Lourdes Rubrico
2
. LOURDES RUBRICO, ET. AL., VS. GLORIA MACAPAGAL-ARROYO, ET. AL., February 10, 2010 Facts: On 03 April 2007, Lourdes Rubrico, chair of Ugnayan ng Maralita para sa Gawa Adhikan, was abducted by armed men belonging to the 301st Air Intelligence and Security Squadron (AISS) based in Lipa City while attending a Lenten pabasa in Dasmarinas, Cavite. She was brought to and detained at the air base without charges. She was released a week after relentless interrogation, but only after she signed a statement that she would be a military asset. Despite her release, she was tailed on at least 2 occasions. Hence, Lourdes filed a complaint with the Office of the Ombudsman a criminal complaint for kidnapping and arbitrary detention and grave misconduct against Cuaresma, Alfaro, Santana, and Jonathan, but nothing has happened. She likewise reported the threats and harassment incidents to the Dasmarinas municipal and Cavite provincial police stations, but nothing eventful resulted from their investigation. Meanwhile, the human rights group Karapatan conducted an investigation which indicated that men belonging to the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) led the abduction of Lourdes. Based on such information, Rubrico filed a petition for the writ of amparo with the Supreme Court on 25 October 2007, praying that respondents be ordered to desist from performing any threatening act against the security of petitioners and for the Ombudsman to immediately file an information for kidnapping qualified with the aggravating circumstance of gender of the offended party. Rubrico also prayed for damages and for respondents to produce documents submitted to any of them on the case of Lourdes. The Supreme Court issued the desired writ and then referred the petition to the Court of Appeals (CA) for summary hearing and appropriate action. At the hearing conducted on 20 November 2007, the CA granted petitioner’s motion that the petition and writ be served on Darwin Sy/Reyes, Santana, Alfaro, Cuaresma, and Jonathan. By a separate resolution, the CA dropped the President as respondent in the case. On 31 July 2008, after due proceedings, the CA rendered its partial judgment, dismissing the petition with respect to Esperon, Razon, Roquero, Gomez, and Ombudsman. Hence, the petitioners filed a Petition for Review on Certiorari with the Supreme Court. Issue: Whether or Not the doctrine of command responsibility is applicable in an amparo petition? Held:
-
Upload
nandie-joy -
Category
Documents
-
view
220 -
download
0
Transcript of Lourdes Rubrico
8/12/2019 Lourdes Rubrico
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/lourdes-rubrico 1/2
. LOURDES RUBRICO, ET. AL., VS. GLORIA MACAPAGAL-ARROYO, ET. AL., February 10, 2010
Facts:
On 03 April 2007, Lourdes Rubrico, chair of Ugnayan ng Maralita para sa Gawa Adhikan,
was abducted by armed men belonging to the 301st Air Intelligence and Security Squadron(AISS) based in Lipa City while attending a Lenten pabasa in Dasmarinas, Cavite. She was
brought to and detained at the air base without charges. She was released a week after
relentless interrogation, but only after she signed a statement that she would be a military
asset. Despite her release, she was tailed on at least 2 occasions. Hence, Lourdes filed a
complaint with the Office of the Ombudsman a criminal complaint for kidnapping and arbitrary
detention and grave misconduct against Cuaresma, Alfaro, Santana, and Jonathan, but nothing
has happened. She likewise reported the threats and harassment incidents to the Dasmarinas
municipal and Cavite provincial police stations, but nothing eventful resulted from their
investigation.
Meanwhile, the human rights group Karapatan conducted an investigation which
indicated that men belonging to the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) led the abduction of
Lourdes. Based on such information, Rubrico filed a petition for the writ of amparo with the
Supreme Court on 25 October 2007, praying that respondents be ordered to desist from
performing any threatening act against the security of petitioners and for the Ombudsman to
immediately file an information for kidnapping qualified with the aggravating circumstance of
gender of the offended party. Rubrico also prayed for damages and for respondents to produce
documents submitted to any of them on the case of Lourdes.
The Supreme Court issued the desired writ and then referred the petition to the Court
of Appeals (CA) for summary hearing and appropriate action. At the hearing conducted on 20November 2007, the CA granted petitioner’s motion that the petition and writ be served on
Darwin Sy/Reyes, Santana, Alfaro, Cuaresma, and Jonathan. By a separate resolution, the CA
dropped the President as respondent in the case.
On 31 July 2008, after due proceedings, the CA rendered its partial judgment, dismissing
the petition with respect to Esperon, Razon, Roquero, Gomez, and Ombudsman.
Hence, the petitioners filed a Petition for Review on Certiorari with the Supreme Court.
Issue:
Whether or Not the doctrine of command responsibility is applicable in an amparo
petition?
Held:
8/12/2019 Lourdes Rubrico
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/lourdes-rubrico 2/2
