De Lima’s arraignment deferred anew
Sen. Leila De Lima
INQUIRER FILE PHOTO/LYN RILLON
Muntinlupa Regional Trial Court Branch 205 Judge Amelia Fabros-Corpuz on Friday moved the arraignment of detained Sen. Leila de Lima and her coaccused, Jad Dera, to Nov. 24, five months after its initial schedule in June, following her motions of reconsideration on one of her illegal drug trade charges.
De Lima was charged for three complaints of illegal drug trade filed by the Department of Justice (DOJ).
On June 30, the court deferred the senator’s arraignment after she questioned the second warrant of arrest issued by Corpuz.
Legislative furlough
The Aug. 18 arraignment was rescheduled again to Sept. 25 after Corpuz granted the prosecution’s motion to reset the hearing.
Filibon Tacardon, counsel of De Lima, said they had filed two motions for reconsideration for their second motion to quash the information of her case and another for their application for legislative furlough.
Tacardon said they were asking the court for a furlough for De Lima to be able to attend the Senate hearings of the committee on public order concerning extrajudicial killings, particularly that of Kian Loyd delos Santos.
In a court order dated Sept. 18, 2017, Corpuz denied all three motions filed by De Lima: motion for reconsideration with motion to recall warrant of arrest; second motion to quash; and very urgent motion for legislative furlough.
“Being charged with a crime punishable with life imprisonment and nonbailable, and more importantly, being charged of a crime punishable by Republic Act No. 9165, or the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002—the same law involved in the Senate hearings which accused intends to attend, accused De Lima cannot be given a different treatment as that of other prisoners whose liberty is curtailed,” the order said.
Tacardon said that the case handled by Corpuz—Criminal Case No. 17-166 for violation of RA 9165 filed by the DOJ—“did not state an offense.”
Direct bribery
In their complaint, the DOJ said that Dera demanded millions of pesos and vehicles for De Lima’s senatorial run from convicted drug lord, Peter Co, at New Bilibid Prison in March 2016.
This was based on the statements of convicted drug lords during a series of hearings at the House of Representatives.
The defense had said that instead of illegal drug trade, De Lima should had been charged with direct bribery.
The Sept. 18 order, however, said “the court gives credit to the argument of prosecution that there is no direct bribery in the information.”
Instead, it maintained that the “essential elements” for De Lima to be charged with violation of RA 9165 were “present.”
