Ombudsman opposes Gloria Arroyo’s house arrest bid at SC

The Office of the Ombudsman has strongly objected the motion of former President and incumbent Pampanga Rep. Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo to be placed under house arrest.

In an 18-page opposition paper dated January 11 filed before the Supreme Court (SC), the Ombudsman, through the Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP) maintained that Arroyo’s frail health is not a valid reason to allow her transfer from the hospital to her home.

"The medical condition of Arroyo does not justify the modification of Arroyo’s confinement from the hospital to her house. Any ‘house arrest’ arrangement in modification of the present confinement arrangement of Arroyo will violate the equal protection clause of the Constitution,” the OSP said.

The Sandiganbayan First Division was furnished with a copy of the opposition paper on Monday. Arroyo has been under hospital arrest at the Veterans Memorial Medical Center (VMMC) in Quezon City since 2012 for the plunder case she is facing before the Sandiganbayan.

The case stemmed from the alleged misuse of P366-million worth of funds from state lottery firm, Philippine Charity Sweepstakes Office (PCSO), during her term as President.

In opposing Arroyo’s house arrest bid, the OSP maintained that transferring the 68-year-old lawmaker to her home is not a guarantee that her health condition would improve than when she is in a hospital where medical services and facility are readily available.

Arroyo is virtually asking back her full liberty through an imaginary ‘custodial arrangement’ that she viciously calls ‘house arrest’…There is an obvious chasm between the illnesses and proposed method of treatment that her physicians and psychologist created with their general abstraction of the so-called ‘holistic approach’,” the OSP said.

Arroyo’s physicians both at the VMMC and St. Luke’s Medical Center had earlier maintained that her health condition has been “steadily deteriorating” following major operations in her cervical spine and due to a degenerative bone disease, osteoporosis, the narrowing of the esophagus and nerve compression, among others.

Her doctors said her continued “distressful” confinement is not conducive to the improvement of her well-being. Rather, she needs to be transferred to her house, with her family, for a more holistic recuperation.

"How can such psychological cajoling reverse a degenerative bone disease, reverse osteoporosis or stop the pain associated with damage or disturbance of nerve function?...They cannot provide the answer. As we grope in the darkness of that chasm deliberately blurring our reason, Arroyo is appealing for our compassion, teasing our sense of humanity,” the OSP said.

The OSP also pointed out that placing Arroyo under house arrest would practically restore her rights and liberty despite the Sandiganbayan First Division’s earlier denial of her petition to post bail for her plunder case, citing the strong evidence presented by the prosecution against her.

"She wants no less than her normal life back and to freely resume to her previous personal, social and political routine as an elected public official. She wants a privileged treatment…This is a direct affront and mockery of our correction system,” the OSP said.

The OSP further warned the SC that placing Arroyo under house arrest would set a bad precedent and would violate the “equal protection clause” provided under the Constitution.

"How many of these ‘distressed’ detention prisoners charged with murder, parricide, infanticide, rape, treason, kidnapping…and other heinous crimes are we prepared to send under house arrest?” the OSP said.

"The restrictions imposed on Arroyo in confinement are inherent in detention and are as equally applicable on all detention prisoners. They are reasonably required to achieve the legitimate objective of securing the detainee’s safety and to prevent her escape,” it added.

Lastly, the OSP pointed out that the issues raised by Arroyo in her motion for house arrest were the same issues she raised in her petition for certiorari, questioning the earlier rulings of the First Division denying her motion to post bail and her demurrer to evidence which sought the dismissal of the case due to the supposed weak evidence of the prosecution.

"The instant motion [for house arrest] collaterally attacks resolutions of the Sandiganbayan which are the very subject of a separate petition for certiorari filed by Arroyo with the same Court. She is virtually raising the same issues and asking for the same relief, a practice akin to forum-shopping which must be proscribed,” the OSP said.

The SC has yet to rule on Arroyo’s petition for certiorari, which the lawmaker filed on April 17, 2015. In her petition, Arroyo said the Sandiganbayan committed grave abuse of discretion by ruling that there is strong evidence against her. Arroyo prayed that the High Tribunal reverse the Sandiganbayan's and that she be allowed to post bail. — BAP, GMA News