CA junks writ of amparo and habeas data against activists

The Court of Appeals (CA) junked the petition for the issuance of a writ of amparo and a writ of habeas data by environmental activists Jhed Reiyana  Tamano and Jonila Castro, who claimed that they were victims of enforced disappearance perpetrated by state agents in September 2023.

The CA’s Former Special Eight Division (Division of Five) in dismissing the petition,  held that the petitioners failed to prove the existence of imminent or continuing threat to warrant the grant of the reliefs.

 Additionally, the CA noted the petitioners failed to sufficiently identity that members of the Philippine Army were behind their alleged abduction. 

Castro and Tamano were reported missing on 2 September 2023 and were believed to have been abducted by the military.    

After 10 days, the two surfaced to voluntarily surrender  to 2LT. Junrey Caballeda, 701B’s Acting Civil Military Operations Office and in charge of the Enhanced Comprehensive Local Integration Program (ECLIP) for the reintegration of former rebels.    

Castro claimed to be a member of the semi-legal team and the armed group of the Partido Komunista ng Pilipinas (PKP) while Tamano stated that she is a member of the Kabataang Makabayan, an underground mass organization of the PKP. They expressed their willingness to surrender.     

Believing in the sincerity and truthfulness of the respondents, the military coordinated with the Public Attorney’s Office for the execution of their affidavits of surrender.     

However, during a press conference organized by the National Task Force to End Local Communist Armed Conflict (NTF-ELCAC) in September 2023, the petitioners contradicted the respondents’ version, claiming they were abducted by the military and coerced into signing their affidavits. 

“The Court cannot subscribe to petitioners’ theory that they were so restrained inside the military camp as to amount to a violation of their right to liberty or security,” the CA declared in a 58-page ruling penned by Associate Justice Lorenzo Bordios.

 The CA noted that during the petitioners stay at the military camp they were able to exercise full freedom, including roaming around  the camp conversing with the military personnel, watching television shows, and partying with them. 

“If indeed, petitioners were also subjected to threats inside the camp, we find it contrary to human experience and logic that they would not register their intention to leave said place at the earliest opportunity, such as when they met Jhed’s parents on 13 September 2023. Or when the representatives from the CHR (Commission on Human Rights) visited them on 14 September 2023,” it added. 

A writ of amparo is a remedy available to any person whose right to life, liberty, and security has been violated or is threatened with violation by an unlawful act or omission of a public official, employee, or a private individual or entity.

A writ of habeas data “is a legal remedy available to any person whose right to privacy in life, liberty, or security is violated or threatened by an unlawful act or omission of a public official or employee, or of a private individual or entity engaged in the gathering, collecting, or storing of data or information.”

The CA clarified that the decision is “without prejudice to an appropriate investigation” by the  chief of the Armed Forces of the Philippines and the director-general of the Philippine National Police (PNP) on the abduction of Tamano and Castro. 

The CA said, “Accordingly, said officers are ordered to conduct an investigation of the said incident with dispatch."

The petitioners sought relief in a petition filed directly before the Supreme Court on 28 September 2023, alleging that they were abducted by several unidentified individuals whom they believed were military officers. 

The activists narrated their ordeal that occurred from the time of their abduction on 2 September 2023 until they were delivered to the custody of the 70th Infantry Battalion of the Philippine Army in its camp in Bulacan on 12 September 2023. 

They alleged they were interrogated, subjected to psychological torment and threats, and forced to write affidavits detailing their supposed voluntary surrender as rebels.

In February 2024, the SC ruled that Castro and Tamano were able to prove “by substantial evidence” the allegations in their petition, meriting the protection of their freedoms through the writs of amparo and habeas data.

It found that elements of enforced disappearance were present, specifically that petitioners were forcibly taken on 2 September 2023, as evidenced by the affidavit executed by a member of Karapatan Gitnang Luzon as to the accounts of witnesses to the abduction in plain sight; petitioners' attestation that they left their footwear during their struggle against their captors, and photos of petitioners.

A temporary protection order  was also  issued by the Court prohibiting law enforcers from entering within a radius of one kilometer from the persons, places of residence, school, work, or present locations, of petitioners.

Respondents in the petition were Lieutenant Colonel Ronnel B. Dela Cruz and members of the 70th Infantry Battalion of the Philippine Army; Police Captain Carlito Buco and members of the Philippine National Police, Bataan; National Security Council Assistant Director General Jonathan Malaya; National Task Force to End Local Communist Armed Conflict (NTF-ELCAC).