The Ampatuan clan has been absolved by the Court of Appeals from rebellion charges, including its patriarch Andal Ampatuan Sr., former ARMM Governor Zaldy Ampatuan and several others.
This was after the appellate court junked the petition for review filed by the government, through the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG), questioning a Quezon City court decision dismissing rebellion raps against them in connection with the Maguindanao massacre in 2009.
The setback from the government came after the CA has affirmed the findings of Quezon City RTC in exonerating the Ampatuans and their cohorts.
In a 63-page decision, penned by Associate Justice Elihu Ybañez, the appeals court upheld the March 2010 ruling rendered by Judge Vivencio Baclig of Quezon City Regional Trial Court Branch 77 finding no probable cause to indict the clan for the said crime.
The CA blamed the prosecution for the weak case against them, saying that “a judge or fiscal may not go on with the prosecution in hope that some credible evidence might later turn up during trial. The prosecutors may have indeed abuse the criminal justice system.”
The lower court decision had held that there exists no probable cause to indict the accused.
Aside from Andal Sr. and Zaldy Ampatuan, also cleared by the CA were Datu Anwar Ampatuan, Datu Sajid Islam Ampatuan, Datu Akmad Tato Ampatuan.
The CA also cleared the Ampatuan allies Akmad Abdullah Ulilisen, Kusain Akmad Sakilan, Duca Lendungan Amban, Jovel Vista Lopez, Rommy Gimba Mamay, Sammy Duyo Villanueva, Ibrahim Tukya Abdulkadir, Samil Manalao Mindo, Goldo B. Ampatuan, Amaikugao Obab Dalgan, Billy Cabaya Gabriel Jr., Abdulla Kaliangat Ampatuan, Moneb Samir Ibrahim, Umpa Ugka Yarya, Dekay Idra Ulama, Kapid Gabriel Cabaya, Koka Batong Managilid, Sammy Ganda Macabuat and Manding Abdulkadir.
However, because of the pending multiple murder charges filed against them, the accused will have to stay in jail.
The powerful political kin have been blamed for the massacre of 57 people, where 32 of the victims were journalists in November 23, 2009. The rebellion charges was initially used by the government to arrest the Ampatuans since the murder charges were not yet established by the prosecutors.
According to the CA ruling on rebellion charges, the Department of Justice (DOJ) was not able to prove its claim of rebellion against the Ampatuans and their followers.
The DOJ had accused the Ampatuans of “conspiring, confederating and cooperating with each other… commanded their followers to rise publicly and take arms against the Republic for the purpose of removing allegiance to the government.”
The prosecution said that out of fear of uprising because of the massing of armed supporters who have formed a private army to resist government troops, the functions of the local government were paralyzed as employees went on mass leave.
According to the DOJ, the regional trial courts in the area were not functioning, refused to accept the application for search warrants for violation of PD 1866 to authorize the search of the properties of the heads of the rebellion.
The DOJ also alleged that there was undue delay in the issuance of court processes despite the exigency of the situation.
In spite of this, the CA ruling said that none of the rallyists were armed during the the rally on November 29, 2009 which was attended by ARMM officials from Basilan, Sulu and Tawi-Tawi, in full view of the police and military.
As to the allegations of clashes and gunfires, the appeals court also said that “the accused remind us that the information for rebellion was filed on December 9, 2009, whereas the alleged clashes occurred after December 9, 2009, thereby casting a serious constitutionality infirmity upon the information since the facts constitutive of the crime of rebellion took place subsequent to the indictment.”
“Petitioner (OSG) claims that the rebellion continued from November 24, 2009 to February 2010, yet in contrast, the martial law in Maguindanao was lifted on December 12, 2009, signifying that the rebellion had by then been crushed,” the CA ruling further averred.
The CA also said that even the military dug up thousands of firearms in Ampatuan-owned lots, there were no allegations that these arms had been used against the government.
It added that this also proved that there was no rebellion, for it contravenes claims of undisquised acs of armed uprising to topple the government.
Associate Justices Fernanda Lampas Peralta and Francisco Acosta both concurred with the ruling.
PINOY SNIPER 