Secretary of National Defense vs. Manalo (EVIDENCE)

Secretary of National Defense vs. Manalo

GR No. 180906, October 7, 2008

Facts:

Raymond and Reynaldo were taken by some members of the CAFGU. They were interrogated and beaten up several times. After detention of more than one year, Raymond and Reynaldo were able to escape. Thereafter, respondents filed a petition for prohibition, injunction, and temporary restraining order against the petitioners. In the meantime and while the petition was pending, the Rule on the Writ of Amparo was promulgated. The Court then resolved to treat the petition as a petition for a writ of amparo. Lt. Col. Jimenez was directed to investigate the alleged abduction of the respondents by CAFGU auxiliaries under his unit. Jimenez found that the participation of the petitioners in the abduction and disappearance of the Manalo brothers were unsubstantiated.

Issue:

Whether Manalo Brothers entitled to the privilege of the writ of amparo.

Ruling:

Yes, the privilege of writ of amparo is a remedy available to victims of extra judicial killings and enforced disappearances or threats of similar nature, regardless of whether the perpetrator of unlawful act or omission is a public official or employee or a private individual. It is envisioned basically to protect and guarantee the right to life, liberty and security of persons, free from fear and threats that vitiate the quality of life.
This case delineates as well the meaning of enforced disappearances which are attended by the following characteristics: an arrest, detention or abduction of a person by a government official or organized groups or private individuals acting with the direct or indirect acquiescence of the government, the refusal of the state to disclose the fate or whereabouts of the persons concerned or a refusal to acknowledge the deprivation of liberty which places such persons outside the protection of law.