MANILA, Philippines – The Quezon City judge hearing the Maguindanao massacre case is hopeful the Supreme Court’s designation of her court as a “special court” will expedite the resolution of pending pleadings.
Judge Jocelyn Solis-Reyes issued this statement Friday, the same day that the high court a petition by media groups to designate her sala, regional trial court Branch 221, as a special court that would hear only the Maguindanao case.
Reyes told reporters on Friday that the raffle exemption was “nothing new,” but hoped that the designation of her court as a “special court” “would be a big help in resolving pending motions.”
She said she had yet to receive official notice of the Supreme Court’s June 28 resolution designating Branch 221 as a “special court” exclusively for the Maguindanao massacre.
The resolution said Branch 221 was “granted full authority to resolve any matter and issue which may arise from the said cases, including issues cognizable by other special courts without need of further designation by this [Supreme] Court.”
Reyes said she has yet to see how the ruling would affect the hearings of the case which are conducted on Wednesdays and Thursdays.
When asked if the resolution would lead to more hearings, the judge replied, “I’ll have to talk to my staff first, particularly the stenographers, the interpreters, and the clerk in charge of the criminal cases, if they can handle it.”
Reyes said two judges were helping her out in the hearing of criminal and civil cases which were raffled to her branch before she got the Maguindanao massacre case.
The Supreme Court’s resolution came two weeks after it allowed live media broadcasts of the trial, with the high court’s Public Information Office live-streaming the proceedings.
The high court issued the ruling after the National Press Club (NPC) and the Alyansa ng Filipinong Mamamahayag asked that the Quezon City court be designated as a special court “to attain speedy trial of the Maguindanao massacre case.”
The petitioner told the high court that the case was moving slowly.
They added that aside from that fact, counsels of all the accused would do every legal strategy to protect the interest of their clients, including the filing of several pleadings and motions that would delay the trial of the case and add up to the case load of the court handling the massacre trial.
Both the prosecutor and the defense had listed over 200 witnesses. “The direct, cross, redirect and re-cross examination of the said witnesses for the prosecution and for the defense would really consume a lot of time.
“Unless this Honorable Court will do something to speed up the process, the trial of the said cases will definitely be a long road which will possibly take a decade to pass through,” petitioners said.
The high court said in its recent resolution noted that both the prosecution and the defense did not object to the petition filed by the media organizations.
“All parties called for the speedy disposition of the case by conducting daily marathon hearings, citing material factors such as the large number of the accused, victims and witnesses involved in the trial as compelling reasons therefore,” the high court said.