(Eagle News) — The Office of the Solicitor General on Tuesday reiterated that Senator Leila de Lima’s petition for her arrest to be nullified should be junked as the pleading’s notarization had been falsified.
According to the OSG, the name “Atty. Maria Cecille T. Tresvelles Cabalo” who supposedly administered the oath on De Lima on February 24 for the pleading filed before the Supreme Court, did not appear in the logbook of the Philippine National Police Custodial Center from February 24 up to February 25.
The OSG noted that this was the only time De Lima could have personally appeared before Cabalo following the senator’s arrest on February 24.
De Lima, who remains detained in the PNP Custodial Center, was arrested by virtue of a warrant issued by Muntinlupa Regional Trial Court Judge Branch 204 Juanita Guerrero.
The warrant was issued in connection with a case filed against her for her alleged involvement in the illegal drug trading in the New Bilibid Prison.
“(The petition) should be consigned to the trash can,” Solicitor General Jose Calida told reporters in an ambush interview on the second day of oral arguments in the Supreme Court on De Lima’s petition.
De Lima’s camp argued that she personally made her oath before Cabalo when the senator was in the Criminal Investigation and Detection Group prior to her detention, but the prosecution disproved this, saying that the four close-in policemen assigned to guard her had issued affidavits denying such.
Former Solicitor General Florin Hilbay, who represents De Lima, insisted that the SC should focus on the “real issues” he raised in the first round of oral arguments last week.
Hilbay argued then that the case against the senator should be junked given the “incompatible” positions of the Department of Justice, which sought to charge the senator for violation of Section 5 of the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act, and the Solicitor General, which sought to hold her liable under Section 26b, or the provision on “the attempt or conspiracy” to trade drugs of the law.
Hilbay also noted that the Muntinlupa RTC had no jurisdiction over the senator’s case.
“The way the case is being framed is a fight between procedural technicalities and substantive questions. What we would like of course for the court to do is to focus on the real issues on this case,” Hilbay said.
