(Eagle News) – “The past finally caught up with Senator Trillanes.”
This was how Presidential Spokesperson Harry Roque described the recent turn of events on the voiding of the 2010 amnesty granted to Senator Antonio Trillanes IV by former President Benigno Aquino III.
Roque, who had also served as legal counsel before for Trillanes himself and other mutineers, said the senator had never admitted guilt to the crime of coup d’etat.
What will now happen is that the previous criminal charges for coup d’etat which had never really gone into the trial phase, will now proceed.
“Well, the past finally caught up with Senator Trillanes. He is responsible for his current state ngayon. Kung hindi sana niya ginawa iyong Oakwood, kung hindi sana niya ginawa iyong Manila Peninsula, wala po siyang ganitong mga kaso ngayon,” he said in a press briefing.
Roque said that Proclation 572 of President Rodrigo Duterte only applied to Trillanes, and not to the other mutineers who were given amnesty by Aquino.
The lawyer maintained that Trillanes never really admitted guilt to the crime of coup d’etat particularly.
“So far po si Senator Trillanes… well, this is without prejudice kasi ang nangyari po talaga and I have experienced also, representing some of them in the past… talagang ayaw nila umamin at that time kasi hindi nila alam talaga kung magkakaroon sila ng amnesty at saka iyong ramifications pagdating doon sa careers nila. (They really did not want to admit guilt at the time because they really did not know if they will be granted amnesty and [they were] considering the ramifications regarding their careers),” Roque explained.
“Marami sa kanila gusto magkaroon ng honorable discharge, at iyong pag-amin may not be a reason for honorable discharge. (Many of them wanted to have a honorable discharge, and their admission may not be a reason for honorable discharge),” he said.
The Palace spokesperson who had at one time defended some of the Oakwood mutineers explained that the issue of admission of guilt to the crime of coup d’etat was really an issue for the soldiers, including Trillanes.
Roque said that it just so happened that former President Aquino did not anymore insist on the strict compliance of the Oakwood mutineers, including Trillanes, on the provisions of their amnesty. During the Aquino administration, plunder charges as well as a string of graft cases had been filed against predecessor, former President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, whom the Oakwood mutineers had tried to oust unsuccessfully.
“Now, talaga naman pong – again ‘no, I’ve had experience defending some of them – talaga naman pong issue sa maraming Oakwood iyong pag-amin. At I guess iyong mga panahon na iyon ‘no, eh nasuwerte lang siya na kakampi niya iyong dating Presidente at hindi na nag-insist doon sa literal compliance with the provisions provided for an amnesty,” he said.
-Roque: “Act of beneficence has to be construed strictly”–
Roque said that the requirements for amnesty, including a true admission of guilt to the crime of coup d’etat, should be “construed strictly” for the “act of beneficence” of the amnesty to apply.
“Pero iyon nga po ‘no… as act of beneficence, it has to be construed strictly at saka iyong kaso po na cited naman dito ‘no, People versus Vera, explains why iyong admission of guilt is very important ‘no. Because without admission of guilt, hindi naman sisipa iyong act of beneficence na buburahin iyong mga pangyayari na nakalipas (the act of beneficence will not kick in so that the incidents of the past will be erased),” said Roque, a noted human rights lawyer before he was appointed as Palace spokesperson.
He also stressed that it is wrong for Trillanes to cry politics just because his grant of amnesty was voided by the President for not having complied with the “minimum requirements.”
He said that in the first place Trillanes was the one who led the July 27, 2003 Oakwood Mutiny and the Manila Peninsula incident of November 2007, and that he still should be held responsible for these events which are acts of the highest crime of coup d’etat against a lawfully elected Philippine president.
“Well unang-una po, siya ang gumawa ng Oakwood, siya ang gumawa ng Manila Peninsula. So there’s nothing political, these are all his acts and dapat lang naman ‘no na panagutan ang mga ginawa ng kahit sino. Hindi naman pupuwede na magbabalot ka ng bomba sa Oakwood; na ite-takeover mo ang Manila Peninsula at wala ka nang pananagutan. It doesn’t work that way,” explained Roque.
He said that the review of Trillanes’ case had been “two years” in the offing as the proper review of his records was done.
“Alam mo, dati na po ito talaga. Two years na ito in the offing, and unang-una hinahanap iyong mga records; they had to make sure na talagang walang application at walang pag-amin itong si Trillanes ‘no. Pangalawa, there was also… kumbaga maximum tolerance being showed to Senator Trillanes,” he said.
“But in the end, it is the job of the President to implement the laws; and when a grant of amnesty is void ab initio, it’s part of the role of the President to rescind it or declare it as void ab initio,” Roque added.
