Justice denied
Justice denied
Updated 00:24am (Mla time) Oct 15, 2004
Inquirer News Service
Editor's Note: Published on page A14 of the October 15, 2004 issue of the Philippine Daily Inquirer
PITY Evelio Javier. Not only was justice for him delayed, it was also denied. Arturo Pacificador walked off a free man last Tuesday when the Antique Regional Trial Court cleared him of the brutal murder of the anti-Marcos governor in 1986. While the court convicted and sentenced several persons associated with Pacificador for the killing, it found no evidence beyond reasonable doubt to convict and sentence the former assemblyman and close associate of Ferdinand Marcos. It's as if the henchmen who ambushed Javier and slew him in broad daylight had no mastermind, no governing intelligence. It was as if the guns went and finished off Javier on their own.
While the court stacked every doubt against Pacificador's involvement, it didn't seem to find it bothersome to convict the triggermen and even Pacificador's own lawyer, Avelino Javellana. How reasonable doubt was constituted and interpreted in this case only the Antique court knew. To the court, there must be something about doubt that reason finds credible, too credible.
The Javier family and the Antique folk have understandably reacted with shock and anger at the decision. Particularly for those who witnessed Javier being mercilessly gunned down and his friends shot at and injured in broad daylight right at the provincial capitol grounds, the decision must have looked like another ambush, another naked exercise in state violence and terrorism.
But this time the state violence has been perpetrated by the justice system. The judiciary may protest that it is independent of the executive and the legislature, which are otherwise vested with the state powers of force and compulsion, and thus, it does not have the instruments of aggression. But in rendering an incomprehensible decision that lets off the hook somebody who appears for all intents and purposes-and all rigor of logic-as the mastermind, the judiciary has melded with the state and employed the instrument of justice to deny justice, nay, even slay justice.
Without justice
AN INSTRUCTION on the judiciary's tendency to connive with state violence, wittingly or unwittingly, is the murder of Arbet Santa Ana-Yongco, the lawyer privately prosecuting the case against cult leader Ruben Ecleo for the murder of his wife, Alona Bacolod-Ecleo. Yongco's death-so dastardly, so needless-seems destined to follow the trail of unsolved murders in connection with Ecleo, who seems to enjoy the benefit of the doubt as far as the judiciary is concerned.
When his wife's body was found murdered in Dalaguete town in the province of Cebu, circumstances pointed to Ecleo, who hadn't reported that his wife was missing. You would think that the law would run after Ecleo, but no, he was only arrested and arraigned after the media exposed the reluctance of authorities to indict him. And he was captured not before members of his cult had killed several arresting officers.
In jail, Ecleo received special treatment from his jailers; he was even allowed to co-habit with his girlfriend. Meanwhile, a cult member massacred the entire family of his murdered spouse. Even then, the court released Ecleo for "humanitarian" reasons.
When a cult member confessed to having killed Bacolod-Ecleo, the judge was quick to accept the uncorroborated confession. Even suspiciously, it was discovered that the judge had rendered the decision right after he had been relieved by the Supreme Court for rendering questionable decisions before.
From the looks of it, the Bacolod-Ecleo case has been botched many times over, rendering remote that justice would ever be served any time soon. It seems fated to go the way of the Javier case, which was 18 years in the making.
If one considers that it took nearly 10 years for the Javier case to reach the first phase -- the arraignment of the suspects -- simply because Pacificador had done a Houdini, and that it took nearly another 10 years for the regional trial court to rule, then, indeed, justice is excruciatingly slow in the Philippines. It takes nearly a generation for a court to make a first determination, and by then, the next generation might have no memory regarding what the fuss was all about in the first place.
Historical memory is such a pitiful commodity in the Philippines; it is as scarce and pitiful as justice. In a way, the Javier case shows that memory and justice are inextricably linked. Without justice, there would be no memory; and without memory, there would be no drive for justice. The Philippines seems fated to go both ways -- without memory, without justice.
Updated 00:24am (Mla time) Oct 15, 2004
Inquirer News Service
Editor's Note: Published on page A14 of the October 15, 2004 issue of the Philippine Daily Inquirer
PITY Evelio Javier. Not only was justice for him delayed, it was also denied. Arturo Pacificador walked off a free man last Tuesday when the Antique Regional Trial Court cleared him of the brutal murder of the anti-Marcos governor in 1986. While the court convicted and sentenced several persons associated with Pacificador for the killing, it found no evidence beyond reasonable doubt to convict and sentence the former assemblyman and close associate of Ferdinand Marcos. It's as if the henchmen who ambushed Javier and slew him in broad daylight had no mastermind, no governing intelligence. It was as if the guns went and finished off Javier on their own.
While the court stacked every doubt against Pacificador's involvement, it didn't seem to find it bothersome to convict the triggermen and even Pacificador's own lawyer, Avelino Javellana. How reasonable doubt was constituted and interpreted in this case only the Antique court knew. To the court, there must be something about doubt that reason finds credible, too credible.
The Javier family and the Antique folk have understandably reacted with shock and anger at the decision. Particularly for those who witnessed Javier being mercilessly gunned down and his friends shot at and injured in broad daylight right at the provincial capitol grounds, the decision must have looked like another ambush, another naked exercise in state violence and terrorism.
But this time the state violence has been perpetrated by the justice system. The judiciary may protest that it is independent of the executive and the legislature, which are otherwise vested with the state powers of force and compulsion, and thus, it does not have the instruments of aggression. But in rendering an incomprehensible decision that lets off the hook somebody who appears for all intents and purposes-and all rigor of logic-as the mastermind, the judiciary has melded with the state and employed the instrument of justice to deny justice, nay, even slay justice.
Without justice
AN INSTRUCTION on the judiciary's tendency to connive with state violence, wittingly or unwittingly, is the murder of Arbet Santa Ana-Yongco, the lawyer privately prosecuting the case against cult leader Ruben Ecleo for the murder of his wife, Alona Bacolod-Ecleo. Yongco's death-so dastardly, so needless-seems destined to follow the trail of unsolved murders in connection with Ecleo, who seems to enjoy the benefit of the doubt as far as the judiciary is concerned.
When his wife's body was found murdered in Dalaguete town in the province of Cebu, circumstances pointed to Ecleo, who hadn't reported that his wife was missing. You would think that the law would run after Ecleo, but no, he was only arrested and arraigned after the media exposed the reluctance of authorities to indict him. And he was captured not before members of his cult had killed several arresting officers.
In jail, Ecleo received special treatment from his jailers; he was even allowed to co-habit with his girlfriend. Meanwhile, a cult member massacred the entire family of his murdered spouse. Even then, the court released Ecleo for "humanitarian" reasons.
When a cult member confessed to having killed Bacolod-Ecleo, the judge was quick to accept the uncorroborated confession. Even suspiciously, it was discovered that the judge had rendered the decision right after he had been relieved by the Supreme Court for rendering questionable decisions before.
From the looks of it, the Bacolod-Ecleo case has been botched many times over, rendering remote that justice would ever be served any time soon. It seems fated to go the way of the Javier case, which was 18 years in the making.
If one considers that it took nearly 10 years for the Javier case to reach the first phase -- the arraignment of the suspects -- simply because Pacificador had done a Houdini, and that it took nearly another 10 years for the regional trial court to rule, then, indeed, justice is excruciatingly slow in the Philippines. It takes nearly a generation for a court to make a first determination, and by then, the next generation might have no memory regarding what the fuss was all about in the first place.
Historical memory is such a pitiful commodity in the Philippines; it is as scarce and pitiful as justice. In a way, the Javier case shows that memory and justice are inextricably linked. Without justice, there would be no memory; and without memory, there would be no drive for justice. The Philippines seems fated to go both ways -- without memory, without justice.
posted by Dante at 9:57 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home