DOJ asks SC to order re-arrest, murder trial of ex-Palawan gov

- Advertisement -

THE Justice Department has asked the Supreme Court to reconsider its March 23, 2022 resolution granting the plea of former Palawan governor Mario Joel Reyes for a temporary restraining order enjoining the Puerto Princesa City regional trial court from implementing its warrant of arrest against him.

Reyes is facing trial as the principal accused in the killing of staunch anti-corruption crusader, environmentalist, and broadcaster Dr. Gerry Ortega in 2011.

Justice Secretary Menardo Guevarra expressed optimism that justice will eventually prevail, despite the SC’s order that set back the continuation of the trial of Reyes, who has been accused of allegedly masterminding the gruesome killing of Ortega on January 24, 2011.

- Advertisement -spot_img

“I have no doubt that justice will prevail in the end,” Guevarra said in a text message.

Guevarra issued the statement after the Supreme Court Second Division, on March 23, 2022, granted Reyes’s motion for reconsideration, reinstated his petition for review on certiorari, and required the DOJ, through the Office of the Solicitor General, to comment on the petition within 10 days.

The SC also issued a TRO enjoining the RTC from implementing a warrant of arrest against Reyes and from conducting further proceedings in the criminal case against him.

“The DOJ firmly believes in the fairness and evenhandedness of our highest court,” Guevarra said. “The OSG has already filed a motion for reconsideration with the Supreme Court. Let’s leave it at that, lest we tread on sub judice grounds.”

Last April 1, 2022, the OSG asked the SC to lift the TRO it issued last month stopping the Puerto Princesa City RTC, Branch 52, from enforcing its warrant of arrest, and instead order Reyes’s immediate re-arrest to ensure his appearance during the trial of his murder case.

The OSG also sought the dismissal of Reyes’ petition for review on certiorari, which seeks to reverse and set aside the November 28, 2019 amended decision of the Court of Appeals’ Special Former Eleventh Division that enjoined the Puerto Princesa City court from implementing its arrest order against the former governor.

The CA’s amended decision reversed its January 2018 ruling which dismissed the murder case against Reyes and ordered his release. Instead, the appellate court upheld the ruling of the Puerto Princesa City RTC that denied the plea of Reyes to suspend the proceedings and sustained the validity of the warrant of arrest it issued against the petitioner.

Reyes has been charged with murder along with his brother, former Coron town mayor Mario Reyes, and eight others for the death of Ortega. A known critic of Reyes, Ortega was gunned down in front of a thrift store in Puerto Princesa City on January 24, 2011.

The trial court ordered his arrest in March 2012, despite Reyes moving to suspend the murder case and recall the warrant of arrest. Reyes assailed the RTC ruling before the appellate court, citing the trial court’s reliance on the “uncorroborated statement” of witness Rodolfo “Bumar” Edrad, his bodyguard.

Aside from Edrad’s affidavit, the CA cited the sworn statements of Arwin Arandia, who claimed to have been initially hired by Edrad to kill Ortega; and Dennis Aranas and Marlon Recamata, who also confessed to being paid to kill Ortega. Recamata was convicted in 2013.

“Respondent People of the Philippines most respectfully prays that this Honorable Court: lift the temporary restraining order enjoining the [RTC], Branch 52, Puerto Princesa City, Palawan from implementing a warrant of arrest against petitioner and from conducting further proceedings in Criminal Case No. 26839,” the OSG through Senior State Solicitor Henry Gerald P. Ysaac Jr. and State Solicitor Dianne Margarette T. delos Reyes-Gonzales said.

On June 14, 2021, the SC First Division denied the petition for review of Reyes “for failure of the petitioner to sufficiently show that the Court of Appeals committed any reversible error in the challenged amended decision and resolution as to warrant the exercise of this Court’s discretionary appellate jurisdiction.”

Author

Share post: