Ampatuan driver to remain as gov’t witness
MANILA, Philippines—The Supreme Court affirmed the decision of the Manila City Regional Trial Court Branch 26, which ruled that the former driver of Andal Ampatuan Jr. should remain as government witness in the Maguindanao massacre case.
In a nine-page decision, the high court’s First Division through Associate Justice Lucas Bersamin dismissed the bid of Ampatuan Jr. to compel the Department of Justice (DOJ) to include as co-accused government witness Kenny Dalandag in the multiple murder case where 58 people died including over 30 journalist.
Dalandag was admitted to the government’s Witness Protection Program on Aug. 13, 2010. The Quezon City Regional Trial Court Branch 221 already included him in the list of prosecution’s witness.
On Oct. 14, 2010, Ampatuan through his counsel sent a letter to Justice Secretary Leila De Lima and Assistant Chief State Prosecutor Richard Anthony Fadullon to request the inclusion of Dalandag as accused due to his confessed participation in the massacre based on his sworn declarations to which De Lima denied.
After De Lima’s decision, Ampatuan took the case to the Manila Court which dismissed his bid. He then went straight to the Supreme Court.
However, the high court said the appeal lacks merit considering that the court does not interfere with the conduct of preliminary investigation of the Executive Department through the DOJ which will determine whether a case be filed in court or not.
The high court said it will only take action when the prosecutor commits grave abuse of discretion.
But in this case, the high court said there is none. “His [Dalandag] exclusion as an accused from the information did not at all amount to grave abuse of discretion on the part of the Panel of Prosecutors whose procedure in excluding Dalandag as an accused was far from arbitrary, capricious, whimsical or despotic.”
“The admission of Dalandag into the Witness Protection Program of the Government as a state witness since Aug. 13, 2010 was warranted by the absolute necessity of his testimony to the successful prosecution of the criminal charges,” the high court said.
It added that they can compel De Lima to act on the letter request of Ampatuan but they cannot compel De Lima to act in certain way.
