SC: Govt cannot be forced to probe drug war killings
By J.Lo
GOVERNMENT cannot be compelled to investigate and prosecute extrajudicial killings in connection with Duterte administration’s war against illegal drugs, according to Supreme Court (SC).
In decision promulgated SC said writ of continuing mandamus cannot be used to compel government to conduct investigation as it is only remedy in environmental cases.
SC en banc, in decision penned by Associate Justice Maria Filomena Singh, dismissed petition for mandamus filed by several lawyers claimed respondents then Philippine National Police (PNP) chief and now Sen. Ronald dela Rosa, late Commission on Human Rights (CHR) chairman Jose Luis Martin Gascon and then Department of Justice (DOJ) secretary Vitaliano Aguirre II failed to adequately perform their duty to prevent violations of right to life and to investigate and prosecute killings.
Petitioners asked SC to direct respondents, through writ of continuing mandamus, to investigate every allegation of violation of right to life committed under government’s drug war and prosecute perpetrators.
They also asked High Court to order respondents to submit periodic reports on actual number of extrajudicial killings and their circumstances, progress of investigation of each case and criminal charges filed in courts, as well as positive measures adopted to prevent further human rights violations.
In denying petition, SC said writ of mandamus is remedy when any tribunal, corporation, board, officer or person unlawfully neglects to do duty, or unlawfully excludes from another use or enjoyment of right or office.
High Court was not established respondents neglected their duties as respective heads of PNP, DOJ and CHR in preventing and investigating violations of right to life, in relation to drug war.
Petitioners also “offered no concrete proof respondents are remiss in their duties” and their “bare allegations cannot be given credence.”
SC noted that Gascon submitted true copies of CHR’s records for each region on its investigations of extrajudicial and drug-related killings and list of trainings it conducted for police and military sectors from 2016 to 2017.
It added petitioners cannot impose on respondents “ standards and characteristics of investigation which they deem to be appropriate and sufficient through mandamus petition, as it lies only to compel performance of purely ministerial duties.”
High Court said writ of continuing mandamus is available only in environmental cases. It is issued by court in environmental case, ordering any government agency or its officer to perform act decreed by final judgment that shall remain effective until fully satisfied.
SC said respondents cannot be required to submit periodic reports to High Court as such directive violates doctrine of separation of powers.
ISKUP! 