HEALTH
SC directs trial courts to conduct necessary proceedings for possible release of PDLs
by Dante Guittu, Jr. and Reina Lyne Pintang
Posted on December 12, 2020
The Supreme Court (SC) has rendered a decision in the petition granting humanitarian considerations for 22 Persons Deprived of Liberty (PDLs) who were allegedly among the elderly, sick, and pregnant population of inmates in congested penal facilities, posing severe health risks.
Photo from CNN Philippines
In the decision, SC directed trial courts to conduct proceedings to weigh the pieces of evidence in each case and decide whether or not the petitioners should be granted temporary release.
According to SC, the political prisoners were charged with offenses punishable by reclusion perpetua or permanent imprisonment, a non-bailable offense.
“In cases where the offense is punishable by reclusion perpetua, and where evidence of guilt is strong, bail is a matter of discussion,” stated in its decision.
The petitioners grounded the motion on COVID-19 danger where social distancing and self-isolation measures were claimed to be impossible and that the government’s response to the pandemic is not enough to protect PDLs.
Additionally, they invoked the Court to exercise its power for ‘equity jurisdiction’ for their temporary release based on humanitarian grounds and to create a “Prisoner Release Committee.”
The said committee will administer the possible release of PDLs in congested penal facilities and follow the United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoner.
However, the respondents who were represented by the Office of the Solicitor General opposed the petitioners’ plea.
The respondents reasoned out that the petitioners cannot be given temporary release since they are considered as valuable members of the Communist Party of the Philippines-New People’s Army-National Democratic Front (CPP-NPA-NDF).
They also added that there are adequate mechanisms to address their health needs.
The respondents also stated that SC is not the proper avenue to grant these petitions and that the petitioners cannot be granted provisional liberty based on equity because governing laws already exist.
“Hence, being a court of last resort, this Court ingeminates and reminds the Bench and the Bar that it is not the proper avenue or forum to ventilate factual questions especially if they are presented for adjudication on the first instance,” SC concluded.
Despite allegations of the respondents, SC still acknowledged the petitioners’ appeal and referred to the respective trial courts, which handle the petitioners’ criminal cases, to conduct the proceedings and resolve their cases with utmost dispatch. #