Palace fears Gloria Arroyo, others next

Abide by Rules of Court

Asked if there was a need to clarify bail rules for prosecutors in the wake of the Supreme Court ruling, De Lima said: “[M]y only guidance to our trial prosecutors at this point is to abide by what the Constitution and the Rules of Court truly mandate on the matter of bail, both with respect to the instances when the grant of bail is a matter of right and when it is discretionary.”

Under the Constitution, bail is allowed for all people except those charged with no-bail offenses “when evidence of guilt is strong.”

De Lima said the Supreme Court ruling could open “the floodgates to similar petitions for bail based on humanitarian grounds.”

“There are indeed hundreds, if not thousands, of detainees of advanced age and failing health,” De Lima said.

National Union of Peoples’ Lawyers (NUPL) secretary general Edre Olalia cited the example of Wilma Tiamzon and Sharon Cabusao, both detained at Camp Crame.

Tiamzon, a 62-year-old communist leader on trial for illegal possession of firearms and explosives in Cebu and multiple murder in Manila along with her husband, Benito Tiamzon, has vertebral artery syndrome and spondylolisthesis, Olalia said.

Cabusao, 52, former public information officer of the women’s group Gabriela, is known to be suffering from leukemia, thyroid and blood-related diseases, and is in need of “regular monitoring, exercise and special diet,” he said.

To test SC ruling

The NUPL, a group of human rights lawyers, is planning to test the Supreme Court ruling by filing a petition for bail for political detainees and other detainees who are old and sick.

Without saying Malacañang was supportive of the NUPL plan, Valte said the Supreme Court decision was now established doctrine.

“Unless they overturn themselves,” Valte said, referring to the justices. “But, of course, the assumption is because it has been issued as doctrine, then others are free to use it in their pleadings, in their cases, and to use it also as part of their pleadings in appealing for their clients and that should apply. Because it’s doctrine, [it] should apply equally across all demographics, regardless of political or social status. That is the assumption, unless the Supreme Court clarifies otherwise.”

Valte noted that the Supreme Court did not say the decision was sui generis, or a class of its own, and therefore its application to other petitioners who would use it would be limited.

Asked if the ruling contravened the Aquino administration’s reform program, Valte said it was too early to tell.

“Let’s see if this issue on a new doctrine of bail based on humanitarian consideration would be settled with finality,” she said, adding that legal remedies were available to the government.

‘Banana republic’

Decrying the ruling on Friday, De Lima said the special bail grant for Enrile was a step back to having a “banana republic” judicial system.

Explaining her choice of words yesterday, De Lima said her reference meant “a weak state as compared to a strong modernized state based on the rule of law.”

“We have come a long way from the era of a dictatorship establishing a modern rules-based society only to be set back by a decision that is based on unwarranted discretion even when there are existing legal standards that should have made the court ruling canonical, brute and banal, in the words of Justice Leonen,” she said.

“The decision sets us back to a state of backwardness as contraposed to one of modernity. Modernization of our society and all societies in this day and age depends on the rule of law and equal protection of the laws, where everybody is treated by our legal and justice system equally without regard to title, position or wealth in society,” she added.

RELATED STORIES

Aquino wants SC ruling on Enrile bail studied

Enrile’s poor health, old age justify his release on bail–SC