The Commission on Human Rights (CHR) hearing on the complaint filed by the “Morong 43” in relation to the violation of their rights proceeded today, March 18, as scheduled.
Among the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) respondents to the complaint, only Col. Aurelio Baladad and Lt. Col. Jaime Abawag Jr. were present. From the Philippine National Police (PNP), P/Supt. Marion Balonglong was present. State Prosecutor II Romeo Senson, who had subjected the 43 to improper inquest proceedings, also attended.
Absent was Judge Cesar Mangrobang of the Imus Regional Trial Court – who issued the search warrant that was used as the basis for the illegal arrest and detention of the 43 health workers.
Likewise, Dr. Melecia Velmonte, the owner of the house where the “Morong 43” were arrested and where evidence against them was allegedly discovered, did not appear.
The Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) refused to comply with the CHR's Feb. 26 order to produce the 43 health workers at today's hearing. Their lawyers from the Judge Advocate General Office (JAGO) Senson, in explaining why the 43 were not brought to the CHR, argued that they need a court order from the Morong Regional Trial Court – where the 43 had been charged with violating the election gun ban, illegal possession of firearms, and illegal possession of explosives – to transport the 43 from the AFP's Camp Capinpin in Tanay, Rizal to the CHR. It is the Morong RTC, they said, that has “exclusive jurisdiction” over the 43.
But Atty. Romeo Capulong of the Public Interest Law Center (PILC) and the National Union of People's Lawyers (NUPL) argued that if the AFP did not need a court order to transfer five of the detainees – Valentino Paulino, Chenilyn Tawagon, Eleanor Carandang, Jenelyn Pizarro, and John Mark Barrientos – to another facility, they do not need a court order to bring all the 43 to the CHR.
The CHR ruled that since it is an independent constitutional body, it does not need a court order to investigate complaints of human rights violations – which includes questioning the complainants.
When the commissioners were about to question Baladad on his unit's participation in the operation that led to the illegal arrest and detention, the JAGO lawyers tried to prevent him from being questioned, invoking the constitutional right to remain silent and right against self-incrimination. But the CHR ruled that there is nothing that can prevent the CHR from asking clarificatory questions, and that the right to remain silent and the right against self-incrimination may be invoked only while the questioning is already ongoing, not at the outset. At this point, the JAGO lawyers requested a “five-minute break” to confer with their clients, but the break lasted longer.
During questioning, Baladad said his unit joined the operation in support to the PNP unit led by Balonglong. He said it was the PNP that had applied for the warrant to search the house of a certain “Mario Condes.” He admitted that he had not seen the warrant before his unit decided to join the operation. He further said the decision for his unit to join the operation was made “at the battalion commander level,” referring to Abawag whose battalion is under Baladad's command.
When it was Abawag's turn to be questioned, he got so mixed up with his claims about his battalion's participation in the operation that it became impossible to grasp even the gist of what he was trying to say.
Balonglong, meanwhile, confirmed that he was the one who applied for the warrant against Condes, against whom a complaint for illegal possession of firearms had previously been filed. He tried to explain that he applied for a warrant in Imus, not in Morong, because Condes is “known as a prominent person” in Morong. He claimed to have done prior verification of Condes's exact place of residence, but could not explain why it was not specified in the warrant Mangrobang issued. He ended up contradicting himself and even blaming his informant for not giving the street number for Condes's house.
Senson requested not to be questioned, citing his lack of counsel. He was instructed to be prepared with counsel at the next hearing.
The CHR decided to set the next hearing for sometime after the Holy Week.
