THE Manila Prosecutors Office formed a panel to handle the treason and inciting to sedition case filed against members of the government peace panel.
In Office Order Number 9 signed by Manila City Prosecutor Edward Togonon, members of the panel are Assistant City Prosecutor John Erick Flordeliza as chairman while his members are Assistant City Prosecutors Purificacion Baring-Tuvera and Dennis Aguila.
The panel was given 60 days to complete the preliminary investigation. Once the case is submitted for resolution, the panel has 30 days to resolve the case.
Togonon said the panel was created due to the complexity of the case involving high profile personality and the issue.
Named in the complaint are Government of the Philippines (GPH) negotiating panel chair Miriam Coronel-Ferrer, former GPH chairman Marvic Leonen who is currently an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court, GPH negotiating panel members Senen C. Bacani, Yasmin Busran-Lao, Mehol K. Sadain, former GPH panel consultant Zenonida Brosas.
Presidential Adviser on the Peace Process Teresita Quintos Deles is also included in the complaint.
Also included as respondents in the complaint are MILF negotiating panel chair and the Transition Commission Mohagher Iqbal and members Datu Michael Mastura, Maulana Alonto, Abdulla Camilian, alternate negotiating panel member Datu Antonio Kino, Transition Commission members Ibrahim Ali, Talib Abdulhamid Benito, Pedrito Eisma, Raissa Jajurie, Froilyn Mendoza, Hussein Muñoz, Akmad Sakkam, Said Shiek, Asani Tammang, Timuay Melanio Ulama and Johaira Wahab.
Complainants include Buhay Representative Jose Atienza, Abakada Representative Jonathan Dela Cruz and Atty. Jeremy Gatdula.
The House Ad Hoc Committee on the Bangsamoro Basic Law (BBL) has already approved the measure that will formalize the creation of a new political entity to replace the existing Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao (ARMM). The new measure is now known as the Basic Law for the Bangsamoro Autonomous Region.
Complainants said BBL has usurped the power of Congress to enact laws as it attributes to the Bangsamoro instead of Congress as the author, promoter of the BBL. In effect, complainants said it gives the Bangsamoro people not only the autonomy as a local unit but also its independence.
“The proposed BBL, in its entirety, promotes the eventual self-determination of the Bangsamoro political entity, which violates the sovereign of the Republic of the Philippines,” complainant lawmakers said.
Citing a Supreme Court ruling, the complainants pointed out that “no sub-group within the Philippines is entitled to self-determination. Despite this ruling, the respondents still chose to include the sovereign concept of ‘self determination’ in the BBL. Such persistence is a clear sign of intent to incite others to secede.”
Complainant lawmakers added that the asymmetric relation between the Bangsamoro Government and the National Government has caused the curtailment of the power of the executive branch of the government.
Some of the powers given to the Bangsamoro government that was supposed to be for the national government only include:
* Power to appoint
* Creation of a Bangsamoro Commission on Audit and Sharia’ah Supreme Court. The Constitution only allows one Supreme Court and one Commission on Audit.
* Allows the Bangsamoro Parliament to create provinces and cities
* Taxing powers despite absence of guidelines and limitations from Congress.
“The respondents’ strategy for inciting sedition or treason is comprehensive…The respondents also incite people to strip away the superiority of the National Government and to prevent the executive department to freely exercise its power as provided by the Constitution,” the complaint stated.
“The acts of the Respondents, in executing the Framework Agreement and in proposing the BBL also effectively aided the MILF armed forces to successfully assert their existence as a separate and independence state. Therefore, the respondents must be held liable for the crime of treason as punished under the Revised Penal Code,” the complaint added.
During Thursday’s preliminary investigation, the prosecutors gave the respondents up to July 16 to submit their counter-affidavits.