Presidential cases – legal and political considerations
It has long been hoped that the Mamasapano incident of January 15, 2015, be laid to rest after so many years of official investigations by the Philippine National Police (PNP) and the National Bureau of Investigation and inquiries in aid of legislation by the Senate and the House of Representatives.
Last January, 2017, the Ombudsman filed charges of graft and usurpation of authority against the PNP chief at the time of the massacre of 44 Special Action Force (SAF) men, Director General Alan Purisima, and the SAF chief, Director Getulio Napenas Jr. The case is now before the Sandiganbayan Fourth Division.
The families of some of the 44 SAF men who died at Mamasapano, however, believe the responsibility for the death of their loved ones goes higher than the two accused PNP officials. With the help of the Volunteers against Crime and Corruption (VACC), they filed new charges, this time including former President Benigno S. Aquino III.
Ombudsman Conchita Carpio Morales rejected their charge of reckless imprudence leading to multiple homicide, saying the acts of negligence of the accused officials were not the “proximate cause”of the death of the SAF 44. But she found basis for charging President Aquino with “usurpation of authority” – under the Revised Penal Code, for allowing Purisima to play a major role — indeed the lead in the SAF operation – although he knew that Purisima was then under preventive suspension over a courier service deal on firearms licenses between the PNP and a private firm.
In his defense, Aquino has said that he was merely using Purisima as a “resource person” providing vital information for Oplan Exodus. But the Ombudsman said Purisima was exercising authority over Director Napenas and Oplan Exodus could not have happened “were it not for the complicity and influence of President Aquino.”
Aside from the charge of usurpation, Aquino was charged with graft under the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act, which declares it unlawful for any public official to persuade, induce, or influence another public officer to perform a violation of law.
The filing of charges against President Aquino continues an unfortunate series of cases filed against former presidents of the country after they leave office. President Joseph Estrada was indicted for plunder in 2001 and found guilty in 2007 but was pardoned by President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo. She was herself indicted for plunder in 2012 but was cleared by the Supreme Court last April, 2017.
Presidents Estrada and Arroyo have both recovered strongly from their adverse experiences, Estrada winning election as mayor of Manila and Arroyo as congresswoman of Pampanga. But now we have another president – Aquino – in dire straits, facing usurpation and graft charges.
Without judging the merits of these cases, we deplore the fact that for the last 16 years, our presidents have had to go through the unfortunate experience of trial and detention, and another one may now have to go through the same ordeal. There are legal issues involved but there may also be some political considerations which we hope we can minimize in the coming years.
