MANILA, Philippines — Eight years after the dismissal of the rebellion case filed against Senator Antonio Trillanes IV for the 2007 Manila Peninsula siege, the Makati City Regional Trial Court Branch 150 will resume trial of the case.
The case was dismissed in 2011 after the senator was given amnesty by then President Benigno Aquino III.
However, the amnesty was revoked by President Rodrigo Duterte’s Proclamation 572 due to the Senator’s alleged non-compliance with the amnesty requirements, including submission of an application form and admission of guilt.
Last Sept. 25, 2018, Makati RTC Branch 150 Judge Elmo Alameda ruled that there was “factual and legal basis” for the Proclamation No. 572 issued by President Rodrigo Duterte revoking the amnesty given to Trillanes.
READ: Makati Court revives Trillanes’ rebellion case
Trillanes then filed a motion for reconsideration, but the court dismissed it last December 2018 saying Trillanes failed to raise new issues that would warrant a reversal of its Sept. 25, 2018 order.
READ: Court sustains arrest warrant issued vs Trillanes
In its recent order made public Friday, the court set the hearing for March 20, 2019, with the prosecution’s turn to present their evidence.
“Considering that there is no more legal hindrance such as a temporary restraining order or injunction that enjoins this court from continuing with the hearing of the case, the court hereby sets the continuation of the presentation of prosecution evidence,” the court said.
Alameda’s ruling is in contrast with the order issued by Makati RTC Branch 148 Judge Andres Soriano who handles the coup d’ etat case against the Senator.
Soriano had refused to reopen the coup d’ etat case even with the revocation of amnesty given to Trillanes.
Soriano gave weight to the testimonies of officials from the Department of National Defense and the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) that Trillanes submitted a duly executed amnesty application form.
The Makati RTC Branch 148 added that with the dismissal of the coup d’etat case in 2011, the court already lost its jurisdiction once it became final and executory. /ee