The motion filed by military and police officers challenging the grant of a writ of amparo to two environmental advocates has been denied by the Supreme Court.

The environmental advocates are Jonila F. Castro and Jhed Reiyana C. Tamano.

In a resolution written by Associate Justice Ramon Paul L. Hernando dated 6 May 2025, the SC en banc upheld the writs of amparo and habeas data, along with the Temporary Protection Order previously issued in favor of the petitioners against members of the 70th Infantry Battalion of the Philippine Army, the Philippine National Police, the National Security Council, and the National Task Force to End Local Communist Armed Conflict.

Under the TPO, respondents were barred from coming within one kilometer of the petitioners’ homes, schools, workplaces, or current locations.

The petitioners alleged that the respondents abducted them and coerced them into signing false affidavits based on unfounded suspicions of involvement in anti-government activities.

The writs were issued directing the Court of Appeals to conduct summary proceedings to determine the full merits of the petition, and the SC also ordered the respondents to file a verified return before the CA.

The respondents, through the Office of the Solicitor General, argued that they were denied due process when the SC issued the writs and the TPO without first requiring them to file their comment.

They also questioned the SC’s initial finding of substantial evidence, claiming that this should have been left to the CA to resolve during the summary hearing — arguments the SC rejected.

The writ of amparo, meaning “protection,” was created by virtue of the SC’s power to promulgate rules concerning the protection and enforcement of constitutional rights. It protects individuals against threats or violations of their right to life, liberty, or security, particularly in cases of extrajudicial killings and enforced disappearances. The writ aims to break the cycle of impunity and facilitate the investigation and punishment of perpetrators.

The writ of habeas data, on the other hand, safeguards the right to privacy, especially against unlawful collection, use, or disclosure of personal information that may endanger life, liberty, or security.

Under the Rule on the Writ of Amparo and Rule on the Writ of Habeas Data, the SC may issue these writs outright when a petition shows a credible threat to a person’s life, liberty, security, or privacy.

The SC clarified that at the initial stage, prima facie evidence — or evidence sufficient on its face — is enough to justify the immediate issuance of the writs.