Prosecution witness absent anew in De Lima hearing

Sen. Leila de Lima and prosecution witness Joel Capones, (FILE PHOTOS)

MANILA, Philippines — The prosecution failed to present its witness again at the hearing in the case of the alleged drug charges filed against reelectionist Sen. Leila de Lima on Monday.

According to the senator’s lawyer Rolly Peoro, the Muntinlupa Regional Trial Court (RTC) Branch 256 allegedly received a letter from New Bilibid Prison (NBP) on Friday requesting that the witness, Joel Capones, be presented via video conference.

“The reason is security. They’re alleging that the transport entails security issues so they requested that the witness be presented via video conference,” Peoro told reporters after the supposed hearing.

He noted that previously, all witnesses were presented on-site and the defense counsel even filed a motion last year requesting that all witnesses be presented in court.

“It’s important because this is a nonbailable offense and we would like the court and us to watch the demeanor and to avoid any miscarriage of justice,” he said, adding that it was the right of the defendant to confront the witness in person.

De Lima has continued to deny the accusations against her, saying she has been detained for trumped-up drug charges since Feb. 24, 2017.

2 cases still pending

One of her three drug cases has been dismissed due to lack of evidence while the two other cases are still pending.

Meanwhile, Capones, a convicted murderer, is the commander of the Sigue Sigue Sputnik gang and a witness for the Department of Justice’s panel of prosecutors in one of De Lima’s drug cases.

The senator and her lawyers earlier filed separate criminal complaints against Capones in June 2021 for confessing in open court his participation in trading and selling of illegal drugs while serving his sentence inside NBP.

The city prosecutor ruled that the confession is insufficient evidence against Capones, a ruling, which De Lima said violated the Rules of Evidence.

She cited Rule 130 of Section 33, which indicated that “the declaration of an accused acknowledging his guilt of the offense charged, or of any offense necessarily included therein, may be given in evidence against him.”

‘Warped reasoning’

“This means that the confession could have been made in court before a judge, or anywhere else in the world in any other place outside the courtroom or in the hearing of his own trial,” De Lima said.

She also questioned the resolution that agreed to the “warped reasoning of Capones” that the admission was only good against her in the criminal case before the Muntinlupa RTC but not against Capones in any case filed against him.

“It is tantamount to grotesquely twisting the criminal justice system to favor one in order to persecute another,” De Lima said.

RELATED STORIES

De Lima: Ex-driver’s recent claims prove coercion of witnesses to testify

De Lima’s ex-driver belies transporting drug money: Remarks to Pacquiao made ‘under duress’

‘I don’t regret standing up to Duterte,’ says De Lima on 5th year in detention