SolGen should be tribune of people, not tuta of Duterte admin —Saguisag

The Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) on Friday came under fire from lawyers of opposition figures who questioned its authority to represent the police in a high-profile sedition complaint pending at the Department of Justice (DOJ).

A number of lawyers during the proceedings moved for clarification on the OSG's authority to represent the Criminal Investigation and Detection Group (CIDG) at the beginning of state prosecutors' investigation of a sedition complaint against Vice President Leni Robredo and dozens others.

Though the first in a formal legal proceeding, this was at least the second time the OSG's involvement in the case was questioned—the first arose from a report that OSG staff had a hand in the drafting of the sworn statement of Peter Joemel Advincula alias Bikoy, a witness for the police.

The Free Legal Assistance Group's (FLAG) Arno Sanidad, who represents Chel Diokno and Erin Tanada, was the first to seek clarification regarding the authority of the OSG to represent the CIDG in a DOJ preliminary investigation.

In response, Assistant Solicitor General Angelita Miranda justified the representation as an act of the OSG as "tribune of the people" —the same way the OSG justified deviating from the position of the Commission on Elections, its client, in the shading threshold issue in the Robredo-Marcos election protest.

Joining Sanidad's motion, former senator Rene Saguisag, lawyer for Senator Risa Hontiveros, said the OSG "should be tribune of the people, not the tuta of this administration."

The opposition figures tagged in the CIDG's complaint have called the charges politically motivated. Malacañang, however, has denied having been involved in the case.

Lawyers for Senator Leila de Lima and former solicitor general Florin Hilbay  joined Sanidad's motion.

The investigating prosecutors gave them five days to submit the proper motion and the OSG another five days to comment on the filings, after which the matter will be submitted for resolution.

After the hearing, the OSG pointed to No. 11, Section 35, Chapter 12 of Executive Order No. 292, or the Administrative Code of 1987 as a justification.

This empowers the OSG to "act and represent the Republic and/or the people before any court, tribunal, body or commission in any matter, action or proceeding which, in his opinion, affects the welfare of the people as the ends of justice may require."

However, Hilbay, who was solicitor general from 2014 to 2016, said the OSG during his term was never involved in preliminary investigations at the DOJ because the office's power on criminal cases, he said, was limited to appeals.

"Mawawala 'yung independence ng opisina na 'yun kung sa lebel pa lang ng imbestigasyon ay nakikialam na sila, dahil natatali na 'yung kamay nila," he told reporters.

Presidential Decree No. 478, which defines the powers and functions of the OSG, says one of the office's specific powers is to represent the government in the Supreme Court (CA) and the Court of Appeals (CA) in all criminal proceedings; and in the SC, the CA, and all other courts in civil actions and special proceedings.

Of the OSG, Saguisag said: "In the end, they may even move for our acquittal or dismissal ng kaso, so it should not sandbag itself into becoming a defender of the attempt of the administration to eliminate all dissent and dissenters."

The next hearing in the DOJ's investigation was tentatively set to resume on September 6. —NB, GMA News