision to have candidates or applicants for clemency be published in newspapers or online for the public and the families of victims to be informed of the convicts’ status.
“We need to have clear definition of terminologies and measurable indices para may legal and material basis. At kailangan din may lista ng certain crimes na qualified for clemency o sa GCTA. Kung double- or triple-life, dapat automatic na disqualified,” she explained.
RA 10592 increases GCTAs but does not define “good behavior” as applied to extremely serious crimes, and is therefore open to many interpretations.
