Lawyers of the Ampatuans have used some of the pieces of evidence presented by government prosecutors to refute that there was a rebellion in Maguindanao after the infamous massacre of 57 people in the province last year.

Judge Vivencio Baclig, of Quezon City Regional Trial Court Branch 77, allowed and even admitted the evidence presented by the defense led by Philip Sigfried Fortun.

This prompted Department of Justice (DoJ) prosecutors to declare that it was another indication that the presiding judge is biased, and thus, must inhibit himself from further hearing the case.

State Prosecutor Lamberto Fabros argued that Baclig should have not allowed the defense to present evidence since the rebellion case is still at the stage of determining if there was a probable cause against the Ampatuans, led by former Maguindanao Gov. Andal Ampatuan, Sr., and suspended Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao (ARMM) Gov. Zaldy Ampatuan.

"The determination of the probable cause is between the prosecution and the court... nothing in the rules state that the defense are allowed to present at this point," said Fabros.

What Fabros wants to stress is that the presentation of the defense's evidence should be done at least after Andal, Sr.; Zaldy Ampatuan, Anwar Ampatuan, Akmad Ampatuan and suspended acting Maguindanao Gov. Sajid Ampatuan are arraigned.

"It is irregular and highly unprocedural for them to present evidence because they will have their time to present their evidence and cross examine our witnesses," said Fabros.

Baclig, for his part, admitted that it was the first time that the issue of the defense presenting evidence when the court has not yet decide if there is a probable cause on the charges has cropped up.

He admitted that there are neither existing laws nor previous jurisprudence stating that the defense are allowed for that. He, however, ruled that the defense can do so but under a condition that such specific proceedings will be disregarded if a higher court ruled against it.

To which Fabros said: "This will be questioned at the higher level."

Earlier, government prosecutors have asked Baclig to inhibit himself from the case for his alleged partiality towards the defense lawyers, to which the group of Fortun is opposed.

Baclig had already issued a ruling junking the motion to inhibit by the DoJ prosecutors but Fabros said they have already filed a motion for reconsideration.

On Tuesday's continuation of the hearing on the judicial determination of probable cause on the rebellion case and the motion to defer transfer of the Ampatuans from their jail in Mindanao to a detention facility in Metro Manila, Fortun presented at least 11 major pieces of evidence to refute the rebellion case against Ampatuans.

Among those presented were pictures of protest actions in Maguindanao last year showing some people holding placards expressing support to the Ampatuans. The pictures were the ones presented earlier by the prosecution to establish that one of the elements of rebellion was present with the conduct of rallies.

But Fortun deemed it otherwise, saying the pictures only proved that there was no violence, no armed struggle and political reason to overthrow the government.

Among the pieces of evidence presented were the motions filed by the Ampatuans before various courts after their arrests and the certificates of candidacy they filed to run for public office in this year's elections.

Fortun said the filing of various petitions before the courts are indication that his clients are resorting to legal ways to redress their grievances while the filing of certificate of candidacy is a proof that they do not want to overthrow the government but are in fact recognizing them by allowing the legal processes for seeking elective posts.