NSC to militants: Read CA ruling first on suits’ denial before criticizing
National Security Council Assistant Director General Jonathan Malaya during a press conference in this file photo taken on October 23, 2023 at the National Security Council office. INQUIRER.net file photo / NOY MORCOSO
MANILA, Philippines – The National Security Council (NSC) on Wednesday advised militant groups to read first the Court of Appeals (CA) ruling that dismissed the petition for protective writs filed by two environmental activists before criticizing it.
In a statement, NSC Assistant Director General Jonathan Malaya said Karapatan and the National Union of Peoples’ Lawyers (NUPL) should refrain from badmouthing the decision just because it was not in their favor.
“I wish to remind Karapatan and especially the NUPL, as agents of the court, that they should at all times uphold the rule of law. Just because you did not get the result you want from the judiciary does not give you the license to say that the court’s decision is proof of a ‘climate of impunity under the Marcos Administration’ or that it ‘provides further ground for transgressions.’ They may disagree but they should render respect at all times,” he said.
The Aug. 2 ruling of the appellate court’s Former Special Eight Division – Division of Five denied the petition of Jhed Tamano and Jonila Castro for the issuance of a writ of amparo and writ of habeas data for lack of substantial evidence.
Malaya said the CA’s decision clearly explained why Tamano and Castro failed to prove that they were entitled to these writs.
READ: Protective writs activists filed vs abductors denied by CA
OSG Assistant Solicitor General Angie Miranda also hailed the CA’s decision as a significant victory for justice and the rule of law.
She highlighted the importance of the ruling, stating that the decision serves as a reminder that legal petitions must be grounded in concrete evidence and not on speculative or self-serving claims.
Miranda underscored the broader implications of the decision, stating that it affirms the integrity of the judicial process and the need for substantial evidence in the pursuit of justice.
“This ruling is a testament to the importance of upholding the rule of law and ensuring that the extraordinary legal remedies provided by our judiciary are not misused or weaponized,” she said.
In September 2023, the National Task Force to End Local Communist Armed Conflict (NTF-Elcac) claimed that Tamano and Castro surrendered to the 70th Infantry Battalion in Doña Remedios Trinidad, Bulacan.
However, during a press briefing by the task force on Sept. 19, the two activists alleged that they were abducted by unidentified individuals on Sept. 2 and were allegedly delivered to the Army camp.
In its decision, the CA found that the petitioners failed to demonstrate the existence of an imminent or continuing threat to their rights to life, liberty, or security, a key requirement for the issuance of the writ of amparo.
The court noted that during their stay at a military camp, following their voluntary surrender, the petitioners exercised their full freedom and were not under any restraint or threat.
Furthermore, the CA ruled that the petitioners’ claims of abduction and enforced disappearance were unsupported by independent proof.
In addressing the request for a writ of habeas data, the CA criticized the petitioners’ blanket prayer for the production of information from the respondents, labeling it as a “fishing expedition” that does not fall within the ambit of the writ.
