KARAPATAN condemned the unjust and wrongful decision of Palawan Regional Trial Court Branch 51 convicting six activists of illegal possession of firearms, ammunition and explosives.
The activists — Glendhyl Malabanan, Jenny Ann Bautista, Ronces Paragoso, Benner Rimbuwan, Joelito Tanilon and Awing Lumpat — were on a fact-finding mission when they were illegally arrested at a checkpoint in Barangay Babuyan, Puerto Princesa, Palawan on October 4, 2019. The police seized their personal belongings, brought them to a detachment and later loaded them aboard vehicles that brought them to another checkpoint in Barangay San Jose where they were supposedly flagged down and arrested.
Originally known as the Palawan 7, only six of them made it to the promulgation, since the seventh — peasant organizer Antonio Molina, who was 65 when arrested, succumbed to stomach cancer in November 2021 after the trial court denied his motion for release on recognizance on humanitarian grounds. He was the 11thpolitical prisoner to die in detention under the Duterte regime.
“The arrest of the Palawan activists was marred by several irregularities,” said KARAPATAN legal counsel and deputy secretary general Maria Sol Taule, who served as their counsel. “First, the arresting team did not have any basis for flagging down their vehicle because they were not in the process of committing a crime,” said Taule. “They were arrested without warrant. An arrest warrant presented to Antonio Molina was in the name of “Domingo Ritas,” she added.
“The prosecution failed to establish that the Palawan 7 were in possession of the seized items when arrested,” said Taule, “giving more credence to their claims that these were planted.”
“Moreover,” stressed Taule, “the court made much of a police informant’s so-called positive identification of Molina as ‘Domingo Ritas’ even if the police could not present this informant in court. This reminds us of so many other cases where the police present bogus witnesses before a judge in order to secure a warrant, but fail to present them in court for fear that the witnesses’ false identities and perjured testimonies would be exposed through cross examination.”
“Unfortunately, the judge based his decision solely on the police affidavits and disregarded the weaknesses and inconsistencies that were pointed out during the cross examination,” decried Taule. “He gave weight to the ‘presumption of regularity in the police’s performance of duty,’ failing to consider that it cannot overcome the stronger presumption of innocence in favor of the accused. As usual,” she pointed out, “with the connivance of the courts, the presumption of regularity has again become the refuge of scoundrels. It is the reason most often used to put innocent people in jail.”
“We will appeal this unjust conviction all the way to the Supreme Court if we have to,” said Taule. “Outside the courts, a strong people’s movement calling for the release of all political prisoners continues to support the cause of the Palawan human rights defenders and others who have been unjustly convicted.”
