Two case dismissals but no release order

Senator Leila de Lima and journalist Lady Ann Salem

The case of illegal possession of firearms and explosives against journalist Lady Ann “Icy” Salem of Manila Today was dismissed last Feb. 5 but she continues to be in jail in Mandaluyong City.

A drug case against Sen. Leila De Lima was dismissed last Feb. 17. She, however, remains in detention at the Philippine National Police Custodial Center in Camp Crame, Quezon City because she still faces two other cases.

Salem’s lawyer, Kristina Conti of the Public Interest Law Center, speaking at a rally of the journalist’s supporters in front of the Mandaluyong City Regional Trial Court, said last Friday that the Feb. 5 dismissal of the case against Salem and trade unionist Rodrigo Esparago was not accompanied by a release order.

Conti said there’s no legal reason for Salem to stay a minute longer in jail for a case that is “walang ka kwenta-kwenta (senseless).”

Salem was arrested last Dec. 10, while the world was marking Human Rights Day, based on a search warrant issued by Judge Cecilyn Burgos-Villavert of the Quezon City Regional Trial Court.

In dismissing the case against Salem, Presiding Judge Monique Quisumbing-Ignacio declared the police officers’ search warrant void for being vague after they confiscated items not listed in the warrant.

News reports noted that instead of confiscating only one laptop and one unit of cellphone, as stated in the search warrant, the police took four laptops and five cellphones of different brands.

“The raiding team did not limit themselves to the items listed in the Search Warrants … The seizure of these items is unlawful as even the ‘plain view doctrine’ is clearly inapplicable to these cases,” said the court that also found substantial inconsistencies and contradictions in the testimonies of informants.

“Since the sole basis of the issuance of the Search Warrants w(as) their (informants) sworn statements and testimonies, the Court finds that probable cause was not sufficiently establish(ed),” the dismissal order stated.

In blocking Salem’s release, the prosecutor was insisting that the dismissal is not yet final because it is under appeal. Conti, however, said it does not hold water because the case can go on without keeping Salem in jail.

Conti said Salem, 35, is holding on admirably in detention. She shares an 8 feet by 3 feet detention cell in the Mandaluyong City jail with five other women detainees.

“To maximize the space, they have hung up hammocks up the steel bars where some of them sleep,” said Conti.
De Lima, on the other hand, is marking her four-year imprisonment by launching two books: “Dispatches from Crame I” and “Faith, Hope & Love: Dispatches from Crame II.”

Reacting to the dismissal of one of the three drug cases against her, De Lima, who investigated President Duterte’s alleged human rights violations when she was chair of the Human Rights Commission and Duterte was mayor of Davao City, said: “To be acquitted even in just one case, in the time of Duterte, is a moral victory. “

In the statement read by her lawyers during a press conference after the dismissal of Criminal Case No. 17-166, she took the opportunity to explain the two remaining cases and her situation in detention.

She said that even if the Demurrer to Evidence and Motion for Bail in her other criminal case (No. 17-165) was denied, she and her lawyers believe that the government does not have a strong evidence to prove their trumped-up charges.

In the case “conspiracy to engage in illegal drug trading,” De Lima said the prosecution has not come up with any evidence of the alleged crime. “Walang kahit isang testigo na nagpatunay na ako at ang aking kapwa akusado ay nakipagsabwatan sa mga drug lords para maglako o magbenta ng ilegal na droga sa Bilibid. (Not one of the witnesses proved that I and the other accused conspired with the drug lords to sell illegal drugs in Bilibid.),” she pointed out.

According to her, the prosecution’s witnesses whom it described as “drug lords” have denied that they were drug lords and asserted that they had never entered into any illegal deal with the senator.

She underscored the anomaly in the charges filed against her: “Ito lang din ang katangi-tanging mga kaso tungkol sa droga na kahit isang butil o gramo ng droga, ay walang naipresenta. (This is the only drug case in which not a single grain or gram of drugs was presented.”

“Ibig sabihin, puro laway lang ang basehan (It means their basis is all saliva),”she said.

De Lima explained it has been proven that Case 17-165 was not about drugs but about the unbridled corruption and malpractices in the Bureau of Corrections (BuCor) such as paying prison officials for the return of their privileges which she stopped when she was justice secretary.

De Lima said her accusers have not proven that she received money from the alleged sale of illegal drugs. “Puro tsismis. Puro haka-haka lang. (It was all gossip. Pure speculation.)”

She added: “Mula’t sapul, ang mga kasong ito ay ginagamit lamang na paraan para patahimikin ako at gambalain ang aking paglilingkod sa bayan bilang senador, sa paglaban sa kawalang hustisya at pagtataguyod ng karapatang mamuhay nang marangal at may dignidad ng ating mga kababayan, lalo na ang maralita. Subalit mula noon hanggang ngayon at sa darating pang mga araw, hindi ko hinayaan at hahayaang magtagumpay ang ganitong taktika.

(From the beginning, these cases were used to silence me and prevent me from serving the people as senator, to fight injustice and for the right of our countrymen to live with honor and dignity, especially the poor. But from the beginning up to now and in the coming days, I did not and will not allow this tactic to succeed.)”

De Lima said if those in power would be allowed to circumvent the law to imprison an innocent senator, what more when their target are the poor and the defenseless. “To jail one innocent person – whoever they may be – is an insult to every Filipino who deserves a better government, and an assault on the future of our country,” she said.

Salem and De Lima are two faces of courage against an insecure thug in power. They need and deserve the people’s support.

Ombudsman gives substance to public official’s accountability

Ombudsman Conchita Carpio-Morales

Ombudsman Conchita Carpio-Morales

When the Mamasapano tragedy, which claimed the lives of 67 people including 44 members of the Special Action Force of the Philippine National Police, happened and the active role of suspended PNP chief Allan Purisima was exposed, a source told us that Ombudsman Conchita Carpio-Morales was angry.

Who would not be?

The tragedy happened Jan. 25, 2015. The Ombudsman had suspended Purisima in Dec. 2014 and he was supposed to be not involved in the operations of the PNP.

But details of events that led to the tragedy showed that despite the suspension, President Aquino involved Purisima in official operations.

It was a blatant flouting of the law.

That’s why the Ombudsman’s dismissal of Purisima and 10 other officials last Tuesday is important in terms of restoring the people’s faith in the justice system.

It gave substance to the Consitutional provision that “Public office is a public trust. Public officers and employees must, at all times, be accountable to the people…”

Purisima belongs to a select circle of people t President Aquino believes in and he was not shy about vouching for his good character in public when the investigation was still going on. Yet, Ombudsman Carpio-Morales let the law and evidence prevail.

In a 50-page Consolidated Decision, Morales found substantial evidence to hold Purisima and former officials of the PNP Firearms and Explosives Office (FEO) P/CSupt. Raul Petrasanta, P/CSupt. Napoleon Estilles, P/SSupt. Allan Parreño, P/SSupt. Eduardo Acierto, P/SSupt. Melchor Reyes, P/Supt. Lenbell Fabia, P/CInsp. Sonia Calixto, P/CInsp. Nelson Bautista, P/CInsp. Ricardo Zapata Jr., and P/SInsp. Ford Tuazon liable for Grave Misconduct, Serious Dishonesty and Grave Abuse of Authority.

The case stemmed from two separate complaints filed in 2014 by private citizen Glenn Gerard Ricafranca and the Fact-Finding Investigation Bureau of the Office of the Deputy Ombudsman for the Military and Other Law Enforcement Offices (FFIB-MOLEO) regarding the engagement and accreditation of Werfast as the provider of courier services for renewed firearms licenses.

The Ombudsman’s consolidated decision:

• in May 2011 Werfast proposed an online computerized renewal system and courier delivery service for the renewal of firearms licenses to the PNP which, through Estilles, thereupon entered into a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) with Werfast even without any procurement, accreditation and qualification process;

• in June 2011, Petrasanta, as Technical Working Group (TWG) Chairman, recommended that the courier system be the sole responsibility of Werfast.

• in September 2011, the MOA was notarized.

• in July and August 2011, the PNP Legal Service issued legal opinions stating that the MOA should be treated either as an unsolicited proposal or a request for accreditation, the engagement of a courier service should not be mandatory but optional, the service provider should not be exclusively Werfast, a set of accreditation rules should be formulated, and an accreditation board should be created.

• in November 2012, Police Director Gil Meneses, then chief of the PNP Civil Security Group (PNP-CSG), ordered the creation of an FEO Courier Services Accreditation Board (FEO CSAB) composed of Petrasanta, Parreño, Acierto, Reyes, Fabia, Calixto, Bautista, Tuazon and Zapata.

• in February 2013, Meneses submitted to Purisima a Memorandum recommending that the delivery of license cards by courier service be made mandatory and declaring that Werfast has been accredited after complying with the documentary requirements under the FEO Policy on Accreditation.

• as it turned out, it was only in March 2013 that Meneses issued the Policy on Accreditation and it was only in April 2013 that the FEO CSAB issued a Resolution accrediting Werfast.

• in March 2014, PNP terminated the contract with Werfast.

The Consolidated Decision found that Werfast was a not a registered corporation at the time of the signing of the MOA in May 2011, as it was incorporated only in August 2011 with a measly capitalization of only P65,000.00

It held that the FEO CSAB disregarded the criteria and forthwith accredited Werfast despite its non-submission of clearance from the PNP Directorate for Intelligence, lack of authority to operate a delivery service, and lack of accreditation by the Department of Science and Technology as it was not even qualified for failing to meet the required capitalization of P500,000.00 to operate in two or more regions in the country. It added that Werfast had no track record in the courier service business or any other business; it is not listed as a subsidiary or local partner of Philippine Remittance Service, Ltd. (Philrem) as it even noted that Werfast turned to LBC, and not to Philrem, in fulfilling its obligations; it paid no income taxes and withheld none from any employees; and it had no machinery, manpower and logistic capability.

In questioning his suspension last December, Purisima said that he relied on” good faith on the regularity in the performance of duties of his subordinates when he approved the recommendation.”

But the Ombudsman found otherwise: “Evidence shows not only that Purisima knew what he was doing in signing the Meneses Memorandum but that he himself exerted pressure and coercion over his subordinates on behalf of Werfast.”
Aside from dismissal, the Ombudsman also imposed the accessory penalties of forfeiture of retirement benefits, cancellation of eligibility, bar from taking civil service examinations and perpetual disqualification from re-employment in government service on Purisima and the 10 other officials involved in the Werfast deal.

Former Senator Panfilo “Ping” Lacson, who was also former PNP chief, was correct: Purisima pushed his luck too far when he stayed on in the police force even when he had resigned as PNP chief after the Mamasapano tragedy.

But then, it’s good that he pushed his luck too far. The damage to the Filipino people was lessened by a few million pesos.

Edith Burgos to Aquino: ‘End this suffering of not knowing the truth’

Edith Burgos: today's Mater Dolorosa

Edith Burgos: today’s Mater Dolorosa

Yesterday, while many joined the mother of OFW Mary Jane Veloso in prayers , another mother continues the agonizing search for her son.

Edith Burgos, mother of missing farmer/activist Jonas Burgos, together with relatives of persons who have disappeared, went to the Aquino house in Times St., Quezon city to deliver a letter to President Aquino on the on the 8th anniversary of the abduction of Jonas Burgos.

They were blocked by about 50 policemen.

The letter that Edith Burgos was carrying was an appeal to Aquino “to end this suffering of the family of not knowing the truth about what happened to Jonas.”

On April 28, 2007, past noon, Jonas Burgos was at Ever Gotesco Mall in Quezon City waiting for friends. Before his friends came three military agents, one was a woman, approached him and forcibly brought him out to a waiting vehicle. Jonas was never seen after that.

Life’s normal cycle starts with birth and ends with death. To just disappear violates life’s natural cycle.

The disappearance of Jonas and many other Filipinos is an assault to humanity and an outrage especially in a democratic country like the Philippines.

In her letter Edith gave the President an update of Jonas’s case and appealed for him to order the military to return Jonas to them “at whatever state he is in.”

Here’s Mrs. Burgos’ letter:

“I come with open hands offering prayers of peace for the Country, our beloved Philippines.

“As you know, my son, Jonas is still missing. Today he will have been gone for 8 years. The case of Jonas, which the family has pursued very deliberately and carefully using peaceful means through our existing legal and government systems, has been marked by setbacks and victories.
By God’s grace we have won our legal battle. You have already been informed that our Supreme Court has affirmed the findings of the Court of Appeals to wit, (March 7, 2013):
1. That the case of Jonas’ abduction is a CASE OF ENFORCED DISAPPEARANCE;
2. That the Armed Forces of the Philippines-Philippine Army (AFP-PA) is ACCOUNTABLE FOR THE ABDUCTION;
3. That among many John Does, Major Harry Baliaga Jr., of the Philippine Army is RESPONSIBLE for the abduction of Jonas.

“As a result of these conclusions we have filed a criminal case against Harry Baliaga and the case is being heard at the Quezon City RTC Branch 216.
“We have won the battle and yet we are losing the war… Jonas has not been returned to his family and nobody has been held responsible for this noncompliance of the Supreme Court order (February 2, 2014). Even the National Bureau of Investigation whom Your Excellency has ordered to investigate and to file the necessary cases as expeditiously as they can as warranted from the investigation, has not done anything after more than a year after your order was received.
“The family has not left any stone unturned … taking legal steps, pursuing all available avenues both private and government. However, we very strongly believe that you, as Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces of the Philippines, can shorten the long drawn painful process of the search.
“It is in this view, that we prayerfully plead that Your Excellency, order your subordinates, the AFP-PA to follow the SC order and return Jonas to the family, at whatever state he is in.
“As a mother, I personally appeal to you to end this suffering of the family of not knowing the truth about what happened to Jonas. Surely, you who have held your own mother dear and revered, would listen to this poor mother who is looking for her son.
And, finally, we all would like a world without Disappearances, allow me to take this opportunity to appeal to you to sign the Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance, People from being Disappeared and thus move towards that goal. This would be a noteworthy legacy you can leave not only with the Philippines but with the world. “

Prayers amid dismay for justice for victims of Ampatuan massacre


Five years ago, a crime so heinous was perpetrated by persons in authority, in a remote village in Maguindanao in Southwestern Mindanao.

Fifty-eight persons lay dead after Andal Ampatuan, Jr., mayor of Datu Unsay town and his men were through with their shooting spree. He then asked for a backhoe in the office of his father, Andal Ampatuan Sr., who was then governor of the province, to be brought to the crime scene to bury the dead bodies.

Among the dead was Genalyn Mangudadatu, wife of the political rival of the Ampatuans, Esmael “Toto” Mangudadatu, who was supposed to file the certificate of candidacy of her husband challenging the position of the Ampatuan patriarch.

Of the 58 victims, 32 were members of media, who were supposed to cover the political event.

Five years have passed and the families of the abominable crime are still in search of justice.

The National Union of Journalits in the Philippines has produced a moving video titled “Project Backhoe.” Please click to http://www.nujp.org/?p=3705.

massacre photo with backhoe

NUJP also laments even as the quest for justice for the 58 continues, the killing to bury the truth continues. Last week two potential witnesses were shot while they were riding a tricycle on their way to finalize their affidavit. Dennis Sakal, the former driver of Andal Jr., was killed and Sukarno Saudagal, a former bagman of Andal, Jr. was severely wounded.

CenterLaw’s Harry Roque, who is counsel for 15 of the victims, called on President Aquino to fulfill the Philippine’s state obligations, under international law, to provide adequate reparations, including compensation and satisfaction, to the heirs of the victims of the Nov. 23 Maguindanao massacre.

“If the Philippine’s can pay 1.5 Million Pesos to the family of a Taiwanese fisherman shot dead by a Philippine coast guard patrol last 2013, why can’t the Philippines pay compensation with the same dispatch to journalists brutally murdered by Philippine state agents in the Maguindanao Massacre?” Roque said.

It is sad, Roque mused, that the Philippines discriminates against its own citizens, and reveals gross ignorance of its state obligations under international human rights law.

CenterLaw furthermore Aquino to adopt measures— including focused prosecution on the accused Ampatuan clan members, the arrest of all 79 Maguindanao massacre suspects at large and custody by the Witness Protection Program of prosecution witnesses—to expedite the prosecution of the Maguindanao massacre cases before his term ends on 30 June 2016.

It was Centerlaw, through the Roque & Butuyan Law Offices, which proposed the FIFO or “First in-First Out”. Under FIFO, the Trial Court may already render judgment on the case of any accused over whom all evidence – for and against – has already been heard. The FIFO concept was included by the Supreme Court in its guidelines for the Maguindanao massacre, and shall hopefully expedite the prosecution of the Maguindanao massacre cases.
The Center for Media Freedom and Responsibility (CMFR) in its statement, expressed dismay, over developments related to the Maguindanao massacre case.

CMFR’s statement:

“In a disturbing—and irony-ridden—demonstration of official hostility to the Constitutional guarantee of press freedom, the Philippine National Police (PNP) has prevented journalists from covering the trial of the alleged masterminds and perpetrators of the November 23, 2009 Ampatuan Massacre since August this year without justification, and without even informing the media who ordered the ban.

“Four journalists, meanwhile, were killed for their work in 2014, the fifth year since the worst attack on journalists in history occurred in Ampatuan town, Maguindanao province, bringing the total number of journalists killed for their work since Benigno Aquino III assumed the presidency to 25. It comes second to the 82 of the Arroyo administration which lasted nine years and included the Ampatuan Massacre victims.

“In this same year, President Aquino again claimed, once during the April visit of US President Barack Obama to the Philippines, and again in a radio interview before his September visit to several European countries, that not all the journalists killed were slain for their work, and that not only some but many were killed for reasons that if made public would be embarrassing to their families. But CMFR’s findings show that the number of work-related killings at 145 since the restoration of democracy in February 1986 to be a matter of grave concern.

“The ban on media coverage of the trial is an unconscionable assault on press freedom—the very right, so crucial to the state of democracy in this country. It is also an infringement on the public right to be informed on the proceedings of a trial whose outcome will be critical to the dismantling of impunity, or its persistence.

“Impunity—defined internationally as ‘the impossibility, de jure or de facto, of bringing the perpetrators of violations to account’—is what drives the continuing killing of journalists and media workers in the Philippines. Impunity allows the cycle of criminality to continue as it is the failure to break it with punishment, with penalty and the imposition of reparation. Impunity however applies especially to those with the means to hire lawyers who can use the judicial system to evade conviction and delay trials.

“Current data show 145 journalists and media workers out of 217 killed since 1986 were targeted for their work, and that any attempt to minimize the killings as assaults on press freedom makes ending the killings even more difficult. President Aquino would do well to reexamine the circumstances of the killings. CMFR has gathered enough information on every case to guide government reform and for the President to initiate policy action that will put a stop to the outrage that has severely damaged the country’s standing in the international community.

“The President should hold to review the prosecution of the trial to determine whether it reflects the political will to see this trial to a credible conclusion – the conviction of the guilty and cause the just compensation of the complainants. Attacks on witnesses will affect the trial; so far three witnesses have died. The President should call for urgent action to improve the protection of the witnesses who are critical to the success of the trial.

“Beyond that, President Aquino can also recall those recommendations, made as early as 2010, by the Freedom Fund for Filipino Journalists, Inc. (FFFJ), a coalition of the CMFR, the Kapisanan ng mga Brodkaster ng Pilipinas (KBP), the Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism (PCIJ), the Philippine Press Institute (PPI) and the Center for Community Journalism and Development (CCJD), that, among others, encourages the creation of a multi-sectoral quick response group to assist the PNP in obtaining relevant information whenever a journalist is killed.

“The killing of journalists and media workers has become an international concern, impinging as it does on the universal imperative of defending and enhancing the human right to disseminate and receive information. Ironic that in this, the fifth year since the worst attack on journalists and media workers in world history, it has not merited the same level of expressed concern from the Philippine government.”

11 facts that render allegations of bribery vs Harry Roque ridiculous

Harry Roque with relatives of the victims. Photo by Lito Ocampo,  CMFR.

Harry Roque with relatives of the victims. Photo by Lito Ocampo, CMFR.

The murderous Ampatuans must be enjoying the spectacle of the prosecutors in the Maguindanao massacre destroying each other.

Atty. Nena Santos, representing 25 of the of the 58 who were killed in a massacre in a secluded hill in Maguindanao on Nov. 23, 2009, has alleged that government and fellow private prosecutor Harry Roque, of having been bribed by the Ampatuans to lose the case.

Santos represents Maguindanao Governor Esmael Mangudadatu, husband of victim Genalyn Mangudadatu and political rival of the Ampatuan family.

It will be recalled that Genalyn, accompanied by family members, political associates and members of media were abducted while on their way to file the candidacy of Mangudadatu for governor against Andal Ampatuan Jr, son of the then incumbent, Andal Ampatuan Sr. They were brought to a secluded hill and killed by Andal Jr and his henchmen. Of the 58 killed, 34 were media workers, earning for the Philippines the reputation of one of the most dangerous places for journalists.

A total of 194 persons are accused led by Andal Ampatuan Sr.; Andar, Jr. ; former ARMM Governor Zaldy Ampatuan. The court has approved the “the first in, first out” policy to speed up the hearings which former Sen. Joker Arroyo could take 200 years.

Last March government prosecutors rested their case and it was expected that the defense would now start presenting their evidence.

Santos and two other private lawyers, Maria Gemma J. Oquendo and Prima Quinsayas, opposed the government prosecutors’ move which was supported by Roque.

Now comes the report of ABS-CBN, quoting Santos and an unnamed source, of multimillion peso bribe to government prosecutors and Roque.

The basis of ABS-CBN’s report was an unnamed source who has notebook allegedly containing a list of bribes given by Ampatuans. The list included a cell phone number (which turned out to be Roque’s) followed by a word speedy, the P10 M plus car.

That was all. No other document if there was delivery of money and car or if it was accepted or rejected.

Disclosure:Harry Roque was my counsel in my libel case filed by Mike Arroyo in 2003 and in the case we filed against officials of Gloria Arroyo involved in our arrest after the 2007 Manila Peninsula siege. Also, The Roque and Butuyan Law Office is the lawyer of VERA Files, where I am one of the trustees.

Needless to say I don’t believe the allegations of bribery against Roque.

Joel Butuyan

Joel Butuyan

But let Roque’s associate, Joel Butuyan, give a brief on what they have done on the Ampatuan case which makes the bribery allegations preposterous.

1. A few days after the Ampatuan massacre, Harry Roque personally led an independent investigation in the very scene of the massacre in Ampatuan town, Maguindanao province, bringing with him three of his lawyers, and engaging the services of a South American forensic expert, and a British investigator. The Roque-led group of six joined then CHR Chair Leila De Lima. As a result of this independent investigation made after the police had completed theirs, the dentures of the 58th victim – Reynaldo Momay – were found even if his body has never been recovered to this day. Roque subsequently caused the filing of the 58th charge of murder against the Ampatuans, a move opposed even by Private Prosecutor Nena Santos.

2. Roque represents the heirs of the 15 victims in the massacre trial, and he has rushed to complete — as in fact he has months ago completed — the presentation of the full testimonies of all the family representatives of the 15victims. The testimonies of Roque’s 15 clients pointing accusatory fingers at the Ampatuans can no longer be taken back because they are now part of the case records.

3. While the murder trial was on going, Roque found out that the 62 policemen charged for assisting the Ampatuans in committing the massacre had not been suspended from their positions and were still presumably enjoying the perks of their ranks and offices even if they were already charged in the murder trial. Appalled, Roque initiated the filing of administrative cases against these 62 policemen in the NAPOLCOM to have them all dismissed from service. This was opposed even by Prosecutor Nena Santos. Roque caused the NAPOLCOM trial to be completed after 15 months, and the case now has been awaiting decision from the NAPOLCOM since July 2011.

4. It has been widely believed that the Ampatuans became drunk with power because they were pampered and were made to believe they were untouchable during the reign of Gloria Macapagal Arroyo. After Gloria Arroyo stepped down from power, Roque caused the filing of a multi-million damage suit against Arroyo in behalf of the Ampatuan massacre victims.

5. Roque had long demanded that the Anti-Money Laundering Authority freeze the assets of the Ampatuans. When the AMLA refused to take action, Roque filed a criminal complaint against the AMLA officers. The AMLA eventually but belatedly moved to freeze the assets of the Ampatuans.

6. Roque had been very vocal in the media discussing the crimes committedby the Ampatuans. He has been speaking in the local and international media, and even in international conferences. As a result, the Ampatuans and their cohorts have filed at least four criminal cases for contempt and libel against Roque, and all these cases remain pending. Some of these cases were even filed in Maguindanao.

7. When Roque felt that the court cases against the Ampatuans were taking so long and were insufficient to address the liabilities of all those liable, he caused the filing of a complaint before the ASEAN Inter-Governmental Committee on Human Rights. Together with several of his clients, Roque went to Jakarta, Indonesia where he led a rally in front of the ASEAN IGCHR, joined by human rights organizations in Indonesia.

8. Roque felt that even the complaint he filed in the ASEAN Committee on Human Rights was not being given due consideration. Consequently, he caused the filing of a complaint with the United Nations Human Rights Committee (UNHRC) with respect to the Ampatuan massacre.

9. Roque believed that the massacre could have been prevented if the military officers in charge of the area had granted the request and pleas of the eventual victims for a military escort. Roque found out that an AFP Major General and a Colonel refused to provide security to the ill-fated convoy notwithstanding advance information of threats to the convoy. As a result, Roque filed a criminal case against the military officers for their dereliction of duty.

10. Private Prosecutor Nena Santos restrictively participates in the trial involving the 57 murder victims. There is even no recollection that she ever personally presented a single witness during the trial. In contrast, and in addition to his participation in the trial of the 57 murder victims, Roque has initiated, sued, and actively participates in more than 20 additional cases/proceedings involving the Ampatuan massacre. These additional cases cost the Ampatuans and/or their co-accused substantial lawyers expenses and expose them to additional liabilities.

11. Roque wanted live TV and radio coverage for the Ampatuan trial because, among others, he believes that the public is entitled to see the conduct, demeanor, and competence of the Presiding Judge, the Prosecutors, the Defense Counsels, the witnesses, the complainants, and the accused during the trials. Accordingly, he filed a Petition with the Supreme Court to allow live media coverage for the Ampatuan trial. Unfortunately, the Supreme Court did not favor live media coverage.