Sec. of Nat'l Defense v.

Manalo
G.R. No. 180906
Oct. 07, 2008

PUNO, C.J.:

FACTS:

This is an appeal via Petition for Review under Rule 45 of the Rules of Court in
relation to Section 191 of the Rule on the Writ of Amparo, seeking to reverse and set
aside on both questions of fact and law, the Decision promulgated by the Court of
Appeals in C.A. G.R. AMPARO No. 00001, entitled "Raymond Manalo and Reynaldo
Manalo, petitioners, versus The Secretary of National Defense, the Chief of Staff,
Armed Forces of the Philippines, respondents."

This case was originally a Petition for Prohibition, Injunction, and Temporary
Restraining Order (TRO)2 filed before this Court by herein respondents (therein
petitioners) on August 23, 2007 to stop herein petitioners (therein respondents)
and/or their officers and agents from depriving them of their right to liberty and other
basic rights. Therein petitioners also sought ancillary remedies, Protective Custody
Orders, Appointment of Commissioner, Inspection and Access Orders, and all other
legal and equitable reliefs under Article VIII, Section 5(5)3 of the 1987 Constitution
and Rule 135, Section 6 of the Rules of Court. In our Resolution dated August 24,
2007, we (1) ordered the Secretary of the Department of National Defense and the
Chief of Staff of the AFP, their agents, representatives, or persons acting in their
stead, including but not limited to the Citizens Armed Forces Geographical Unit
(CAFGU) to submit their Comment; and (2) enjoined them from causing the arrest of
therein petitioners, or otherwise restricting, curtailing, abridging, or depriving them of
their right to life, liberty, and other basic rights as guaranteed under Article III,
Section 1 of the 1987 Constitution.

While the August 23, 2007 Petition was pending, the Rule on the Writ
of Amparo took effect on October 24, 2007. Forthwith, therein petitioners filed a
Manifestation and Omnibus Motion to Treat Existing Petition as Amparo Petition, to
Admit Supporting Affidavits, and to Grant Interim and Final Amparo Reliefs. They
prayed that: (1) the petition be considered a Petition for the Writ of Amparo under
Sec. 266 of the Amparo Rule; (2) the Court issue the writ commanding therein
respondents to make a verified return within the period provided by law and
containing the specific matter required by law; (3) they be granted the interim reliefs
allowed by the Amparo Rule and all other reliefs prayed for in the petition but not
covered by the Amparo Rule; (4) the Court, after hearing, render judgment as
required in Sec. 18 of the Amparo Rule; and (5) all other just and equitable reliefs.

Respondent Raymond Manalo recounted that about one or two weeks before
February 14, 2006, several uniformed and armed soldiers and members of the
CAFGU summoned to a meeting all the residents of their barangay in San Idelfonso,
Bulacan. Respondents were not able to attend as they were not informed of the
gathering, but Raymond saw some of the soldiers when he passed by
the barangay hall.

On February 14, 2006, Raymond was sleeping in their house in Buhol na Mangga,
San Ildefonso, Bulacan. At past noon, several armed soldiers wearing white shirts,
fatigue pants and army boots, entered their house and roused him. They asked him
if he was Bestre, but his mother, Ester Manalo, replied that he was Raymond, not
Bestre. The armed soldier slapped him on both cheeks and nudged him in the
stomach. He was then handcuffed, brought to the rear of his house, and forced to
the ground face down. He was kicked on the hip, ordered to stand and face up to the
light, then forcibly brought near the road. He told his mother to follow him, but three
soldiers stopped her and told her to stay.

Among the men who came to take him, Raymond recognized brothers Michael de la
Cruz, Madning de la Cruz, "Puti" de la Cruz, and "Pula" de la Cruz, who all acted as
lookout. They were all members of the CAFGU and residing in Manuzon, San
Ildefonso, Bulacan. He also recognized brothers Randy Mendoza and Rudy
Mendoza, also members of the CAFGU. While he was being forcibly taken, he also
saw outside of his house two barangay councilors, Pablo Cunanan and Bernardo
Lingasa, with some soldiers and armed men.

The men forced Raymond into a white L300 van. Once inside, he was blindfolded.
Before being blindfolded, he saw the faces of the soldiers who took him. Later, in his
18 months of captivity, he learned their names. The one who drove the van was
Rizal Hilario alias Rollie Castillo, whom he estimated was about 40 years of age or
older. The leader of the team who entered his house and abducted him was
"Ganata." He was tall, thin, curly-haired and a bit old. Another one of his abductors
was "George" who was tall, thin, white-skinned and about 30 years old.

The van drove off, then came to a stop. A person was brought inside the van and
made to sit beside Raymond. Both of them were beaten up. On the road, he
recognized the voice of the person beside him as his brother Reynaldo's. The van
stopped several times until they finally arrived at a house. Raymond and Reynaldo
were each brought to a different room. With the doors of their rooms left open,
Raymond saw several soldiers continuously hitting his brother Reynaldo on the head
and other parts of his body with the butt of their guns for about 15 minutes. After
which, Reynaldo was brought to his (Raymond's) room and it was his (Raymond's)
turn to be beaten up in the other room. The soldiers asked him if he was a member
of the New People's Army. Each time he said he was not, he was hit with the butt of
their guns. He was questioned where his comrades were, how many soldiers he had
killed, and how many NPA members he had helped. Each time he answered none,
they hit him.

In the next days, Raymond's interrogators appeared to be high officials as the

soldiers who beat him up would salute them, call them "sir," and treat them with
respect. He was in blindfolds when interrogated by the high officials, but he saw their
faces when they arrived and before the blindfold was put on. He noticed that the
uniform of the high officials was different from those of the other soldiers. One of
those officials was tall and thin, wore white pants, tie, and leather shoes, instead of
combat boots. He spoke in Tagalog and knew much about his parents and family,
and a habeas corpus case filed in connection with the respondents'
abduction.16 While these officials interrogated him, Raymond was not manhandled.
But once they had left, the soldier guards beat him up. When the guards got drunk,
they also manhandled respondents. During this time, Raymond was fed only at night,
usually with left-over and rotten food.

On the third week of respondents' detention, two men arrived while Raymond was
sleeping and beat him up. They doused him with urine and hot water, hit his stomach
with a piece of wood, slapped his forehead twice with a .45 pistol, punched him on
the mouth, and burnt some parts of his body with a burning wood. When he could no
longer endure the torture and could hardly breathe, they stopped. They then
subjected Reynaldo to the same ordeal in another room. Before their torturers left,
they warned Raymond that they would come back the next day and kill him.

The following night, Raymond attempted to escape. He waited for the guards to get
drunk, then made noise with the chains put on him to see if they were still awake.
When none of them came to check on him, he managed to free his hand from the
chains and jumped through the window. He passed through a helipad and firing
range and stopped near a fishpond where he used stones to break his chains. After
walking through a forested area, he came near a river and an Iglesia ni Kristo
church. He talked to some women who were doing the laundry, asked where he was
and the road to Gapan. He was told that he was in Fort Magsaysay.19 He reached
the highway, but some soldiers spotted him, forcing him to run away. The soldiers
chased him and caught up with him. They brought him to another place near the
entrance of what he saw was Fort Magsaysay. He was boxed repeatedly, kicked,
and hit with chains until his back bled. They poured gasoline on him. Then a so-
called "Mam" or "Madam" suddenly called, saying that she wanted to see Raymond
before he was killed. The soldiers ceased the torture and he was returned inside Fort
Magsaysay where Reynaldo was detained.

For some weeks, the respondents had a respite from all the torture. Their wounds
were treated. When the wounds were almost healed, the torture resumed,
particularly when respondents' guards got drunk.

Raymond recalled that sometime in April until May 2006, he was detained in a room
enclosed by steel bars. He stayed all the time in that small room measuring 1 x 2
meters, and did everything there, including urinating, removing his bowels, bathing,
eating and sleeping. He counted that eighteen people22 had been detained in
that bartolina, including his brother Reynaldo and himself.

For about three and a half months, the respondents were detained in Fort
Magsaysay. They were kept in a small house with two rooms and a kitchen. One
room was made into the bartolina. The house was near the firing range, helipad and
mango trees. At dawn, soldiers marched by their house. They were also sometimes
detained in what he only knew as the "DTU."

At the DTU, a male doctor came to examine respondents. He checked their body
and eyes, took their urine samples and marked them. When asked how they were
feeling, they replied that they had a hard time urinating, their stomachs were aching,
and they felt other pains in their body. The next day, two ladies in white arrived. They
also examined respondents and gave them medicines, including orasol, amoxicillin
and mefenamic acid. They brought with them the results of respondents' urine test
and advised them to drink plenty of water and take their medicine. The two ladies
returned a few more times. Thereafter, medicines were sent through the "master" of
the DTU, "Master" Del Rosario alias Carinyoso at Puti. Respondents were kept in the
DTU for about two weeks. While there, he met a soldier named Efren who said that
Gen. Palparan ordered him to monitor and take care of them.

One day, Rizal Hilario fetched respondents in a Revo vehicle. They, along with Efren
and several other armed men wearing fatigue suits, went to a detachment in Pinaud,
San Ildefonso, Bulacan. Respondents were detained for one or two weeks in a big
two-storey house. Hilario and Efren stayed with them. While there, Raymond was
beaten up by Hilario's men.

From Pinaud, Hilario and Efren brought respondents to Sapang, San Miguel,
Bulacan on board the Revo. They were detained in a big unfinished house inside the
compound of "Kapitan" for about three months. When they arrived in Sapang, Gen.
Palparan talked to them. They were brought out of the house to a basketball court in
the center of the compound and made to sit. Gen. Palparan was already waiting,
seated. He was about two arms' length away from respondents. He began by asking
if respondents felt well already, to which Raymond replied in the affirmative. He
asked Raymond if he knew him. Raymond lied that he did not. He then asked
Raymond if he would be scared if he were made to face Gen. Palparan. Raymond
responded that he would not be because he did not believe that Gen. Palparan was
an evil man.

ISSUE:
Whether or not the Philippine Military personnel violated the right to life, liberty and
security of Manalo Brothers.

HELD:

The petition of the petitioners on the Writ of Amparo seeking to reverse and set aside
on both questions of fact and law, the Decision promulgated by the Court of Appeals
was dismissed by the Supreme Court.

The Court come to the reliefs granted by the Court of Appeals, which petitioners
question.

First, that petitioners furnish respondents all official and unofficial reports of the
investigation undertaken in connection with their case, except those already in file
with the court.

Second, that petitioners confirm in writing the present places of official assignment of
M/Sgt. Hilario aka Rollie Castillo and Donald Caigas.

Third, that petitioners cause to be produced to the Court of Appeals all medical
reports, records and charts, and reports of any treatment given or recommended and
medicines prescribed, if any, to the Manalo brothers, to include a list of medical
personnel (military and civilian) who attended to them from February 14, 2006 until
August 12, 2007.

With respect to the first and second reliefs, petitioners argue that the production
order sought by respondents partakes of the characteristics of a search warrant.
Thus, they claim that the requisites for the issuance of a search warrant must be
complied with prior to the grant of the production order, namely: (1) the application
must be under oath or affirmation; (2) the search warrant must particularly describe
the place to be searched and the things to be seized; (3) there exists probable cause
with one specific offense; and (4) the probable cause must be personally determined
by the judge after examination under oath or affirmation of the complainant and the
witnesses he may produce.152 In the case at bar, however, petitioners point out that
other than the bare, self-serving and vague allegations made by respondent
Raymond Manalo in his unverified declaration and affidavit, the documents
respondents seek to be produced are only mentioned generally by name, with no
other supporting details. They also argue that the relevancy of the documents to be
produced must be apparent, but this is not true in the present case as the
involvement of petitioners in the abduction has not been shown.

Petitioners' arguments do not hold water. The production order under

the Amparo Rule should not be confused with a search warrant for law enforcement
under Article III, Section 2 of the 1987 Constitution. This Constitutional provision is a
protection of the people from the unreasonable intrusion of the government, not a
protection of the government from the demand of the people such as respondents.

Instead, the Amparo production order may be likened to the production of documents
or things under Section 1, Rule 27 of the Rules of Civil Procedure which provides in
relevant part, viz:

Section 1. Motion for production or inspection order.

Upon motion of any party showing good cause therefor, the court in
which an action is pending may (a) order any party to produce and
permit the inspection and copying or photographing, by or on behalf of
the moving party, of any designated documents, papers, books of
accounts, letters, photographs, objects or tangible things, not
privileged, which constitute or contain evidence material to any matter
involved in the action and which are in his possession, custody or
control...

In Material Distributors (Phil.) Inc. v. Judge Natividad,153 the respondent judge, under
authority of Rule 27, issued a subpoena duces tecum for the production and
inspection of among others, the books and papers of Material Distributors (Phil.) Inc.
The company questioned the issuance of the subpoena on the ground that it violated
the search and seizure clause. The Court struck down the argument and held that
the subpoena pertained to a civil procedure that "cannot be identified or confused
with unreasonable searches prohibited by the Constitution..."
Moreover, in his affidavit, petitioner AFP Chief of Staff himself undertook "to provide
results of the investigations conducted or to be conducted by the concerned unit
relative to the circumstances of the alleged disappearance of the persons in whose
favor the Writ of Amparo has been sought for as soon as the same has been
furnished Higher headquarters."

With respect to the second and third reliefs, petitioners assert that the disclosure of
the present places of assignment of M/Sgt. Hilario aka Rollie Castillo and Donald
Caigas, as well as the submission of a list of medical personnel, is irrelevant,
improper, immaterial, and unnecessary in the resolution of the petition for a writ
of Amparo. They add that it will unnecessarily compromise and jeopardize the
exercise of official functions and duties of military officers and even unwittingly and
unnecessarily expose them to threat of personal injury or even death.

On the contrary, the disclosure of the present places of assignment of M/Sgt.

Hilario aka Rollie Castillo and Donald Caigas, whom respondents both directly
implicated as perpetrators behind their abduction and detention, is relevant in
ensuring the safety of respondents by avoiding their areas of territorial jurisdiction.
Such disclosure would also help ensure that these military officers can be served
with notices and court processes in relation to any investigation and action for
violation of the respondents' rights. The list of medical personnel is also relevant in
securing information to create the medical history of respondents and make
appropriate medical interventions, when applicable and necessary.

In blatant violation of our hard-won guarantees to life, liberty and security, these
rights are snuffed out from victims of extralegal killings and enforced
disappearances. The writ of Amparo is a tool that gives voice to preys of silent guns
and prisoners behind secret walls.