MANILA, Philippines?(UPDATE 2) Several witnesses brought by the prosecution showed evidence rebellion existed in Maguindanao, in an effort to implicate members of the prominent Ampatuan clan in the plan to usurp the authority of the national government in the province, after they were linked to the massacre there last November.

First to take the witness stand at Tuesday?s resumption of hearing was Superintendent Roberto Badian, chief of the criminal investigation and detective management of the Autonomous Region of Muslim Mindanao police.

Aside from determining probable cause, Judge Vivencio Baclig of Branch 77 of the Quezon City regional trial court, will also hear the motion filed by the Ampatuans? lawyer Sigfrid Fortun seeking the deferment of a motion to transfer his clients from their detention cells in Mindanao to Metro Manila.

The accused are Maguindanao Governor Andal Ampatuan Sr., Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao Governor Zaldy Ampatuan, Anwar, Akmad, and Sajid Ampatuan.

Badian presented seven pages of photos showing padlocked municipal halls of several towns in Maguindanao, which the prosecution claimed was evidence that executive functions were halted in the province.

Photos showed a shut Maguindanao Provincial Capitol and town halls of Shariff Aguak, Datu Unsay, and Ampatuan town, among others.

Badian said these photos were taken mid-day of December 1, days before Maguindanao was placed under martial law.

He said the pictures were taken while a police convoy was headed towards the provincial police office of Maguindanao to conduct an investigation into the grisly massacre of 57 people last November 23.

?On December 1, I was with the convoy of the officer-in-charge, regional director of ARMM [Senior Superintendent Bienvenido Latag] proceeding from Parang to the Maguindanao provincial police office [based in Shariff Aguak]. When we were traversing the [highway], I noticed that several of the municipal halls and the Provincial Capitol were closed,? Badian told the court.

This, the prosecution argued, was proof that executive functions were compromised because of the massacre.

Another witness presented by the prosecution was Dante Dincong, personal secretary of Buluan Vice Mayor Ismael ?Toto? Mangudadatu.

Dincong, corroborating the testimony of Badian, told the court that when he tried to obtain a death certificate of Mangudadatu?s wife, Genalyn, he was unable to do so because the government offices were closed.

Another key witness, Lieutenant General Raymundo Ferrer was absent at the hearing. Ferrer was the designated martial law administrator when the emergency rule was imposed on the province.

Ferrer, according to the prosecution, was out of the country.

Prosecution lawyer Lamberto Fabros told the court that Ferrer was supposed to provide testimony that: there was uprising in the province; the chief executive [President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo] was deprived of her powers; that there was taking of arms; and the issuance of arrest warrants against the accused.

Meanwhile, Badian also recounted how, hours after reports of the abduction and massacre came out, he was ?amazed? that members of the Maguindanao provincial police office were unaware of the incident.

He said that on November 23, when reports of the massacre broke out on local radio, he was instructed by his superiors to investigate and head to the provincial police office.

However, when he arrived there later that day, he was surprised that even the acting director, Senior Superintendent Abusama Maguid was unaware that such an incident occurred in his area of jurisdiction.

?It was amazing that there were no reports in their office even if it was almost evening already,? Badian said.

Aside from this, Badian also told the court that a day after the massacre, he saw a ?lump? of vehicles in Shariff Aguak.

Badian described the vehicles as ?back to back? and even consisted of police and military vehicles boarded by militiamen.

Later in the hearing, there was a brief tension between the prosecution and the defense lawyers when the prosecution asked for a continuance after Ferrer failed to show up and the prosecution wanted more witnesses to take the stand.

The defense, however, objected to the prosecution?s request for a continuance, arguing that a further delay of the proceedings was a violation of the constitutional rights of the accused.

The defense also said that the prosecution?s witnesses should no longer take the witness stand after they have already executed their affidavits.

The lawyer of Zaldy Ampatuan said that delaying further the case would be detrimental to his client?s health.

Lawyer Redemberto Villanueva told the court that his client was suffering from chronic renal failure and has to be confined in a hospital for two to three days.

?Any delay will affect his health,? Villanueva told the court

The lawyers of the Ampatuans alleged that the prosecution was trying to delay the case.

?If the prosecution is sincere in not delaying this case?the accused had been detained since December 5 and we are entitled to be heard. Our clients are languishing in jail,? lawyer Sigfrid Fortun appealed before the court.

?[Granting a continuance] not only violates the rights of the accused. We ask not only for compassion but also for the Constitutional rights of the accused. The prosecution has been given ample time to prepare,? Fortun added.

?What more does the prosecution want? If they have a case, they have a case,? Fortun said.

To which the Fabros responded, ?To give impression that we are delaying proceedings is not fair.?

Finally, Baclig intervened and after a private discussion among Baclig, the defense, and the prosecution lawyers, all parties finally agreed to move the hearing to February 12 to wait for the return of Ferrer.

?We conceded in the agreement that Ferrer be the last person to speak up,? said lawyer Felipe Egargo Sr., one of the lawyers of Andal Sr.