(Eagle News)–The Supreme Court has allowed Mary Jane Veloso, who is imprisoned for drug trafficking in Indonesia, to testify against her alleged recruiters facing illegal recruitment cases in Nueva Ecija via deposition.
In setting aside a December 2017 Court of Appeals ruling that gave due course to the petition for certiorari of alleged recruiters Maria Cristina Sergio and Julius Lacanilao, and in affirming with modification the August 16, 2016 resolution of Branch 88 of the Sto. Domingo, Nueva Ecija Regional Trial Court where the illegal recruitment cases are pending, the SC said banning the written interrogatories would curtail the right to due process of Veloso.
According to the SC, the RTC did not gravely abuse its discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction when it allowed the taking of testimony of Veloso in light of her imprisonment in Yogyakarta after being convicted of drug trafficking there.
The High Court said the CA, on the other hand, appeared to have strictly and rigidly applied and interpreted Section 15, Rule 119 of the Rules of Criminal Procedure, even when it was inapplicable in Veloso’s case.
This rule says that “[w]hen it satisfactorily appears that a witness for the prosecution is too sick or infirm to appear at the trial as directed by the court, or has to leave the Philippines with no definite date or returning, he may forthwith be conditionally examined before the court where the case is pending.”
The SC noted that Veloso cannot even take a single step out of the prison facility of her own volition without facing severe consequences, adding that there were therefore compelling reasons to liberally construe the procedural rules and apply suppletorily the Rules on Civil Procedure.
It said there was also reversible error in the CA ruling considering the supposed errors ascribed were “mere errors of judgment which do not lie in a certiorari proceeding.”
The High Court ordered for Veloso’s deposition to be taken before the Philippine Consular Office and officials in Indonesia pursuant to the Rules of Court and principles of jurisdiction.
The SC also referred to the SC Committee on Revision of the Rules the recommendation by the Office of the Solicitor General for the High Court to promulgate a set of rules for the guidance of the Bench and the Bar in transnational cases that may arise in the future, where a prosecution’s vital witness in a criminal proceeding is unavailable.
