Purisima, Napeñas charged in Mamasapano massacre

On the eve of the second anniversary of the Mamasapano debacle, state prosecutors filed charges in the Sandiganbayan against two top Philippine National Police officials who allegedly bypassed the chain of command in planning the botched operation.

Dismissed PNP Director General Alan Purisima and retired Special Action Forces (SAF) Director Getulio Napeñas were formally charged on Tuesday with usurpation of authority under Article 177 of the Revised Penal Code.

They were also charged with violating Section 3(a) of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act, which prohibits the act of persuading a public officer to violate rules and regulations.

Assistant Special Prosecutor Reza Casila-Derayunan recommended that bail be fixed at a total of P40,000 for each of the accused, but the charge sheets apparently misstated the bail recommendation for graft and reflected it as P20,000.

Although Ombudsman Conchita Carpio Morales first issued a finding of probable cause to press charges in April and denied their appeals in June, it took prosecutors seven months to finally bring the case to the antigraft court.

During the Jan. 25, 2015, massacre, 44 elite commandos were killed by rebels from the Moro Islamic Liberation Front splinter group, the Bangsamoro Islamic Freedom Fighters, and various private armed groups.

Controversy flared after it was revealed that President Benigno Aquino III entrusted the operation to neutralize two terror targets to his close friend Purisima despite his suspension pending an investigation on a graft case involving the delivery of firearms licenses.

The charge of usurpation of authority stated that Purisima took part in the so-called Oplan Exodus “under pretense of official position and without being lawfully entitled to do so.”

Allegedly, the suspended PNP chief constantly asked for preoperational updates from Napeñas; he also approved the final date and time-on-target coordination of the operation.

These acts were committed despite “both accused fully knowing Purisima’s preventive suspension from office, to the damage of public interest.”

As for the graft charge, Purisima allegedly induced Napeñas to violate the PNP chain of command, and the Ombudsman’s Dec. 10, 2014, preventive suspension order.

Purisima also allegedly convinced Napeñas to violate a special order of Deputy Director General Leonardo Espina, the PNP’s officer in charge. The order directed suspended PNP officers to cease and desist from performing their duties and functions.

Espina and Interior Secretary Manuel Roxas II were effectively “eased out” of the operations, the charge sheet narrated.

Not only was the suspension order violated, the two officials allegedly disregarded the fact that “it was Espina who had the authority to oversee the preparation for and conduct of ‘Oplan Exodus.’”

The case information did not make any explicit reference to the two officials’ coordination with Malacañang.

When the fact-finding probe was concluded in July 2015, investigators recommended charges not only against Purisima and Napeñas, but also nine other SAF troopers.

The investigators did not name Aquino as a respondent in the case. Assistant Ombudsman Asryman Rafanan said that Aquino’s participation “did not amount to a criminal offense as he in fact ordered that they should coordinate the implementation of the operations.”