Supreme Court may grant De Lima bail – Lagman
Former Sen. Leila de Lima (INQUIRER FILE PHOTO)
MANILA, Philippines — It may be necessary for the Supreme Court to grant bail to former Sen. Leila de Lima after the high court itself suggested legal remedies to the Muntinlupa City Regional Trial Court’s denial of her bail petition in the third and last illegal drugs case against her.
De Lima’s lawyer, Boni Tacardon, said they are preparing to appeal the decision of Judge Romeo Buenaventura of Muntinlupa RTC Branch 256 to deny De Lima’s bail petition.
But, the day after the decision was announced, the Supreme Court issued a public statement noting that Buenaventura’s ruling merely meant that he wanted to weigh the prosecution’s evidence for purposes of bail.
“The former senator can also move for her release on bail at any time during the course of trial if she deems that the prosecution evidence being presented is weak,” the high court said in a rare statement on a pending case.
“Personally, I was surprised and, when I saw Sen. Leila de Lima, she was also surprised because it’s not every day that the public information office of the Supreme Court will come up with a media advisory over a case that is not pending with the Supreme Court,” Tacardon told reporters.
But Rep. Edcel Lagman argued that De Lima has been incarcerated for more than seven years and the two similar charges against her have already been dismissed by another court.
In a statement, Lagman said again denying bail to the former senator and justice secretary would mean that she will remain incarcerated for another nine months because Supreme Court administrator Raul Villanueva directed the Muntinlupa City Regional Trial Court to render judgment on de Lima’s case within nine months.
“It behooves the High Court, upon De Lima’s petition, to grant her bail with judicious alacrity while she waits the adjudication of her last remaining case,” Lagman said.
He pointed out that the additional nine months would extend de Lima’s detention without any conviction to seven years and two weeks, or “2,569 harsh and unjust days.”
“Each day in prison while the trial pends, is an odious and oppressive confinement, which derogates her constitutional rights to bail and speedy trial,” Lagman added.
