"The opt-repeated purpose of a preliminary investigation of a criminal complaint is to serve the innocent against hasty, malicious, and oppressive prosecutions, and to protect him from open and public accusation of crime, from the trouble, expenses and anxiety of a public trial, and also to protect the State from useless and expensive prosecutions." (Hashim vs. Boncan, 71 Phil. 216 quoted in O. Bernardo's Criminal Procedures Annotated Fifth Edition page 62)
Let us have a look at how the case against Senator Ping Lacson progressed:
March 27, 2009
The daughters of Salvador Dacer filed a Complaint Affidavit with the DOJ against Senator Lacson
October 26, 2009
Senator Lacson filed a Counter Affidavit. The complainants manifested that they would file a Reply-Affidavit at the hearing on December 1, 2009. Senator Lacson manifested that he would file his Rejoinder-Affidavit and any other evidence on December 18, 2009.
The complainants later manifested that they no longer intended to file a Reply Affidavit and moved that the case be submitted for resolution.
The DOJ panel issued an Order cancelling the Dec 1 and 18 settings and denied a motion for reconsideration filed by Senator Lacson, thereafter issuing its Resolution dated December 18, 2009 finding probable cause against Senator Lacson for two counts of murder.
Was Senator Lacson accorded due process? Was his right as accused trampled upon by the DOJ panel?
It looks like Senator Lacson was not given enough opportunity to controvert the evidence of the complainant against him.
No comments:
Post a Comment