DOJ: Dismissal of Trillanes coup d’etat case ‘may simply be ignored’

The Makati court that dismissed the coup d'etat case against Senator Antonio Trillanes IV can "simply ignore" its own "void" judgment, the Department of Justice (DOJ) claimed Thursday.

In their reply-affidavit to Trillanes' opposition against the government's bid for his arrest, state prosecutors insisted that President Rodrigo Duterte's nullification of his staunch critic's amnesty means the coup case junking in September 2011 "has no legal effect."

The Makati Regional Trial Court's (RTC) Branch 148 dismissed the case against Trillanes and the other soldiers who participated in the 2003 Oakwood Mutiny by virtue of the amnesty they received from former President Benigno Aquino III.

"A void judgment or order has no legal and binding effect, force or efficacy for any purpose. In contemplation of law, it is non-existent," the DOJ prosecutors led by Acting Prosecutor General Richard Anthony Fadullon said in the pleading.

"Such judgment or order may be resisted in any action or proceeding whenever it is involved. It is not even necessary to take any steps to vacate or avoid a judgment or final order; it may simply be ignored," they argued.

Because of the supposed "non-existent" nature of the dismissal order, Branch 148 never lost jurisdiction over the coup d'etat case and over Trillanes, the DOJ said.

The DOJ still has not won a warrant of arrest against Trillanes, more than a week after the publication of Proclamation No. 572, which "revoked" the senator's amnesty on two grounds: an alleged failure to file an application and admit his guilt.

Instead of issuing an arrest warrant and a hold departure order against the senator, Judge Andres Soriano of Branch 148 gave both Trillanes' lawyer and the government a fresh timetable to submit their arguments: 10 days for the defense, and five days after that for the prosecution's reply, only after which the matter will be deemed submitted for the judge's resolution.

This development stems from a Supreme Court (SC) ruling that referred the hearing or resolution of pleadings "as regards the legality of Proclamation No. 572" to the RTCs. The SC said Trillanes' compliance with the amnesty requirements was a factual issue that can only be tried by the RTCs, and in some cases, the Court of Appeals.

Another judge, this time Elmo Alameda of Branch 150, will hear a similar motion for Trillanes' arrest on Friday.

Tendency to 'hole up?'

The DOJ also took an apparent swipe at Trillanes, who has been staying in his Senate office since the presidential proclamation was published on September 4.

"The history of this case reminds us that accused Trillanes has the propensity to 'hole up' in an enclosed building, establishment and/or institution, as exhibited during the Oakwood Mutiny and Manila Peninsula stand-off, disrupting business operations," the prosecutors said.

"In recent days, one can fairly assume that that disruptive behavior is being employed in the Senate premises, disrupting its day to day operation, while evading the processes of the law," they added.

They accused Trillanes of "misleading" the State into granting him amnesty with the assumption that he had complied with the requirements. "He did not," the DOJ said.

The prosecutors also argued that despite Trillanes' petition before the Supreme Court assailing the constitutionality of Proclamation No. 572, he has failed to secure a temporary restraining order against its implementation.

"Jurisprudence is replete that laws are considered valid until declared unconstitutional, and until then, courts are duty bound to enforce them," the prosecutors said.

During Thursday morning's hearing, Fadullon told the court that Proclamation No. 572 is valid until it is annulled. Countering him, Trillanes' lawyer, Reynaldo Robles, said it is the amnesty grant itself that is presumed valid. — MDM, GMA News