DoJ reinstates criminal raps vs Chinese poachers | Inquirer News

DoJ reinstates criminal raps vs Chinese poachers

By: - Reporter / @JeromeAningINQ
/ 01:52 AM June 11, 2011

As the diplomatic row between China and the Philippines heats up, the Department of Justice yesterday reinstated criminal charges against seven Chinese fishermen caught last year fishing illegally and poaching marine wildlife in the waters of the disputed territory.

In a resolution, Justice Secretary Leila de Lima reversed a ruling dated June 29, 2010, by her predecessor, Alberto Agra, that ordered the Palawan provincial office to withdraw the charges against Huang Pu, Ho Ta, Dy Song, Seng Fa, Hu Yung, Lin Shing and Ho Sy.

The seven were on a fishing boat, the Song Song Hai 05022, that was captured by the Coast Guard on May 27, 2010, some 45 miles northwest of Balabac Island, which is in the waters of the Spratlys but well within the 200-mile exclusive economic zone claimed by the Philippines.

Article continues after this advertisement

Other fishermen and members of the crew escaped in smaller boats. The seven who were captured were brought to the provincial capital of Puerto Princesa and charged in the provincial prosecutor’s office.

FEATURED STORIES

Seized from the boat were various fishing paraphernalia used for capturing marine turtles, including bales of nets, cotton-like stuffing materials and formaldehyde. The boat was also equipped with a built-in aquarium designed to hold live marine animals for long periods, according to investigators.

Indictment reversed

Article continues after this advertisement

The prosecutor approved the charges of violations of Republic Act No. 8550, or the Philippine Fisheries Code of 1998, and RA 9147, or the Wildlife Resources Conservation and Protection Act of 2001.

Article continues after this advertisement

However, Agra reversed the indictment and ordered the charges withdrawn, saying the respondents had no criminal intent to violate Philippine laws when they were navigating in Philippine waters.

Article continues after this advertisement

Since the respondents were under the impression that they were not inside Philippine territory, they had no criminal intent to commit a violation of Philippine laws, Agra argued.

The complainants—the Department of Environment and Natural Resources, the Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources, Palawan Representative Paciano Gianan and the Palawan Council for Sustainable Development—filed a motion for reconsideration.

Article continues after this advertisement

De Lima did not state in the resolution why it took her nearly a year to act on the motion.

“Fishing inside Philippine waters is not immoral or illicit in itself and, therefore, not mala in se (wrong or evil in itself). However, it becomes illegal when it transgresses special laws and prohibitions set by the government. Fishing or utilizing our aquatic resources is allowed for as long as they follow the restrictions set by law,” De Lima said.

She said criminal intent was not necessary to come to a conclusion that RA 9147 and RA 8550 were violated by the respondents.

Tried to evade arrest

“What is important is that [the] respondents were caught fishing/poaching within our territorial waters, in violation of our laws and that when apprehended, they tried to evade arrest,” De Lima said.

The justice secretary ordered the provincial prosecutor to refile the case against the respondents if it has not been withdrawn yet, and report on the action taken within 10 days.

Your subscription could not be saved. Please try again.
Your subscription has been successful.

Subscribe to our daily newsletter

By providing an email address. I agree to the Terms of Use and acknowledge that I have read the Privacy Policy.

It is not known if the Chinese fishermen are still detained or have already been set free.

TAGS: China, Diplomacy, DoJ, poaching, Spratlys

Your subscription could not be saved. Please try again.
Your subscription has been successful.

Subscribe to our newsletter!

By providing an email address. I agree to the Terms of Use and acknowledge that I have read the Privacy Policy.

© Copyright 1997-2024 INQUIRER.net | All Rights Reserved

This is an information message

We use cookies to enhance your experience. By continuing, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn more here.