CA affirms injunction on Mary Jane Veloso’s testimony
The Court of Appeals (CA) has affirmed its injunction on the testimony of Filipino death row inmate Mary Jane Veloso against the recruiters who allegedly tricked her into transporting illegal drugs to Indonesia in 2010.
In an 18-page decision promulgated on December 13 last year, the Former Eleventh Division reversed the ruling of Judge Anarica Castillo-Reyes of the Sto. Domingo, Nueva Ecija Regional Trial Court that allowed Veloso to testify against Maria Cristina Sergio and her live-in partner Julius Lacanilao.
The CA said Reyes erred when she allowed the deposition of Veloso on April 27 in Yogyakarta Prison, saying the inmate must be present in the Philippines for the court to admit her testimony subject to a cross examination.
"We find that the petitioners have sufficiently established that the respondent judge has committed grave abuse of discretion when it granted the subject motion," the CA said.
PAO cited Section 14 paragraph 2 of the Bill of Rights, which gives, among others, an accused the right to a speedy, impartial, and public trial and meet the witnesses face to face, and to have compulsory process to secure the attendance of witnesses and the production of evidence.
The CA sided with PAO lawyers, saying the imprisonment of Veloso in Indonesia imposes a "limitation on her mobility" to undergo a cross examination in the criminal proceedings.
"Clearly, to take the deposition of the prosecution witness elsewhere and not before the very same court where the case is pending would deprive a detained accused of his right to attend the proceedings," the court said.
The CA said it is "not unmindful of the gravity of the offenses charged against the petitioners. Likewise, we are not oblivious of the sad and unfortunate fate" of Veloso, who was sentenced to die by firing squad in April 2015.
The appellate court, however, said its first duty is to "apply the law." It said Veloso must be present in the Philippines before the court or at least before a judge where the case is pending so that lawyers can test her credibility.
"This is true especially in criminal cases where the Constitution secures to the accused his right to a public trial and to meet the witnesses against him face to face," the CA said.
"The requirement is the safest and most satisfactory method of investigating facts as it enables the judge to test the witness' credibility through his manner and deportment while testifying," it added. —KBK, GMA News
Comments