SolGen asks CA to allow Veloso testimony vs. recruiters

The top government counsel said Veloso should be exempted from the said rules considering that she was under detention in Indonesia that now had jurisdiction over her case. (Photo: Save the Life of Mary Jane Veloso/Facebook)

MANILA— The Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) has filed a motion for reconsideration before the Court of Appeals (CA) seeking to reconsider its earlier decision stopping Mary Jane Veloso, the Filipina detained in Indonesia’s death row over drug charges – to testify in the criminal case against her recruiters through a deposition.

In a 45-page motion for reconsideration filed on Jan. 16, Solicitor General Jose Calida asked the CA’s 11th Division to affirm the decision of Sto. Domingo, Nueva Ecija Regional Trial Court Branch 88 Judge Anarica Castillo-Reyes to allow Veloso to testify against her alleged recruiters Cristina Sergio and Julius Lacanilao.

Calida said the appellate court “grossly ignored the extraordinary circumstances” of the case when it ruled against Veloso, adding that it should not have strictly applied Section 15, Rule 19 of the Rules of Court which stated that prosecution witnesses may be conditionally examined only on two basis: that the witness is too sick or infirm to appear in court and that the witness has to leave the country with no definite date of return.

The top government counsel said Veloso should be exempted from the said rules considering that she was under detention in Indonesia that now had jurisdiction over her case.

“The People respectfully submits that Mary Jane Veloso, a Filipina OFW convicted of drug trafficking in Indonesia and sentenced to death but granted retrieve, thus, remains under the custody of law in Indonesia, is suffering from an unusual predicament,” part of the OSG’s motion said.

“Verily, her personal appearance before the trial court for the presentation of her testimony cannot be reasonably expected owing to her detention in an Indonesian jail,” it added.

Further, Calida stressed that allowing the taking of Veloso’s deposition would still be lawful under Rule 23 of the Rules of Criminal Procedure and would not violate the constitutional rights of Sergio and Lacanilao.

The said provision states that the testimony of any person may be taken by deposition upon oral or written interrogatories.

Calida said this was the same provision that the RTC had used in its decision allowing the taking of Veloso’s deposition in her jail cell in Jakarta.

“The Court of Appeals should recognize that in the performance of their duties amid the constantly and rapidly changing legal landscape, trial courts are persistently called upon to read laws not as estate mausoleums of texts, but as living, breathing and evolving documents,” the solicitor general said.

In the same motion, Calida also asked the CA to dismiss the instant petition filed by the respondents against the use of Veloso’s statements in the hearing.

In its ruling dated Dec. 13, 2017, the appellate court sided with the arguments raised by Sergio and Lacanilao that allowing the Philippine Embassy in Indonesia to get her deposition would violate their right to confront the witness face to face and to have compulsory process to secure the attendance of witnesses and the production of evidence which was guaranteed under Section 14, Paragraph 1 of the 1987 Constitution.

The CA said the petition filed by Sergio and Lacanilao was “impressed with merit” and that the “respondent judge erred in granting the subject motion”.

The CA agreed with the petitioners that Veloso should be present before a trial if she were to testify.

“Generally, the examination of witnesses must be done orally before a judge in open court,” the appellate court said.

Sergio and Lacanilao are facing human trafficking charges for allegedly duping her to smuggle illegal drugs in Indonesia last 2010. They remained under police custody.

Veloso’s camp said the deposition would boost her defense in the drug trafficking conviction in Indonesia.

The National Union of Peoples’ Lawyers (NUPL), Veloso and her family’s counsel in the Philippines, meanwhile welcomed the OSG’s move filing the MR.

“We gladly welcome this position by the OSG on this specific case and particular issue as it is compatible and is on all fours with our submission as Philippine counsels for Mary Jane and her family,” Edre Olalia, who is the NUPL president, said in a statement.

He said that Sergio and Lacanilao have already “categorically and unequivocally” admitted that Veloso was a “victim” who did not know that her luggage contained heroin when she was arrested in 2010.

“Hence, to stop her from testifying is not only simply absurd and a gross injustice but is a matter of life and death for her,” Olalia added.

Veloso was arrested in Indonesia in April 2010 for smuggling 2.6 kilograms of heroin.

In October 2010, she was sentenced to death but her execution was put on hold in 2016 after the Philippine government said her testimony would be vital in the human trafficking charges filed against her illegal recruiters.

Indonesian President Joko Widodo stopped Veloso’s execution on April 29, 2015 after then President Benigno Aquino III appealed her case.

Earlier, the Department of Foreign Affairs assured the family of Veloso of the government’s continued support as well as for her to be able to prove she was a victim of human trafficking despite the CA ruling.