Trillanes to address court affirmation of Duterte arrange vs amnesty

The camp of Sen. Antonio Trillanes IV is keen to question a Makati court’s order that upheld President Rodrigo Duterte’s proclamation nullifying his amnesty.

Trillanes’ lawyer Rey Robles manifested this at the Makati Regional Trial Court (RTC) Branch 148 Tuesday during a hearing

on the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) motion for partial reconsideration of its order that denied its plea for the lawmaker’s arrest.

“The court was assuming good faith and the court was being courteous in not touching the proclamation of the President,”

Robles told reporters after the hearing.

“But now, this motion for partial reconsideration clearly shows the intent to use that proclamation to nullify a long final and

executory court decision as well as to nullify the amnesty granted to the senator and a previous proclamation, Proclamation No. 75, series of 2010,” he said.

Proclamation No. 75 is former President Benigno Aquino III’s 2010 order that granted amnesty to Trillanes and other rebels

involved in uprisings during the time of former President and now Pampanga Rep. Gloria Arroyo.

On Oct. 22, Makati RTC Branch 148, which handles coup d’etat charges against Trillanes for his role in the 2003 Oakwood mutiny,

junked the DOJ’s bid for an arrest warrant and hold departure order against the former rebel in the wake of Duterte’s Proclamation No. 572, which invalidated the senator’s amnesty.

President already determined Trillanes

In the same breath, it upheld the legality of Duterte’s proclamation as the order did not invalidate Aquino’s amnesty proclamation.

In its motion, the DOJ argued that as the court affirmed Duterte’s proclamation, it should have presumed that the

Further, President had already determined that Trillanes did not comply with the requirements for applying for amnesty.

For Robles, the DOJ’s argument clearly indicated “overreach of the Executive.” He said “it was the intent of the proclamation

to nullify the previous court’s decision,” something which a president could not do.

“If that is the intent, then the proclamation should be nullified by the court. It becomes illegal and unconstitutional because it

tries to arrogate, the President is trying to arrogate unto himself the power to nullify previous

court decisions, a power which even the Supreme Court does not have at this point,” Robles said.

Amid the consultation, Judge Andres Soriano allowed Trillanes 15 days from October 25 to document his remark on the DOJ’s movement for halfway reevaluation.

DOJ has 5 days to record its answer, after which the case will be submitted for goals.

Incomparable COURT PETITION, RECONSIDERATION OF BRANCH 150 RULING

Robles likewise uncovered that the congressperson set to document an arguing under the watchful eye of the Supreme

Court in connection to his appeal to scrutinizing Duterte’s organization.

He said the legitimate group will conjure accurate discoveries of Branch 148 and incorporate a duplicate of its decision in the arguing.

Meanwhile, the official had requested that the high council hinder Duterte’s structure, yet the Supreme Court denied his appeal to for

a primer directive as it offered “room” to the RTCs to practice their locales.

Aside from Makati RTC Branch 148, Branch 150 of a similar court is taking care of a disobedience body of evidence against

Trillanes over the 2007 Manila Peninsula attack, likewise resuscitated in the wake of Duterte’s structure.

The Trillanes camp has a pending request for Branch 150 to reevaluate its Sept. 25 arrange for the representative’s capture. Trillanes reserved after the court’s issuance however made abandon that day.

Hence, Robles said the DOJ itself submitted to Branch 150 the whole transcript of the stenographic notes of the hearings in Branch 148 through its response to Trillanes’ movement for reexamination.

“Sila mismo pester present ng ebidensiya doon sa transcript ng stenographic notes, declaration ng lahat ng observes sa Branch 148 doon sa kanilang pinakahuling arguing sa Branch 150,” he said.

(They are the ones who presented proof in the transcript of stenographic note, declaration of all observers in Branch 148 in their most recent arguing in Branch 150.)

“So we are pondering on documenting a movement to expel in Branch 150 on the grounds that they have in certainty summoned the proof, and therefore, even the decision in Branch 148,” he included.

Hence, Trillanes’ movement with Branch 150 currently submitted for goals. Judge Elmo Alameda anyway is on leave until November 5.