By Edu Punay, The Philippine Star
MANILA, Philippines - Did the military and police provide a protective cloak to armed personnel allegedly behind the enforced disappearance of activist Jonas Burgos six years ago?
The possibility of a cover-up in the initial investigation is among the issues the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) will try to address in its new probe of the case.
The Court of Appeals (CA) recently ruled that the case of Burgos, son of the late newspaper publisher Jose Burgos Jr., was an enforced disappearance.
Justice Secretary Leila de Lima yesterday explained that President Aquino wants the NBI to come up with the truth, which requires probers to look into all angles – including a possible cover-up in earlier investigations conducted by the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) and the Philippine National Police (PNP).
“NBI’s mandate is to ferret out the truth through an exhaustive and independent probe. Hence, possible cover-up would be necessarily and inevitably be part of the inquiry,” she told The STAR.
She said it is likely for the NBI to consider inviting former and active military and police officers who handled the previous probes on the missing activist.
Flawed PNP probe
In 2010, the Supreme Court (SC) directed the Commission on Human Rights (CHR) to start “a more meaningful investigation” of the Burgos snatching after ruling that there were lapses in the probe conducted by the PNP Criminal Investigation and Detection Group (CIDG).
“We conclude that the PNP and the AFP have so far failed to conduct an exhaustive and meaningful investigation into the disappearance of Jonas Burgos; and to exercise the extraordinary diligence (in the performance of their duties) that the Rule on the Writ of Amparo requires,” the SC ruling held.
Among the significant lapses that the police committed, according to the SC, was its failure to identify from the artist’s sketches two of the five kidnappers of Jonas based on descriptions provided by eyewitnesses.
“No search and certification were ever made on whether these persons were AFP personnel or in other branches of the service, such as the Philippine Air Force. Notably, the PNP-CIDG, as the lead investigating agency in the present case, did not appear to have lifted a finger to pursue these aspects of the case,” the high court had pointed out.
The PNP-CIDG had concluded that the communist New People’s Army (NPA) was behind the incident as part of the rebel group’s “purging” of its ranks.
But the CHR came up with a different finding – that military men were behind the enforced disappearance.
The STAR had reported on March 19, 2011 the commission’s report to the SC, which identified one of eight persons that purportedly snatched Jonas at a restaurant inside the Ever Gotesco Mall on Commonwealth Ave. in Quezon City on April 28, 2007 – 1Lt. Harry Baliaga Jr. of the Army’s 56th Infantry Battalion based in Bulacan and 7th Infantry Division at Fort Magsaysay in Laur, Nueva Ecija.
The commission based its findings on testimonies of two witnesses – Jeffrey Cabintoy and Elsa Agasang – who positively identified Baliaga through the yearbook of the Philippine Military Academy and other group photos.
The two were working at the restaurant at the time Burgos was dragged away. The two were placed under the government’s witness protection program.
It told the High Court it could not identify the other men due to deliberate refusal of Gen. Gilberto Roa of the Judge Advocate General Office and AFP deputy chief of staff for personnel to provide documents needed for the CHR probe despite a clear order from the SC for full cooperation of the military.
The CHR also contested the findings of the earlier probe conducted by the CIDG based on testimonies of three other witnesses – Emerito Lipio, Marlon Manuel and Meliza Concepcion-Reyes – who claimed that Jonas was taken by NPA members.
The commission said the testimonies gathered by the CIDG from the three witnesses, who have refused to participate in the CHR probe, were fabricated and they should be charged with obstruction of justice.
New evidence
De Lima clarified that the NBI probe would first establish what really happened to Burgos.
“Where is he? Is he still alive? We will know from the investigation what really happened to him and it’s only then when we can hopefully find out where he is,” she explained.
She also stressed the probe would not be limited to existing records and evidence of the case.
“All records and sets of evidence will be scrutinized – including those gathered by the CHR, PNP, AFP and also the purported new evidence submitted by Mrs. (Edita) Burgos (mother of Jonas) recently to the Supreme Court,” De Lima explained.
She ordered the special team composed of lawyers and agents of the bureau to ask Mrs. Burgos for copies of the confidential record supposedly presenting new evidence against the military, admitting that she is “very curious” about it.
De Lima said the NBI team already started reviewing records to find gaps in earlier findings.
Results of the probe would be consolidated with the pending preliminary investigation on the case, which started in 2011 after the CHR came up with its report. With Jaime Laude
The possibility of a cover-up in the initial investigation is among the issues the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) will try to address in its new probe of the case.
The Court of Appeals (CA) recently ruled that the case of Burgos, son of the late newspaper publisher Jose Burgos Jr., was an enforced disappearance.
Justice Secretary Leila de Lima yesterday explained that President Aquino wants the NBI to come up with the truth, which requires probers to look into all angles – including a possible cover-up in earlier investigations conducted by the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) and the Philippine National Police (PNP).
“NBI’s mandate is to ferret out the truth through an exhaustive and independent probe. Hence, possible cover-up would be necessarily and inevitably be part of the inquiry,” she told The STAR.
She said it is likely for the NBI to consider inviting former and active military and police officers who handled the previous probes on the missing activist.
Flawed PNP probe
In 2010, the Supreme Court (SC) directed the Commission on Human Rights (CHR) to start “a more meaningful investigation” of the Burgos snatching after ruling that there were lapses in the probe conducted by the PNP Criminal Investigation and Detection Group (CIDG).
“We conclude that the PNP and the AFP have so far failed to conduct an exhaustive and meaningful investigation into the disappearance of Jonas Burgos; and to exercise the extraordinary diligence (in the performance of their duties) that the Rule on the Writ of Amparo requires,” the SC ruling held.
Among the significant lapses that the police committed, according to the SC, was its failure to identify from the artist’s sketches two of the five kidnappers of Jonas based on descriptions provided by eyewitnesses.
“No search and certification were ever made on whether these persons were AFP personnel or in other branches of the service, such as the Philippine Air Force. Notably, the PNP-CIDG, as the lead investigating agency in the present case, did not appear to have lifted a finger to pursue these aspects of the case,” the high court had pointed out.
The PNP-CIDG had concluded that the communist New People’s Army (NPA) was behind the incident as part of the rebel group’s “purging” of its ranks.
But the CHR came up with a different finding – that military men were behind the enforced disappearance.
The STAR had reported on March 19, 2011 the commission’s report to the SC, which identified one of eight persons that purportedly snatched Jonas at a restaurant inside the Ever Gotesco Mall on Commonwealth Ave. in Quezon City on April 28, 2007 – 1Lt. Harry Baliaga Jr. of the Army’s 56th Infantry Battalion based in Bulacan and 7th Infantry Division at Fort Magsaysay in Laur, Nueva Ecija.
The commission based its findings on testimonies of two witnesses – Jeffrey Cabintoy and Elsa Agasang – who positively identified Baliaga through the yearbook of the Philippine Military Academy and other group photos.
The two were working at the restaurant at the time Burgos was dragged away. The two were placed under the government’s witness protection program.
It told the High Court it could not identify the other men due to deliberate refusal of Gen. Gilberto Roa of the Judge Advocate General Office and AFP deputy chief of staff for personnel to provide documents needed for the CHR probe despite a clear order from the SC for full cooperation of the military.
The CHR also contested the findings of the earlier probe conducted by the CIDG based on testimonies of three other witnesses – Emerito Lipio, Marlon Manuel and Meliza Concepcion-Reyes – who claimed that Jonas was taken by NPA members.
The commission said the testimonies gathered by the CIDG from the three witnesses, who have refused to participate in the CHR probe, were fabricated and they should be charged with obstruction of justice.
New evidence
De Lima clarified that the NBI probe would first establish what really happened to Burgos.
“Where is he? Is he still alive? We will know from the investigation what really happened to him and it’s only then when we can hopefully find out where he is,” she explained.
She also stressed the probe would not be limited to existing records and evidence of the case.
“All records and sets of evidence will be scrutinized – including those gathered by the CHR, PNP, AFP and also the purported new evidence submitted by Mrs. (Edita) Burgos (mother of Jonas) recently to the Supreme Court,” De Lima explained.
She ordered the special team composed of lawyers and agents of the bureau to ask Mrs. Burgos for copies of the confidential record supposedly presenting new evidence against the military, admitting that she is “very curious” about it.
De Lima said the NBI team already started reviewing records to find gaps in earlier findings.
Results of the probe would be consolidated with the pending preliminary investigation on the case, which started in 2011 after the CHR came up with its report. With Jaime Laude
No comments:
Post a Comment