DOJ wraps up preliminary probe on missing sabungeros case

The Department of Justice (DOJ) has concluded its preliminary investigation into the disappearance of several cockfighting enthusiasts, with the case now submitted for resolution, according to Senior Assistant State Prosecutor Charlie Guhit on Tuesday.

“The panel declared that the preliminary investigation is already submitted for resolution. That is after the complainants manifested that they are not filing a reply to the counter-affidavits of the respondents,” said Guhit.

He said 56 respondents had filed counter-affidavits, while a few failed to do so before the deadline. The panel has not yet set a timetable for the release of the resolution due to the large volume of documents and evidence submitted for review.

“The panel will try to resolve the case as soon as possible within the period provided by the rules,” Guhit said. “There are a lot of documents attached to the counter-affidavits of the respondents.”

When asked about gaming operator Charlie “Atong” Ang’s camp requesting the return of the case to the Criminal Investigation and Detection Group (CIDG) for further probe, Guhit said the issue would be addressed in the panel’s final resolution.

“Technically speaking, this case is pending preliminary investigation, so the way forward is to resolve it,” he said.

According to Guhit, the outcome will either be dismissal or filing in court. Should the case be dismissed, complainants — not respondents — may refile by submitting new evidence or witness testimonies.

“It would be absurd for the respondents to do that,” he clarified.

Guhit also confirmed that digital evidence, including USB drives containing videos, was submitted by several respondents.

“We haven’t reviewed them yet, but rest assured that when we resolve the case, we will review everything,” he said.

He assured the public that the DOJ remains impartial and committed to fairness in handling the case.

“The DOJ is always fair when it comes to investigations. I’ve never heard of any issue where our resolutions were unfair to any of the parties — whether complainants or respondents,” Guhit said.