Rebellion Charge Baseless, Beltran’s Lawyers Say
Beltran’s Incarceration, a Dent in the Country’s Judicial Proceedings

The rebellion charge against detained Anakpawis (Toiling Masses) Rep. Crispin Beltran is “baseless,” says Romeo Capulong, one of Beltran’s lawyers.  Capulong added that the continued detention of Beltran is “too high a price to pay” for an innocent man and a “dent in our judicial proceedings”.

BY EMILY VITAL
Bulatlat

The rebellion charge against detained Anakpawis (Toiling Masses) Rep. Crispin Beltran is “baseless,” says his lawyers.

Romeo Capulong, one of Beltran’s lawyers, said in a March 7 hearing at Branch 38 of the Makati Regional Trial Court that there was “no probable cause” for charging the solon with rebellion, a non-bailable offense.

The hearing was precipitated by the filing of a motion for judicial determination of probable cause filed by Beltran’s lawyers, Romeo Capulong, Rachel Pastores, and Amelyn Sato.

“Even the most brief illegal incarceration is too high a price to pay considering the case at hand,” Capulong said. “It is a dent in our judicial proceedings. You are doing it to an innocent man, a member of Congress at that.” 

Out of the 47 documents that were submitted –11 affidavits of witnesses and 36 enclosures – only three affidavits may be considered as relevant evidence, Capulong said. Capulong went on to disprove the claims of three prosecution witnesses.

In an affidavit, a certain Raul Catsuella – who identified himself as a rebel returnee now with the Philippine Army’s 2^nd Infantry Division based at Camp Capinpin, Tanay, Rizal (53 kms. north of Manila) – said he saw Beltran and five other party-list representatives attending the 10^th plenum of the underground Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP) allegedly held in August 1992. In the same affidavit, Catsuella said Beltran was with the New People’s Army (NPA), the CPP’s armed component, from August 1992 to February 1993.

The five other party-list representatives being referred to in the affidavit, namely Reps. Satur Ocampo, Teddy Casiño and Joel Virador of Bayan Muna (People First), Rafael Mariano of Anakpawis, and Liza Maza of the Gabriela Women’s Party (GWP) were also charged with rebellion. Threatened with arrest, the five are now under the protective custody of the House of Representatives.

“Incredible”

Catsuella’s allegation is “inherently incredible,” Capulong said.

He showed the court Beltran’s passport, which revealed that in the period he was supposedly with the NPA, Beltran had gone to France and Osaka, Japan. “[We have a] complete record of all his activities, including his trips abroad,” Capulong said.

”Assuming it is true,” Capulong added, “How can you use that alleged attendance (of the meeting) as a basis for rebellion? Fourteen years ago! This is a mere concoction.”

Another affidavit by Maj. Rino Corpuz alleged that in the Feb. 24 rally, Beltran made the following call: “Ibagsak ang rehimen! Palayasin si Arroyo! Palitan ang gobyernong Arroyo ng gobyernong anakpawis!” (Down with this regime! Oust Arroyo! Replace the Arroyo government with the government of the toiling masses!)

Capulong said Beltran was not in the program and did not give any interview.  Moreover, Capulong insisted that the same alleged utterances were used in another case against Beltran – inciting to sedition.

Another witness, Roel Escala, said in an affidavit that he saw Beltran and the five other party-list representatives alighting from a van at Bukal village, Padre Garcia, Batangas last February 20.

It was in Batangas that 1Lt. Lawrence San Juan, a Magdalo leader who escaped from prison in January, was recaptured.

“(This is a) patent lie,” Capulong said. “Beltran was in Congress on Feb. 20. He attended two committee meetings and a session.”

Capulong said there was also no mention of Beltran’s name in the documents reported to have been confiscated from San Juan on Feb. 25.

Unprepared?

Meanwhile, Emmanuel Velasco, senior state prosecutor, asked the presiding judge for 15 days to file their comment.  Velasco claimed they never received the motion filed by Beltran’s lawyers. “(We have) never read (it) up to this moment.”

Velasco said they have yet to file more pieces of evidence.

“We regret they did not come prepared,” Capulong said.

Sixto Marella Jr., presiding judge, has given public prosecutors seven days to file their comment.

Illegal arrest

Capulong said there had been three attempts to justify the arrest without warrant of Beltran. He cited the 21-year old warrant in a 1985 rebellion charge against Beltran. The second one was the inciting to sedition case. The latest attempt was the rebellion charge.

Capulong said that when he reminded the prosecutors that the 1985 case was already dismissed, they filed the inciting to sedition case.  When they told the prosecutors that Beltran has parliamentary immunity for the inciting to sedition case as it carries a penalty of less than six years imprisonment, the prosecutors filed the rebellion case. 

“The public prosecutors must make up their minds,” he said. Bulatlat

BACK TO TOP ■  PRINTER-FRIENDLY VERSION  ■   COMMENT

© 2006 Bulatlat ■  Alipato Publications

Permission is granted to reprint or redistribute this article, provided its author/s and Bulatlat are properly credited and notified.