October 15, 2003, Philippine Star, Court's jurisdiction over Kuratong case questioned, by Aurea Calica,

October 15, 2003, Philippine Star, Court's jurisdiction over Kuratong case questioned, by Aurea Calica,

The Department of Justice (DOJ) claimed yesterday the Quezon City trial court has no jurisdiction over the Kuratong Baleleng multiple murder case because two of the victims were minors. 

Chief State Prosecutor Jovencito Zuño also questioned Quezon City court Judge Theresa Yadao's order for a hearing on Friday on the motions filed by the defense panel seeking judicial determination of probable cause and asking for the deferment of the issuance of arrest warrants. 

"I am wondering why she (Yadao) set a hearing on Friday. We will not file an opposition or any pleading because that will mean we (are) submitting to her jurisdiction," Zuño said. 

He said the prosecution will move for the transfer of trial venue to any of the six Quezon City family courts, adding the family courts have jurisdiction since two of the victims of the supposed rubout were Melebren Soronda and Sherwin Abalona, 14 and 17 years old, respectively. 

The hearing on the prosecution’s motion seeking for a transfer is scheduled tomorrow at the sala of Quezon City Executive Judge Natividad Dizon. 

Zuño pointed out Republic Act 8369 or the Family Courts Act and Supreme Court Administrative Matter No. 99-1-13 which states the jurisdiction of the family courts on cases involving minors. 

Under RA 8369, the family court has jurisdiction over "criminal cases where one or two of the accused is below 19 years of age but not less than 9 years of age, or one or more of the victims is a minor at the time of the commission of the offense." 

Zuño said the prosecution has the birth certificates of the two victims to prove its claims. 

Sources had disclosed the prosecution panel would prefer the reassignment of the case to any judge other than Yadao. The defense, though, still preferred Yadao to preside over the trial. 

Yadao was said to be have been endorsed to the post by former senator Juan Ponce Enrile and Raul de Guzman, brother-in-law of ousted President Joseph Estrada. Lacson was Estrada's national police chief. 

But State Prosecutor Peter Ong said there is nothing irregular in Yadao presiding the trial of the case. Ong agreed that the issue of jurisdiction should be settled first. 

Ong said the DOJ did not have the chance to file an amended information on the issue of the two minors since the Court of Appeals earlier issued a temporary restraining order against the trial court in the early stages of the case. 

After Quezon City Judge Branch 81 Judge Wenceslao Agnir dismissed the case in 1999, the DOJ filed a new case but was blocked by the defense panel citing double jeopardy. 

When the issue was elevated before the CA, the appellate court issued a temporary restraining order against the court from releasing an arrest warrant or proceeding with the hearing. 

The CA eventually dismissed the case altogether citing the two-year prescriptive period. 

Ong admitted the issue of jurisdiction and the age of the two victims will further delay the issuance of arrest warrants against Sen. Panfilo Lacson and the 33 others accused in the case. 

Lawyers of Lacson and his co-accused, retired police general Romeo Acop and Chief Superintendent Francisco Zubia, last week filed separate motions urging the court to determine the probable cause which will be the basis for the issuance of warrants for their clients’ arrest. 

The defense panel also moved for the dismissal of the case if no probable cause is determined. 

They maintained there is no probable cause since the case has been earlier dismissed by the same court. 

Yadao was the same judge who originally handled the multiple murder case which implicated Lacson and 33 other police officers in the summary execution of 11 robbery suspects in May 1995. 

After Agnir dismissed the case in 1999, the government refiled a new case to the same court, now assigned to Yadao. 

The case went up the appellate court and the Supreme Court where finally, the high tribunal ordered the refiling of the case to the Quezon City courts. A re-raffle was conducted and the case landed in the sala of Yadao, much to the disappointment of the prosecution panel.