COUNSELS of alleged top communist leaders Benito and Wilma Tiamzon have asked the Supreme Court to bring trial proceedings back to the courtroom from the Philippine National Police (PNP) headquarters.
In an 11-page motion for reconsideration dated Feb. 20, the National Union of People’s Lawyers (NUPL) appealed the high court’s Nov. 25 directive granting the request of Quezon City Regional Trial Court Branch 81 Executive Judge Fernando T. Sagun, Jr.
Conducting the trial proceedings of kidnapping and serious illegal detention case faced by the Tiamzon couple inside the PNP compound at Camp Crame violated their right to due process and fair trial, NUPL lawyers said.
“There is no serious and valid ground that justified the transfer of the trial of these cases inside Camp Crame. On the other hand, the right of the accused-movants to due process and ‘fair trial’ is seriously impaired with the aforesaid directives of this Honorable Court,” the motion read.
It added that during the first such hearing on Feb. 9, lawyers, human rights advocates and members of the media were either barred entry or had great difficulty in obtaining clearance.
It added that during the first such hearing on Feb. 9, lawyers, human rights advocates and members of the media were either barred entry or had great difficulty in obtaining clearance.
Several lawyers, the motion said, were initially barred by PNP officers from attending the hearing because they were not included in a confidential list of allowed lawyers.
It added that conducting the trial inside the PNP headquarters “tends to create or result in intimidation and a hostile environment not conducive to effective and unhampered legal representation.”
“There is no guarantee that the witnesses for the accused-movants will not face the same difficulties. The fact that they will be testifying inside a police camp will make it impossible for the witnesses to agree to testify,” the motion further said.
NUPL said that the Quezon City court overreacted to alleged security threats presented by holding the proceedings in its Justice Hall.
Mr. Sagun cited an Oct. 21 incident where peasants’ groups conducted a rally in front of the Justice Hall in support of the Tiamzon couple.
It added that conducting the trial inside the PNP headquarters “tends to create or result in intimidation and a hostile environment not conducive to effective and unhampered legal representation.”
“There is no guarantee that the witnesses for the accused-movants will not face the same difficulties. The fact that they will be testifying inside a police camp will make it impossible for the witnesses to agree to testify,” the motion further said.
NUPL said that the Quezon City court overreacted to alleged security threats presented by holding the proceedings in its Justice Hall.
Mr. Sagun cited an Oct. 21 incident where peasants’ groups conducted a rally in front of the Justice Hall in support of the Tiamzon couple.
Refuting the judge’s argument that the rally hindered the peaceful conduct of proceedings, the petition stated that “the main entrance of the Justice Hall was fully accessible during the time that the rallyist[s] were conducting their rally. It became inaccessible when the guards closed it and refused entry to anyone.”
“The rally, although attended by about a thousand rallyists who are mostly farmers, was peaceful. They... stayed a respectful distance from the Court’s entrances and employees,” it added.
The motion stressed that the court had the “burden of showing the procedure is ‘strictly and inescapably necessary.’”
“Clearly, there was an overreaction to a valid exercise of a constitutional right by peasants who were simply expressing their views and demanding justice for all political prisoners. A valid exercise of the freedom of expression cannot possibly be used to justify the denial to the accused-movants of their right to due process,” the motion said.
“The rally, although attended by about a thousand rallyists who are mostly farmers, was peaceful. They... stayed a respectful distance from the Court’s entrances and employees,” it added.
The motion stressed that the court had the “burden of showing the procedure is ‘strictly and inescapably necessary.’”
“Clearly, there was an overreaction to a valid exercise of a constitutional right by peasants who were simply expressing their views and demanding justice for all political prisoners. A valid exercise of the freedom of expression cannot possibly be used to justify the denial to the accused-movants of their right to due process,” the motion said.
The commies want to turn he trial of the Tiamzons into a propaganda event with daily protest actions outside the courtroom and political outbursts that will interrupt court proceedings. It is nothing more than a blatant attempt to intimidate the judge, jury, and the Philippine legal establishment. Holding the trial inside the PNP compound in Camp Crame will preclude such nonsense.
ReplyDelete