MEL STA. MARIA | Binay, cops, even the Supreme Court know: 'Invitation' is euphemism for 'Arrest'

By: Mel Sta. Maria, News5
 

InterAksyon.com
The online news portal of TV5

Atty. Mel Sta. Maria is the resident legal analyst of TV5. He is Dean of the FEU Institute of Law. He also teaches at the Ateneo School of Law, and daily co-hosts the program 'Relasyon' on Radyo Singko 92.3 News FM.

If you are "invited" to the police station by policemen or men in power or authority, always ask if they have a warrant of arrest. If they do not have any such warrant, their "invitation" should be politely declined.

Even if they were to appear "friendly", do not go. If they insist, insist on calling your lawyer first. Better still, upon hearing at the outset that you are being invited, be sure to have witnesses around you, and then just go ahead and call your lawyer.

Better to be safe than sorry.

The use of "invitations" by policemen has been so abused such that even our Supreme Court has said that such "invitation" has become a "euphemism for an arrest without a warrant of arrest" ( People vs. Dilao G.R. No. L-43259).

Once you are in a police station by yourself, without a lawyer, in the midst of these policemen or men in authority, you are at their mercy. Subsequent events will be beyond your control. Without realizing it, you are already being probed about a crime. Interrogation will have been set in motion.

The environment can be quite intimidating. "In such an atmosphere", the Supreme Court described, "a man of ordinary or average composure may yield to a skilled investigator or one who though unskilled is prone to brutal techniques."

You might say things, admit events or even sign documents involuntarily. Your constitutional rights against warrantless arrest and forced extrajudicial confession will most likely be violated without any witness except your tormentors. Worse, the interrogators, if questioned in a court of law, might invoke, as they usually and abusively invoke, the presumption of regularity of actions of public officials. An incompetent and coward judge, fearful of politicians, may just take the path of least resistance and simply believe these arrogant policemen or men in authority.

The Dasmarinas incident involving Makati Mayor Junjun Binay and his security personnel, where some arrogance of power was allegedly exhibited against security guards of the exlusive neighborhood, is obviously what brings to fore this matter of being "invited" by the cops.
InterAksyon.com reported that "the Chief of the Makati City police on Thursday said there was never an arrest order issued against the two private security guards involved in the November 30 Dasmariñas Village incident with Mayor Jejomar Erwin 'Junjun' Binay" and that "Lucban said the guards were only invited to police headquarters to avoid causing undue alarm in the plush neighbourhood ... and to allow for verification of the guns of the guards, one of whom was brandishing a shotgun."

We don't know what actually happened inside that police station when the two security guards were brought in upon "invitation". But surely, the guards could not have been imagining that they would merely sip coffee or tea with the policemen. They likely expected to be questioned for their actions - and to be arrested.

(See: VIDEO | Makati cops question Dasma guards after Mayor Binay's convoy is blocked at restricted gate)

The police chief said that whatever happened in the police station lasted for "only" two hours. For a person being interrogated, that can seem like an eternity. Were their stories changed or not?

In the first place, was there a commission of a crime necessary to "invite" and hale these security guards to the police station? Apparently, there was none. The police chief himself said that the "invitation" was extended to prevent undue alarm.

But who caused the alarm, anyway? Had the mayor's entourage not passed the Dasmarinas gate on Banyan street, nothing would have happened. Clearly the proximate cause was not the act of the security guards. To stop vehicles at the gate is standard operation procedure in most gated villages, and in this particular case, there was a policy to keep that gate closed past 10 p.m. The guards were accountable to the residents of that village and their security, and not to Mayor Binay. If I were a resident of that village, I would have thanked the guards for checking.

The Chief of Police also said that some verifications were to be made about the guns of the guards. This argument betrays the incompetence of our authorities. Should they not have checked on this - should they not have had a system to check on this - before this event happened?

In the ultimate analysis, the "invitation" to go to the police station was plainly an act of intimidation, an exhibition of official arrogance. Binay cannot fault the public for seeing things this way. He is the Mayor. He is the most powerful person in the community. He was moving within his jurisdiction. He had armed guards with him in separate vehicles. The sight of the entourage and the disembarking of bodyguards from their vehicle are, by themselves, intimidating, if not frightening.

Public officials must not be perceived as rulers who can just command anybody to open their gates - or the doors of their homes. They must be looked at as true public servants who respect the dignity of all persons and the security of their abode. Truly an appearance of humility and simplicity can go a long way.