SUGGESTED ACTION:
Please write letters to the authorities below requesting their
intervention to ensure that the review of this case is concluded
promptly. The Court of Appeals under the 15th Division, where this
case is pending for review, should consider this as a priority. The
Supreme Court must be urged to consider reviewing their rules
regarding review of cases and procedures on transfers to appeals
court to prevent further delays. It must implement rules and
procedures equally to all cases pending before them.
The Office of the Ombudsman and the Department of Justice (DoJ) must
also ensure the immediate filing of appropriate criminal charges
against the policemen involved, in particular the allegations of
torture and violations of human rights without delay. The
administrative complaint against the State Prosecutor Marilyn
Campomanes for negligence and failure to resolve this case must also
be acted upon. Appropriate charges must be filed against her in court
and sanctions imposed.
The condition and welfare of these five persons, in particular Lenido
Lumanog, who is a kidney transplant patient, presently detained at the
New Bilibid Prison, Muntinlupa City, Metro Manila, must be ensured
that they get proper treatment while in detention. Adequate medicines
and medical attention must be afforded to him without delay. Should
there be a need to transfer him to proper health care agencies to
maintain his health and prevent worsening of his health condition it
must be done so.
To support this appeal, please click:
Sample letter:
Dear ___________,
PHILIPPINES: Supreme Court fails to review death sentences of five
torture victims seven years on
Name of persons convicted for death:
1. Lenido Lumanog. He is a kidney transplant patient requiring
adequate medicines and medical attention.
2. Augusto Santos
3. Senior Police Officer 2 (SPO2) Cesar Fortuna
4. Rameses de Jesus
5. Joel de Jesus
Place of detention: New Bilibid Prisons, Muntinlupa City
Status of the case: The Court of Appeals is yet to complete the
mandatory review of their death sentences after the Supreme Court,
which earlier had jurisdiction to review their case, transferred the
case to them conduct the intermediate review. The mandatory review is
yet to be completed since February 2000.
Names of policemen involved in arresting and torturing the accused:
1. Police Senior Superintendents (Pol. Sr. Supt.) Romulo Sales
2. Sr. Supt.Bartolome Baluyot
3. Several of police officers who are then members of the “Task Force
Rolly”
I am writing to draw your attention to the case of five men, widely
known as the “Abadilla 5”. I have learned that the five men, namely
Lenido Lumanog, Augusto Santos, Senior Police Officer 2 (SPO2) Cesar
Fortuna, Rameses de Jesus and Joel de Jesus, had been in jail for
eleven years. The mandatory review of their case however by the
Supreme Court is yet to be completed.
I am aware that after they were convicted for the murder of police
colonel Rolando Abadilla in June 1996, their sentence has since been
referred to the Supreme Court for mandatory review–whether or not to
uphold the ruling by a local court. I am extremely shocked of the
Supreme Court’s failure to complete the review for five years after
the case had been endorsed to them. I was informed that from February
2000 to January 2005, the Supreme Court failed to finish the review.
And even before concluding it, the Supreme Court transferred this
case to its subordinate court, the Court of Appeals, for them to
conduct an intermediate review instead. The case is presently under
review at the CA’s 15th Division under Justice Marlene
Gonzalez-Sison.
I am deeply concern with the Supreme Court’s decision to transfer
this case. Firstly, the Supreme Court should have been able to
promptly dispense it since this case has since been pending before it
for several years. This excessive delay, as a result of the Supreme
Court’s failure to resolve this case and of its order to transfer the
case to the appeals court, is grossly a cause for concern. I am aware
that since the appeals court took over the case two years ago, there
was no substantial progress. The appeals court once again is yet to
conclude its review. Had the Supreme Court not failed to complete the
mandatory review of this case instead of transferring it to the
appeals court, it could have hastened the disposition of this case.
I am aware that the Supreme Court acted on the transfer invoking the
“Mateo ruling” on July 2004 giving the appeals court the authority to
conduct intermediate review on cases involved capital punishment.
However, while this ruling is invoked in this case, I have learned
that in another case; for instance the ruling on “People vs.
Francisco Larranaga, et al.”, the Supreme Court refused the
petitioner to transfer their case to the appeals court even though
the Mateo ruling is in effect. If the Supreme Court could assert its
jurisdiction over cases pending for its review, then why this was not
observed in this case? I am deeply concerned of this unequal treatment
of cases which denies death convicts equal protection to law.
