(Editor’s note: Even high officials simply don’t know the meaning of harshness as noted by the author.)
REP. Satur Ocampo is 67 years old, sickly, harassed to the point of near collapse, and very tired. But he has the courage of a man defying ill treatment.
15 murders?
He stands charged of committing multiple murders, some 15 counts, somewhere in Leyte in 1984 or 1985, according to news reports. This means Ocampo reportedly killed 15 NPA members in an alleged purge during martial law. Was the massacre reported then and thoroughly probed?
Prescription problem
The Penal Code declares "that crimes punishable by death, reclusion perpetua, or reclusion temporal shall prescribe in 20 years. (Art. 90) Criminal liability is totally extinguished by "prescription of the crime and by prescription of the penalty." (Art. 89)
The period of "prescription shall commence to run from the day on which the crime is discovered by the offended party, authorities or their agents…"
For readers who analyze
I’m citing Penal Code articles/principles for the benefit of readers who may want to view and analyze the dilemma of detention and arrest for a member of Congress who is now running for reelection.
Is the evidence of guilt strong enough to deny bail to Ocampo? Strong evidence of guilt of a serious offense — like murder — is the main support of denial of bail. It can also overcome the constitutional presumption of innocence.
Skeletons in one grave?
The murders, evidenced by human skeletal remains recently discovered, were allegedly committed more than 20 years ago.
Connecting Ocampo with the crime can be testified to by witnesses as alleged. If the witness was 20, 30, or 50 years old then would the testimony be as clear to the prosecutor and trial judge now. Would the witnesses retain such credibility to prove guilt after 20 years?
How could the remains be identified and the crimes blamed on Satur Ocampo?
Idiotic joyride
There was really no need for our so-called law enforcers to be overly harsh to an old and sickly, but courageous man. To save expense to cut the national deficit/debt, all they needed was a phone call to the clerk of court in Leyte or RTC Judge Ephrem Abando himself — to find out if Ocampo was badly and immediately needed for trial.
Just a single phone call
Naturally, the cellular phone can give the right information if the call was made during office hours, meaning after 8 a.m. Monday, but NOT at 4 a.m. or 3 a.m. called wee hours — the first few hours after midnight.
As it happened, Ocampo and his tormentors returned to Manila in a jiffy to face a Supreme Court hearing tomorrow, Friday. The judge in Leyte said so. The idiotic joyride has no more fathers after it failed
Cellphones for all
Recently, the CoA auditors questioned the purchase of expensive cellphones by an army of officials and their "faithful helpers." These days even an SPO1 owns a cellphone he can use to call Judge Abando in Leyte at 8:10 a.m. to save faces for his eager-beaver PNP superiors and their superiors’ high superiors.
Ocampo’s security
Another thing, Ocampo does not need or deserve protection by a company — 150 men — of policemen. One polite and healthy officer can fly on a commercial jet with him which is safer and faster than a Cesna, "borrowed" for a questionable purpose.
For so simple and harmless a prisoner/detainee, all that Ocampo needed was the usual treatment.
Cabinet members study his case
His case should NOT be studied by four or five Cabinet members who need to attend efficiently to their departments.
In the old days only one assistant fiscal attended to cases of serious offenses committed by popular governors and Cabinet members under detention. Only one jail guard escorted them to any CFI sala in Manila or in the provinces. Jail guards are not expensive and NOT unduly harsh.
Remember this!
A death convict cannot be executed until after the expiration of eight hours following notice of execution on a working day. The notice shall not be sent before sunrise of the sad day. The execution shall take place after eight hours from notice but BEFORE sunset. (Art. 82)
Courtesy to death convicts
This courtesy is extended to a death convict to give him enough time to apply/wait for executive clemency.
In 1993 and 1996, legislation was approved providing that "The death penalty shall be carried out not earlier than one (1) year nor later than eighteen (18) months after the judgment has become final and executory without prejudice to the exercise by the President of his executive clemency powers at all times. (Rep. Acts 7659 and 8177)
Ocampo, a detainee, was not given the courtesy of a process narrated above. And he is far from being a death convict. (Comments are welcome at rvp@fastmail.ph.inter.net)
|
