Quantcast
Article Index |Advertise | Mobile | RSS | Wireless | Newsletter | Archive | Corrections | Syndication | Contact us | About Us| Services
 
  Breaking News :    
Advertisement
Parol Lantern Parade
Sta Lucia Realty

INQUIRER ALERT
Get the free INQUIRER newsletter
Enter your email address:

 
Top Stories Type Size: (+) (-)
You are here: Home > News > Top Stories

  ARTICLE SERVICES      
     Reprint this article     Print this article  
    Send as an e-mail     Send Feedback  
    Post a comment   Share  

  RELATED STORIES  




imns



2 suspects in drug case file habeas plea

By Tetch Torres
INQUIRER.net
First Posted 15:28:00 01/06/2009

Filed Under: PDEA-DOJ bribery issue

MANILA, Philippines – (UPDATE) A petition for habeas corpus has been filed before the Court of Appeals seeking the release of two of three suspects in a controversial drug case.

Lawyer Felixberto Verano, counsel for Joseph Tecson and Richard Brodett, said they resorted to the Court of Appeals “because nothing was happening at the DOJ [Department of Justice]. The DOJ is not acting on it [the order of release].

In a 10-page petition, Verano told the appeals court that Brodett and Tecson should be released because the Department of Justice (DOJ) dismissed the drugs case against the two last Dec. 2, 2008.

"But despite the express mandate, PDEA vehemently refused to comply and it even argued that it cannot release the subjects because of the existence of a department circular which requires the automatic review by the Secretary Justice," Verano said.

The Department Circular No. 46 refers to the automatic review of dismissed cases involving violation of the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002.

But Verano maintained that the circular itself did not contain any provision about the continuous detention of suspects even when the case was under review.

"As there is no express law or even an express declaration in the said Department Circular No. 46 authorizing the continuous detention of the subjects, they should be released during the automatic review. At present, there is no charge against the subjects. PDEA, therefore, has no reason to deprive the subjects of their liberty," he said.

Verano also pointed to the Constitution, which provides that "no person shall be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law, nor shall any person be denied of the equal protection of the laws."



Copyright 2009 INQUIRER.net. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.



Share

RELATED STORIES:

OTHER STORIES:



  ^ Back to top

© Copyright 2001-2009 INQUIRER.net, An INQUIRER Company

The INQUIRER Network: HOME | NEWS | SPORTS | SHOWBIZ & STYLE | TECHNOLOGY | BUSINESS | OPINION | GLOBAL NATION | Site Map
Services: Advertise | Buy Content | Wireless | Newsletter | Low Graphics | Search / Archive | Article Index | Contact us
The INQUIRER Company: About the Inquirer | User Agreement | Link Policy | Privacy Policy

Advertisement
Megaworld
Filinvest
Property Guide
Inquirer Blogs