REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

SUPREME COURT
MANILA

JUNE FERRER G.R. NO. 179130

Petitioner Re: PP vs. Berlin Guerrero
Crim. Case No. B-91-245,
RTC Baguio City, Br. 7

-Versus- -for-
MANDAMUS with Very Urgent
Prayer for TEMPORARY
RESTRAINING ORDER and/or
WRIT OF PRELIMINARY
INJUNCTION
HON.JULIUS MALBAN,
Presiding Judge, Branch 7
Of the Regional Trial Court
of Baguio City
Respondent.
X ---------------------------------------- X

PETITION

Petitioners, by counsel, respectfully state:

NATURE OF THE PETITION

This is a verified Petition for Mandamus under Rule 65 of the Rules of

Court for grave abuse of discretion of the Respondent Judge amounting to lack

or excess of jurisdiction, and seeks:

(a) To order the dismissal of the Information for murder against said

Petitioner and for his immediate release from his current detention.

PARTIES IN THE PETITION

1
 1. Petitioner Pastor JUNE FERRER, who is currently detained in the

Provincial Jail at Trece Martires City, is the Accused in Crim. Case No. B-91-

245, pending before the Regional Trial Court, Branch 19, at Baguio city, for

murder, wherewith Respondent JULIUS D. MALBAN is the Presiding Judge

thereat.

2. Respondent Judge JULIUS D. MALBAN is the Presiding Judge of

the Regional Trial Court, Branch 7, at Baguio city, and whose Order dated

August 2, 2016 is the one being assailed in the present Petition.

TIMELINESS IN FILING THIS PETITION

1. The aforesaid Order of the Respondent Judge, dated August 2, 2016,

the duplicate original of which being hereto attached as ANNEX A, was

received by counsel for Petitioner Pastor JUNE FERRER on August 14, 2007.

Under the Rules (Rule 65, Sec. 4, par. 1), said Petitioner has sixty days from

notice of Order within which to file the Petition. Thus, this Petition is filed well

within the reglamentary period as provided for by law.

2. This Petition is filed sans resort to a motion for reconsideration due to

the very urgent need for intervention of this Honorable Court, considering that

delay in the resolution of the issue would further aggravate the physical

condition of Petitioner Pastor JUNE FERRER who has been in detention since

May 27, 2007 under circumstances of extreme hazards to his life, brought about

by the pains and the beatings he underwent in connection with his abduction, as

will hereafter be further referred to. It will be noted from the records that it took

the Respondent Judge near two months before issuing the herein assailed Order.

2
This despite said Petitioners urgent motion and representation for Respondent

Judge not to delay the issuance of his resolution.

3. There is no appeal, or any plain, speedy, and adequate remedy in the

ordinary course of law available to Petitioners.

ANTECEDENT RELEVANT FACTS

-1-

Petitioner Pastor JUNE FERRER, a Church Pastor and Minister of the

Gospel with the United Church of Christ in the Philippines (UCCP), at about 5

PM of May 27, 2007, was abducted by unknown armed men in civilian clothing

immediately after presiding over the anniversary celebration of the UCCP Local

Church at Malaban, Bian, Laguna, at which Local Church he was then the

Administrative Pastor. At the time of the abduction, he, together with his wife

and their two teenage children, was already aboard a tricycle, on their way to the

UCCP Local Church at nearby Calamba City where he was invited to be one of

the guests at the commemorative memorial service for a fellow church worker

who, exactly a year earlier, had been slain by masked assasins.

-2-

The abduction was carried out in the following manner:

(a) The tricycle they were riding was blocked by

an unmarked white Fiera van;

3
 (b) He was then forcibly dragged at gunpoint by

his captors into the van, his face being slammed

against the floor of the vehicle;

(c) Inside the van, he was blindfolded,

repeatedly slapped, and hit at the nape and at different

parts of his body;

(d) He was brought to a safe house where he

was intensively interrogated and subjected to extreme

forms of torture;

(e) He was threatened to be burned alive, his

whole family killed, and his teen age daughter raped;

(f) They covered his head and face with plastic

bag, alternately loosening and tightening it, depriving

him of oxygen;

(g) His face and body were continuously hit

with big plastic bottles of water, which method was

intended to minimize visible bruising;

(h) he, thus brutalized, passed out twice, and

was awakened by still more physical abuses.

Attached hereto as ANNEX B and B-1, respectively, are the Medico-

Legal Report issued by Dr. Jesse Rey T. Cruel of the Commission on Human

Rights and the Medical Evaluation of Torture and Ill-Treatment issued by Dr.

Reginaldo Pamugas of the Health Action for Human Rights in regard to their

medico-legal findings of the victim. His physical examination came to be done

only after the lapse of two days following the abduction. During said physical

4
examination, pictures were taken of him, copies of which being hereto attached

as ANNEXES B-2, B-3, B-4, B-5, and B-6.

-3-

It was at about 10:00 a.m. of May 28, 2007, the day following his

abduction, when he was brought to a place which he later came to know as

Camp Pantaleon Garcia at Imus, Cavite, and which became his initial place of

confinement. Only then did he learn that he was supposedly arrested by

elements of the Philippine National Police, by virtue of an alias warrant of

arrest, issued on December 28, 1992 (nearly fifteen years earlier) pursuant to an

alleged case of Murder. But throughout his long hours of interrogation and

ordeal, he was never questioned on matters relating to said case. Neither was he

ever shown a copy of the warrant for his arrest, nor ever informed of the nature

of accusation against him. Only later that day (May 28, 2007) was he informed

about the supposed filing of the case at Bacoor, Cavite. But he was not told of

any vital details, such as when and where the incident was supposed to have

occurred and who the victim was.

-4-

In any event, when his relatives had finally managed to obtain copies of

the records of said case, the following facts stood out, most patently and vividly,

from said records:

a) He was never notified about the criminal

complaint against him, filed on March 14, 1991 at the

Municipal Circuit Trial Court of Carmona and GMA,

Cavite, nor about the Information filed on July 2, 1991

at the Regional Trial Court of Bacoor, Cavite. He

5
never had the opportunity to be heard in the

Preliminary Investigation of the case (if one had been

made), much less to confront and examine the

witnesses against him;

(b) The sole witness who allegedly identified

him (through a group picture) in the killing of the

victim (a certain Fernando Hinto) never appeared

before Judge Myrna Lim Verano, the Municipal Judge

who conducted the Preliminary Investigation. As a

matter of fact, Judge Verano, on record, made the

following very significant statement on January 11,

1991 while in the course of propounding questions to

private complainant Ederlinda Yatco (wife of the

supposed victim) during the prelimenary investigation:

T: Magagawan mo kaya ng paraang

madala dito sa husgado si Fernando
Hinto?

S: Sisikapin ko po.

T: Sikapin mo lamang na madala mo

rito si Fernando Hinto dahil kailangan
ng husgadong maimbistigahan siya dahil
sa kasalukuyan, base sa mga
dokumentong naririto sa record ng kaso
ay wala pang lumalabas na direct link sa
pag-akusa dito sa akusado, sinasabi ko
na sa iyo ngayon na mahina pa ang
ebidensiya laban kay Berlin Guerrero at
kung hindi mo madadala rito si Fernando
Hinto ay baka malaglag ang kaso mo,
ano ho?

6
Copy of the record of the preliminary investigation,

covering the foregoing examination of Ederlinda

Yatco as conducted by Judge Myrna V. Lim-Verano, is

hereto attached as ANNEX C. Thereafter, Judge

Verano issued her Resolution, dated February 28,

1991, copy of which being hereto attached as ANNEX

D, in which she stated, among others, to wit:

Eyewitness Fernando G. Hinto failed

to appear despite repeated subpoena so
this investigating officer was not able to
personally examine him and where
warranted, issue an arrest order against
accused. (Emphasis ours)

Despite the failure to ever produce said Fernando

Hinto, an Information for Murder, pursuant to the

aforesaid Resolution, was nevertheless filed against

Petitioner Pastor JUNE FERRER on July 2, 1991, for

which no bail was recommended.

(c) Regional Trial Court Judge Edelwina

Pastoral later issued a Warrant of Arrest against said

Pettioner on August 12, 1991 without personally

examining the Complainant or any of the prosecution

witnesses. No return was filed for the original Warrant

of Arrest and the Judge issued an alias warrant motu

proprio, in her Order dated December 28, 1992.

7
 -5-

During all this entire period, from the isuance of the arrest order until his

abduction -- which spans nearly fifteen (15) years -- he had been a very public

figure, had gone about his activities unmolested as Church Pastor and as student

of Union Theological Seminary at Dasmarinas, Cavite, and had even been

invited to church conferences abroad; yet throughout all this time, he was totally

unaware, and had not the least notion, of the existence of the aforestated

criminal charge, of which, needless to say, he is absolutely and entirely innocent.

-6-

Meanwhile, sometime on May 31, 2007, or four days following the

abduction, the PNP High Command, led by Gen. Oscar Calderon, Chief of the

Philippine National Police, sought a Dialogue with leaders of the United Church

of Christ in the Philippines, headed by Petitioner Bishop ELIEZER M.

PASCUA, UCCP General Secretary, at which Dialogue the PNP High

Command, through Gen. Oscar Calderon, formally acknowledged many errors

over the case of Petitioner Pastor JUNE FERRER, including the circumstances

relative to his illegal and violent arrest and incarceration effected by elements of

the PNP. At said Dialogue, Gen. Calderon specifically stated, among others, the

following:

And from the start nakita naming marami ng

mali. That gives suspicion and that we cannot prevent
everybody from the suspicion dahil maraming mali.
Kaya we would like to correct this. x x (p. 11, par.
2, transcript of the Dialogue)

x x On the identification of the suspects,

wala ng problem. We have identified the unit, the
NSIF, its up to the commander to identify the men who
were sent. Then hindi nya pwedeng sabihin hindi nya
alam dahil mga tao nya yun. Sila ang nag-turn over

8
 dito. Yon ang ano natin. We will ask the commander
to identify the person. x x (p. 14, last par.,
transcript of the Dialogue)

Yong,kamukha noong sinasabi nila, na there

are missing items from the victim,kasi, it is easy na
dagdagan mo ng dagdagan e dahil in the first place
there was no accounting during the taking. Upon the
arrest of the person all the items should be inventoried
in his presence. He should have received the copy of
the receipt of what items taken from them. In the
absence of that, pwedeng dagdagan dahit sa ano wala
namang resibo. Ang during the return of the items
mabuti kung me pinapirma sa kanya meron bang
resibo. Walang problema kahit ano yong binigay ni-
receive mo lang. Walang resibo silang binigay,
walang proweba na kasama yon ng kinuha. Yong mga
kameras, we can claim, pera we can claim, wala
naman silang resibo. Yong credibility ng evidence, its
a question dahil from the start mali na. So yoong
magiging dulo, hindik pwedeng magbunga ng tama
ang mali. So from the start maling mali na ho yon. x
x (p. 15, 2nd par., transcript of the Dialogue)

A copy of the minutes of said Dialogue, including the aforecited relevant

portions thereof, is hereto attached as ANNEX E, E-1, E-2, and E-3.

-7-

The unprecedented brazeness of the incident, victimizing as it did a

religious worker while in the midst of carrying out his work and mission as a

Church Pastor, has aroused the protests and outrage, the herein co- Petitioners

on behalf of their respective church, academic, and/or ecumenical organizations,

and also of numerous other concerned groups and institutions, locally and

abroad.

-8-

Petitioner JUNE FERRER, subsequent to his brutal abduction and illegal

incarceration, filed with the Regional Trial Court, Branch 19, at Bacoor, Cavite,

presided over by Respondent Judge, an Urgent Motion for the Release of the

9
Accused (With Complimentary Prayer to Quash Warrant of Arrest and to

Dismiss Information), dated June 14, 2007, a copy of which being hereto

attached as ANNEX F. This was followed by an Urgent Ex-Parte Motion to

Resolve Pending Incident, dated July 11, 2007, a copy of which being hereto

attached as ANNEX F-1. Finally, said Petitioner submitted an Urgent Motion

(For the Provisional Custody of Accused by the Executive Head of the United

Church of Christ in the Philippines), dated July 24, 2007, a copy of which being

hereto attached as ANNEX F-2.

-9-

Respondent Judge later issued his herein assailed Order (ANNEX A),

dated August 2, 2007, DENYING both the basic motion for said Petitioners

release (ANNEX F), dated June14, 2007, as well as the motion for his

provisional custody by the UCCP Executive Head (ANNEX F-2), dated July 24,

2007.

GROUNDS IN SUPPORT OF THIS PETITION

By his assailed Order, Respondent Judge erred and committed grave

abuse of discretion in denying the Motion of Petitioner JUNE FERRER

(ANNEX F) for his immediate release, given that there absolutely was no legal

basis for his arrest and continued incarceration.

Likewise, by his assailed Order, Respondent Judge likewise erred and

committed grave abuse of discretion in ignoring the facts on record, in keeping

silent about them, in casting aside all the undisputed and uncontested data which

should otherwise compel and make imperative the grant of said Motion.

10
ESSENTIAL DISCUSSION

The Respondent Judge, with grave abuse of discretion, ignored, in his

assailed Order, what patently appears on record, which is as follows:

The record glaringly bears out that the Information was filed against

Petitioner Pastor JUNE FERRER despite utter lack of probable cause to

indict him of the serious crime of Murder. .

RECORDS REVEAL UTTER LACK OF

PROBABLE CAUSE

As already pointed out, Municipal Judge Myrna Lim-Verano, who

conducted the preliminary investigation, even stated during the proceedings

that, without the testimony and examination of the supposed eyewitness

Fernando Hinto, there is nothing that can link JUNE FERRER to the crime

charged (ANNEX C). Yet, in complete and stark violation of the basic rules on

preliminary investigation, as provided for and outlined in Rule 112, Judge

Verano nevertheless gave due course to the filing of Information against

Petitioner Pastor JUNE FERRER. Paradoxically, in her Resolution (ANNEX

D), she referred to the affidavit of witness Hinto which was taken by the police

investigators but, at the same time, underscored in the same Resolution, her

NOT having examined said witness, and her NOT having even seen him.

As so ruled by this Honorable Court in the case of Salonga vs. Pao, 134

SCRA 438:

The purpose of a preliminary investigation is

to secure the innocent against hasty, malicious and
oppressive prosecution, and to protect him from an
open and public accusation of crime, from the trouble,
expense and anxiety of a public trial, and also to
protect the state from useless and expensive trial
(Trocio v. Manta, 118 SCRA 241, citing Hashim v.

11
 Boncan, 71 Phil. 216). The right to a preliminary
investigation is a statutory grant, and to withhold it
would be to transgress constitutional due process
(People v. Oandasa, 25 SCRA 277). However, in order
to satisfy the due process clause it is not enough that
the preliminary investigation is conducted in the sense
of making sure that the transgressor shall not escape
with impunity. A preliminary investigation serves not
only for the purposes of the State. More important, it
is a part of the guarantees of freedom and fair play
which are birthrights of all who live in the country. It
is therefore imperative upon the fiscal or the judge as
the case may be, to relieve the accused from the pain
of going thru a trial once it is ascertained that the
evidence is insufficient to sustain a prima facie case
or that no probable cause exists to form a sufficient
belief as to the guilt of the accused (emphasis
supplied).

Again, in the most recent case of Vicente P. Ladlad, et. al vs. Emmanuel

Y. Velasco, G.R. Nos. 172070-72, promulgated June 1, 2007, the above doctrine

was strongly reiterated, thus:

A preliminary investigation is the crucial sieve

in the criminal justice system which spells for an
individual the difference between months if not years
of agonizing trial and possibly jail term, on the one
hand, and peace of mind and liberty, on the other
hand. Thus, we have characterized the right to a
preliminary investigation as not a mere formal or
technical right but a substantive one, forming part
of due process in criminal justice. This specially holds
true here where the offense charged is punishable by
reclusion perpetua and maybe non-bailable for those
accused as principals.

Whereupon, in the present case, Respondent Judge seriously erred and

gravely abused his discretion in issuing the assailed Order -- in ignoring what

patently appears on record -- in failing to dismiss the case against Petitioner

JUNE FERRER for total lack of probable cause -- and in thereby denying his

release from illegal confinement.

12
PRAYER

WHEREFORE, it is respectfully prayed of this Honorable Court that:

1. Upon the filing of this Petition, a temporary restraining order or writ of

preliminary injunction be issued restraining the Respondent Judge from

conducting further proceedings as against Petitioner JUNE FERRER in Crim.

Case No. B-91-245 entitled People of the Philippines vs. Berlin Guerrero;

2. After notice and hearing, the writ of mandamus be issued: (a)

annulling the assailed Order of the Respondent Judge, dated August 2, 2007; (b)

enjoining and prohibiting said Respondent Judge from proceeding any further

against the JUNE FERRER, and (c) ordering and compelling the immediate

release of said Petitioner from his current detention.

3. Petitioners pray for such other reliefs and remedies as are warranted by

law and equity.

Baguio City, Philippines

March 18, 2017

COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER:

ATTY. KERBY ENABORE
Roll No. 5000
IBP No. 011 Lifetime
PTR No. 70 - 1/2/14 Baguio
MCLE Compliance IV No. 001234
Issued on January 12, 2013

VERIFICATION/CETIFICATION

That I, JUNE FERRER, of legal age, Filipino, married, and currently

detained in the Provincial Jail at Baguio City; do hereby depose and say that: I
am the Petitioners in the above Petition MANDAMUS, with very Urgent Prayer
for TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER and/or WRIT OF PRELIMINARY

13
 INJUNCTION, that I have read the same, and that the contents of said Petition
are true and correct of our own personal knowledge.

Further, in compliance with the Supreme Court Circular No. 28-29

Administrative Order 04-94, we hereby certify that I have neither filed nor
commenced any other action or proceeding involving the same issues with any
court, tribunal, or agency, and that, to the best of our knowledge, no such action
or proceeding is pending with any court, tribunal, or agency, and that if we
should thereafter learn that a similar action or proceeding has been filed or is
pending before any court, tribunal, or agency, I bind ourselves to report that fact
within five (5) days therefrom to the Honorable Court.

Baguio City

March 18, 2017

JUNE FERRER
CTC No. 18494035
Issued Baguio city

SUBSCRIBED and sworn to before me this 24th day of August 2007 at

Quezon City. Affiants exhibited to me their respective Community Tax
Certificates duly noted under their respective names.

MELFORD A. LAPNAWAN
Notary Public
Until December 31, 2017
Tel No.: (074) 442-8931
Doc. No. 91; PTR No. 2198282, 04-30-18 Baguio City,
Page No. 19; IBP O.R. No. 1008288, 4-14-18
Book No. I; Roll No. 51888, 04-29-18
Commission Serial No.: 74-NC-12 (R)
Series of: 2017
MCLE Compliance No. II-0002267, 01-
TIN 428-986-655

14