Republic of the Philippines

Commission on Human Rights

Regional Office 02
Tuguegarao City, Cagayan

JOEY ALCAIDE, ET. AL,

Complainonfs

-versus- C H R C a s e N o : CHR-ll-2015-0455
F o r : VIOLATION OF SECTION 29, R.A 9 U 5 &
ABUSE OF AUHTORITY

P/SI JOHN RICAMANO,

SP01 OLIVER SIBAYAN,
SPOl JOMELALIGADO
MEMBERS OF DIFFUN POLICE STATION, QUIRINO
Respondents.

NOTICE OF RESOLUTION

TO:

JOEY ALCAIDE, ET AL
BJMP QUIRINO

DIFFUN POLICE STATION

Diffun, Quirino

GREETINGS:

Please t a k e notice that o n M a r c h 08,2017, t h e Regional Office N o .

02, Comnnission o n H u m a n Rights, issued a resolution in t h e a b o v e - e n t i t l e d
c a s e . A c e r t i f i e d c o p y o f t h e r e s o l u t i o n is h e r e b y f u r n i s h e d t h e p a r t i e s .

Y o u m a y file a M o t i o n f o r R e c o n s i d e r a t i o n v^ithin f i f t e e n ( 1 5 ) d a y s
f r o m r e c e i p t o f this n o t i c e .

T u g u e g a r a o City, M a r c h 08, 2017.

^ n Y . jiAA^ P.^ALIGA;X:PA
Rggionaj/Director
 Republic of the Philippines
Commission on Human Rights
Regional Office 02
Tuguegarao City, Cagayan

JOEY ALCAIDE, ET. AL,

Complainants

-versus- C H R C a s e N o : CHR-ll-2015-0455
F o r : VIOLATION OF SECTION 29, R.A 9165 &
ABUSE OF AUHTORITY

P/SI JOHN RICAMANO,

SPOl OLIVER SIBAYAN,
SPOl JOMELALIGADO
MEMBERS OF DIFFUN POLICE STATION, QUIRINO
Respondents.
X X

RESOLUTION NO. -^oi^'O^

I. Introduction

This c a s e s t e m m e d f r o m t h e l e t t e r - c o m p l a i n t o f J o e y A l c a i d e a n d
s e v e r a l o t h e r d e t a i n e e s o f B u r e a u o f Jail M a n a g e m e n t a n d P e n o l o g y
(BJMP) o f Quirino against s o m e m e m b e r s o f t h e Diffun Police Station,
Q u i r i n o n a m e l y , P/SI J o h n R i c a m a n o , S P O l O l i v e r S i b a y a n a n d S P O l
J o m e l A l i g a d o , f o r p l a n t i n g o f e v i d e n c e a n d illegally arresting t h e
complainants.

II. Facts of the Case

As p e r r e c o r d s o f this c a s e , t h e c o m p l a i n a n t s i n their l e t t e r - c o m p l a i n t
alleges that the herein respondents f r a m e d t h e m up a n d only planted the
e v i d e n c e against t h e m in blatant violation o f Section 2 9 o f R.A 9 1 6 5
otherwise k n o w n C o m p r e h e n s i v e D a n g e r o u s Drugs A c t . T h e letter-
c o m p l a i n t h o w e v e r failed t o disclose h o w t h e a l l e g e d planting o f
e v i d e n c e w a s d o n e o r h o w d i d it h a p p e n .

Further, investigation i nt h e instant c a s e reveals t h a t t h e c o m p l a i n a n t s

a r e n o l o n g e r i n t e r e s t e d i n p u r s u i n g this c a s e a n d i n f o r m e d t h e
investigator assigned that they h a d e n g a g e d the services o f a private
l a w y e r w h o h a d a l r e a d y filed a n administrative c o m p l a i n t against t h e
respondent before the National Police Commission ( N A P O L C O M ) .

W i t h this t u r n o f e v e n t s , t h e r e s p o n d e n t s w e r e n o l o n g e r r e q u i r e d t o
submit c o u n t e r - a f f i d a v i t o ra n y d o c u m e n t s t o e x p l a i n their side.
 III. Issue/s

T h e issues t o b e r e s o l v e d in t h e instant c o s e a r e t h e f o l l o w i n g , t o w i t :

a . W h e t h e r o r n o t t h e r e exist h u n n a n rights v i o l a t i o n specifically

v i o l a t i o n o f t h e right t o liberty a n d security (illegal arrest a n d
planting of evidence);

b. W h e t h e r o r n o t t h e r e s p o n d e n t s a r e liable f o r said h u n n a n rights

violation;

IV. Citation of Applicable Human Rigtits Instruments, Domestic Law

and Jurisprudence

W e i l - e n t r e n c h e d is t h a t r u l e u n d e r A r t i c l e 3 o f t h e U n i v e r s a l D e c l a r a t i o n
o f H u n n a n R i g h t s t h a t " E v e r y o n e has the right to life, liberty and security of
person".

In t h e S o n n e v e i n . A r t i c l e 9 o f t h e I n t e r n a t i o n a l C o n v e n t i o n o n C i v i l a n d
P o l i t i c a l R i g h t s provides t h a t "Everyone has the right to liberty and security
of person. No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest or detention. No
one shall be deprived of his liberty except on such grounds and in
accordance with such procedure as are established by law." (Article 9 of
the International Convention on Civil and Political Rights)

V. Finding/ Evaluation

P e r u s a l o f t h e r e c o r d s o f t h e c o s e w o u l d s h o w t h a t t h e issues h a d
already b e c o n n e nnoot a n d acodennic inosnnuch as t h e connploinonts o r e
n o longer interested in pursuing t h e c a s e a n d t h e fact that a private
l a w y e r a c t i n g o n their b e h a l f h a d a l r e a d y filed a n adnninistrative
complaint against t h erespondent before t h e N A P O L C O M .

H o w e v e r , n o t w i t h s t a n d i n g t h e m o o t n e s s o f t h e issues i n this c a s e , this

o f f i c e d e e m e d it w i s e a n d p r o p e r t o r e s o l v e t h e issues r a i s e d s o t h a t it
m a y serve as g u i d e f o r future c o s e s involving similar set o f facts.

In r e s o l v i n g t h e i s s u e s , i t is w o r t h y o f n o t e t h a t a l l e g a t i o n s o r e n o t
s y n o n y m o u s t o guilt a n d t h e r e f o r e h e w h o alleges must p r o v e t h e s o m e .
J u r i s p r u d e n c e d i c t a t e s t h a t l o w e n f o r c e r s a c t i n g i n line o f d u t y o r e
p r e s u m e d t o h o v e a c t e d w i t h r e g u l a r i t y . S t r o n g e v i d e n c e is n e c e s s a r y i n
order t o claim that t h e legal procedures h o v e n o t b e e n complied with.
The S u p r e m e C o u r t h a s steadfastly a d h e r e d t o t h e d o c t r i n e w h i c h states
t h a t ''Government officials are presumed to perform their functions with
regularity and strong evidence is necessary to rebut this presumption."
F a i l u r e t o p r e s e n t e v i d e n c e t h a t w o u l d s h o w t h a t t h e r e is i r r e g u l a r i t y i n t h e
c o n d u c t o f public officers n e g a t e s c l a i m for irregular c o n d u c t . Further,
r e s p o n d e n t s h a s n o o b l i g a t i o n t o p r o v i d e c o n t o v e r t i n g e v i d e n c e if t h e
complainants themselves failed to provide o n e .

VI. Findings and Recommendation

WHEREFORE, p r e m i s e s c o n s i d e r e d , t h e c a s e is h e r e b y DISMISSED f o r
being moot a n d academic.

M A r c h 8, 2017, T u g u e g a r a o City, C a g a y a n .

Recomm' ng Approval: