SC asked to cite Marcoses, AFP in contempt for ‘shady’ burial
Photos from OACPA HPA
Former Bayan Muna Representatives Neri Colmenares and Satur Ocampo and other martial law victims on Monday asked the Supreme Court to cite the Marcos family and the military in contempt for the sneaky burial of the former dictator Ferdinand Marcos sans finality of the decision.
In a 17-page petition for contempt, the petitioners, through counsel National Union of Peoples’ Lawyers (NUPL), said that aside from a fine, they urged the high court to require the respondents to reimburse all the public funds used for the burial.
READ: Marcos family, AFP must be cited in contempt—lawyer
The petitioners also urged the high court to detain or imprison the respondents until they have satisfactorily cleansed themselves of the contemptuous act or until such further orders of the Court.
Petitioners said the conspiracy between the Marcos family and the military for the “shady” burial of Marcos only showed their lack of faith in the Supreme Court and an expression of disrespect and ridicule for the judicial process.
Respondents include Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) Chief of Staff Ricardo Visaya, Defense Secretary Delfin Lorenzana, Rear Admiral Ernesto C. Enriquez, the Deputy Chief of Staff for Reservist and Retiree Affairs of the AFP and the Grave Services Unit of the Philippine Army and the Marcos heirs.
Article continues after this advertisement“The hasty, shady and tricky Marcos burial or interment at the Libingan ng mga Bayani (LMNB) violates doctrines of law that are not only clearly established in the Philippine legal system but are also so elementary. In doing so, the Respondents could not have but acted in evident bad faith and contempt of this Court’s jurisdiction,” the petition stated.
Article continues after this advertisementPetitioners maintained that the Supreme Court decision voting to dismiss the petitions against the Marcos burial is not yet final and executory considering they have 15 days under the Rules of Court to seek a reversal of the ruling. The 15th day would fall on Nov. 26.
Finality of the judgment only becomes a fact if no motion for reconsideration has been filed.
Petitioners reminded the high court that jurisprudence has shown its displeasure with the implementation of a non-final and executory decision.
“The point is, if this Court can demand other courts’ compliance with this doctrine of law, it should also demand its own compliance with this doctrine.”
“Hence, it is very clear, that unless the Honorable Court directs its immediate execution, a decision or resolution of the Honorable Court shall only be executory upon the date of its entry in the book of judgments,” petitioners added.
Aside from Ocampo, other petitioners include Trinidad H. Repuno, Bonifacio Ilagan, Dr. Maria Carolina P. Araullo, Samahan ng mga Ex-Detainees Laban sa Detensyon at Aresto (SELDA) represented by Angelina Bisuna, Carmencita M. Florentino, Rodolfo Del Rosario, Felix C. Dalisay and Danilo M. Dela Fuente.
The petitioners urged the high court to reissue a status quo order pending finality of its decision. No action was taken regarding the motion. Marcos was buried at LNMB last Friday. RAM/rga
