SC to decide on Maguindanao massacre ruling deadline extension

FILE: Maguindanao massacre site in Barangay Salman, Ampatuan, Maguindanao (PCOO photo)

MANILA — The decision on the request of Quezon City Regional Trial Court (RTC) Judge Jocelyn Solis-Reyes for more time to resolve the Maguindanao massacre case is up to the Supreme Court (SC), the Department of Justice (DOJ) said Thursday.

“(W)e shall leave this matter to the sound discretion of the Supreme Court. But we really hope that the good judge would be able to promulgate her decision sooner than later,” Justice Secretary Menardo Guevarra told reporters.

As the massacre marks its 10th anniversary on November 23, the victims’ families had earlier hoped for a promulgation on the case and a guilty verdict for the 197 co-accused in the case.

Under court rules, a judge should announce in open court the date of the promulgation of the decision which should be set within 90 days from the submission of the case for decision.

The Maguindanao massacre case was submitted for decision on August 22.

The attack resulted in the death of 58 people, including 32 journalists and media workers, the single worst peace-time incident involving the killing of newsmen.

Other victims were family members and supporters of the Ampatuan clan’s political foe, Esmael Mangudadatu.

The Quezon City RTC earlier turned down a plea by accused Datu Andal “Unsay” Ampatuan to delay the promulgation of the court’s judgment in the cases arising from the Maguindanao massacre.

In her five-page order, Solis-Reyes denied the motion to re-open trial with a motion to suspend period to set the promulgation of judgment filed by Ampatuan on October 14.

Ampatuan’s lawyers initially asked that the proceedings should be suspended and claimed that prosecution witness Sukarno Badal contacted them through representatives, claiming that he would want to recant his testimony and that what he mentioned during the presentation of evidence were not all true.

The panel of prosecutors, led by Prosecutor Arthur Velasco, objected to the motion on several grounds — that there is no newly- discovered evidence to justify the reopening of the trial, also citing that the necessary judicial affidavit is not attached to the motion.

The witness himself later denied he intends to change his testimony and said he would not likely approach the Ampatuans as they would kill him.