Martes, Abril 10, 2018
BAKIT ISANG MILYONG AKLAT NA "PUHUNAN AT PAGGAWA"?
ni Gregorio V. Bituin Jr.
Noong ikalawang araw ng Ikawalong Pambansang Kongreso ng Bukluran ng Manggagawang Pilipino (BMP) na isinagawa sa Lungsod ng Baguio nitong Enero 2018 ay nagpasa ako ng tatlong resolusyon. Ang una ay paglalathala ng aklat ng BMP na ilulunsad sa ika-25 anibersaryo nito sa Setyembre 2018. Ang ikalawa ay ang pagdaraos ng BMP ng Marxist Conference para sa ika-200 kaarawan ni Karl Marx sa Mayo 5, 2018. At ang ikatlo rito ay pinamagatan kong "Isang Milyong Aklat ng Puhunan at Paggawa ni Ka Popoy Lagman para sa Isang Milyong Manggagawa."
Pokusan natin ang ikatlong resolusyon. Isang milyong aklat? Aba, aba, aba. Kaya bang ilathala ang ganyang karaming aklat sa isang taon, o sa loob ng tatlong taon bago muling mag-Kongreso ang BMP? Kamangha-mangha ang laki ng bilang! Kaya ba nating ilathala iyan? Gaano kalaking pondo ang magagastos diyan?
Subalit iyon ay isang resolusyong sinang-ayunan ng mayorya ng delegado. Isang resolusyong akala natin ay hindi kakayanin.
Narito ang kabuuan ng nasabing resolusyon:
RESOLUSYON BLG. ____
ISANG MILYONG AKLAT NG "PUHUNAN AT PAGGAWA"
NI KA POPOY LAGMAN PARA SA ISANG MILYONG MANGGAGAWA
Sapagkat isa sa mga batayang pag-aaral ng BMP ang "Puhunan at Paggawa" na ngayon ay naisaaklat na, dapat na magkaroon ng kopya ng aklat na ito ang bawat manggagawa;
Sapagkat ang labor force sa ngayon ay umaabot na sa 43.739 million ayon sa isang ahensya ng pamahalaan;
Sapagkat tungkulin ng BMP ang pagmumulat ng mga manggagawa;
Kung gayon, inilulunsad ng BMP ang proyektong 'Isang Milyong Aklat ng "Puhunan at Paggawa" ni Ka Popoy Lagman para sa isang milyong manggagawa;
Sinang-ayunan ng mga delegado ng Ikawalong Pambansang Kongreso ng BMP ngayong Enero 27-28, 2018 sa Skyrise Hotel, Lungsod ng Baguio.
Napakahalaga bilang pangunahing aklat ng mga manggagawa ang Puhunan at Paggawa na sinulat ni Filemon 'Ka Popoy' Lagman, isang lider-manggagawa at naging pangulo ng Bukluran ng Manggagawang Pilipino (BMP). Ang aklat ay tigib ng mga aral at pagsusuri hinggil sa relasyon ng sahod at tubo, ng manggagawa’t kapitalista. Isa ito sa mga natatanging armas ng uring manggagawa upang maunawaan niya ang kanyang kalagayan sa ilalim ng mapagsamantalang sistemang umiiral. Ipinauunawa ng aklat sa mga manggagawa ang kanilang kalagayan sa lipunang ito at tuluyan silang magkaisa at magpalakas upang itayo ang kanilang sariling pamahalaan.
Ang target na isang milyong aklat na Puhunan at Paggawa para sa isang milyong manggagawa ay maliit kung ikukumpara sa labor force at populasyon ng Pilipinas. Subalit kinakailangang targetin upang mas maraming manggagawa ang makaunawa at magkaisa.
Ayon sa October 2017 Labor Force Survey, ang labor force sa Pilipinas ay nasa 43.739 Milyon. Mula ang datos sa inilabas ng Philippine Statistics Authority (PSA) noong Enero 15, 2018. Ayon din sa PSA sa inilabas nito noong Agosto 1, 2015, ang populasyon ng bansa ay umaabot na sa 100,981,437 batay sa 2015 Census of Population (POPCEN 2015).
Kaya 43,739,000 manggagawang sahuran kumpara sa 100,981,437 populasyon, nasa 43 porsyento ng populasyon ang mga manggagawang sahuran.
Kung mahigit 43 milyon ang manggagawang sahuran sa bansa, ano ba naman ang isang milyong aklat na Puhunan at Paggawa para sa isang milyong manggagawa. May mahigit 42 milyong manggagawa pa na hindi magkakaroon ng aklat. Kung ikukumpara sa labor force na mahigit 43 milyon, napakaliit ng target nating isang milyong aklat na Puhunan at Paggawa para sa isang milyong manggagawa. Subalit malaki na ring target, lalo na't limampung libong manggagawa ay di pa nga natin maipalabas na sama-samang kumilos tuwing Mayo Uno.
Karanasan sa Paglalathala
Mula nang maging tagapamahala ako ng Aklatang Obrero Publishing Collective noong 2006, marahil ay nasa limangdaang aklat na Puhunan at Paggawa na ang naipalathala. Karaniwan, depende sa badyet. Kung bawat taon ay nakagawa ako ng 40 aklat na Puhunan at Paggawa, sa loob ng 12 taon, nasa 480 aklat na ang aking napalathala. Paano pa kaya kung 100 aklat bawat taon, yun nga lang, dahil pultaym na tibak, hanggang 40 aklat lang kada taon ang nagagawa kong aklat na Puhunan at Paggawa.
Ako pa lang ito, ha. Paano na kung magtutulong-tulong ang mga manggagawa upang maparami ito at maipamahagi sa maraming manggagawa? Aba'y mas mapapabilis ang pagpaparami ng aklat at pamamahagi nito sa maraming manggagawa.
Mahalagang magkaroon nito at mabasa ito ng bawat manggagawa sa pabrika. Maraming best selling books, dahil na rin sa promosyon ng mga tagapaglathala. Halimbawa, nakapaglathala na ng 500 milyong kopya ng mga aklat na Harry Potter ni J. K. Rowling, ayon sa Bloomsbury, ang tagapaglathala ng mga libro sa Britanya. Ang Noli Me Tangere ni Rizal at Florante at Laura ni Balagtas ay taun-taon ibinebenta sa mga mag-aaral sa hayskul. Kaya ang hamon sa atin ay paano natin itataguyod ang mahalagang aklat na ito ng manggagawa? Paano ang promosyon nito?
Magtulong-tulong tayong ipalaganap ang Puhunan at Paggawa bilang pangunahing aralin ng mga manggagawa sa kanilang pang-araw-araw ng buhay.
Ang Ating Dapat Gawin
Ganito ang ating gagawin. Ang bawat aklat ay dapat mapasakamay ng bawat manggagawa, at hindi isang aklat bawat unyon. Kundi isang aklat bawat manggagawa. Isang aklat na maiuuwi niya sa bahay at babasahin niya sa panahong nasa bahay siya. At maaari ring basahin ng kanyang pamilya. At sa kalaunan ay ng mga kamag-anak, at ng buong komunidad.
Kung isang aklat bawat unyon, baka naka-displey lang ito sa book shelf ng unyon at inaagiw lang. Baka magkahiyaan lang ang mga manggagawa na manghiram, at kung makahiram man ay baka matagal ang pagbalik ng aklat upang mabasa rin ng iba.
Kaya magandang bawat manggagawa ay magkaroon ng aklat na ito. Ano ba naman sa manggagawa ang presyong isangdaang piso (P100) para sa isang librong Puhunan at Paggawa kung ito'y para sa kanilang kabutihan? Maaari rin siyang bumili ng dalawa o limang aklat at ipangregalo niya ito sa kanyang mga kumpare, kumare, kamag-anak, sa kaarawan nito, o sa kapaskuhan.
Maaari ninyong pondohan ang ilang kopya ng Puhunan at Paggawa at pag nabenta lahat ay magpagawa uli kayo. Paikutin lang natin ang pera habang dumarami ang mga aklat. Ang Aklatang Obrero Publishing Collective ay handang tumulong upang tuluy-tuloy na mailathala ang aklat na ito.
Bakasakaling mas mapabilis ang pag-unawa ng mga manggagawa sa kanilang batayang karapatan at kalagayan sa umiiral na lipunan. At bakasakaling mapabilis din ang kanilang sama-samang pagkilos tungo sa layuning itayo ang kanilang sariling lipunan, isang lipunang pinamumunuan ng mga manggagawa, isang lipunang tatapos sa kaayusang kapitalismo.
Isang milyong aklat na Puhunan at Paggawa ni Ka Popoy Lagman, pagtulungan nating ipamahagi sa isang milyong manggagawa. walang mawawala sa atin kung targetin natin ang isang milyong manggagawa. Kailangang makabasa nito at maunawaan ng bawat manggagawa ang nilalaman nito. Bakasakaling sa loob ng limang taon ay maorganisa na ang mga manggagawang ito tungo sa isang lipunang walang pagsasamantala.
Martes, Pebrero 6, 2018
(Ang papel na ito'y ipinamahagi sa mga dumalo sa paggunita sa ika-17 anibersaryo ng kamatayan ni Ka Popoy Lagman sa UP Bahay ng Alumni.)
PAHAYAG SA IKA-17 TAON NG PAGGUNITA
SA KABAYANIHAN NI KA POPOY LAGMAN!
REBOLUSYONARYONG PAGBATI SA LAHAT NG TUMATANGAN
SA APOY NG SULO NG PAKIKIBAKANG
SINULONG NI KA POPOY HANGGANG KAMATAYAN!
Nag-aalab na Pagbati ang ipinaaabot ng Komiteng Rehiyon ng Metro Manila Rizal ng Partido ng Manggagawang Pilipino!
Sa mga kaanak ni Ka Popoy, mga Lider Manggagawa - Anakpawis, Lider ng mga Unyon at Samahang Masa, mga Kadre at Kasapi ng Rebolusyonaryong Partido, Mabuhay ang inyong presensya sa paggunita sa mahalagang araw na ito!
Pagbati sa mga lider masa at mga rebolusyonaryong patuloy na tumatahak sa direksyon na tinahak ni Ka Popoy sa mahabang panahon! Ang buhay niyang inialay sa uri at rebolusyon ay nagsisilbing mitsa sa nagniningas na sulo ng paglaban ng uring manggagawa laban sa pagsasamantala ng Kapital.
Hindi mapipigilan ang pagbabago! Hindi mapipigilan ang motor ng tunggalian para sa bagong bukas, bagong sistemang lilikha sa pantay na relasyon sa lipunan.
Lalu na, na ang pagbabagong ito ay dinilig ng dugo, tulad ng kay Ka Popoy at marami pang mga martir sa rebolusyon ng uri at masa!
Pagkilala rin sa mga sakripisyo at pagbibigay ng maraming oras at panahon sa buhay ng bawat rebolusyonaryo at mulat sa uri na manggagawa. Ito ay nagsisilbing malakas na ihip ng hangin na nagpapaapoy sa nagbabagang aserong maso ng uring manggagawa!
Ang krisis ng kapital ay nagpapatuloy, papatindi, bumabangis ang estadong kumakatawan at tagapagtanggol ng sistemang ito, unti-unti namang nahuhubaran sa mata ng masang api ang oportunistang panlilinlang ng mga "ahente" ng kapital, bulok na pulitiko at pangakong hungkag nang naaagnas na sistema.
Ang mga kalagayang ito'y sa malaon at madali ay sasalubungin ng Partido, pampulitikang organisasyon, ng mga unyon at samahang masa nang malawakang panawagan at pagkilos para sa pagbabago at direktang pag-agaw ng pampulitikang kapangyarihan!
Gagawin ito sa militante-rebolusyonaryong kaparaanan na inihalimbawa sa buhay at pagkilos ni Ka Popoy.
Susulong ito sa pamamagitan ng nagkakaisang manggagawa, malakas at militanteng kilusang manggagawa, masang nakaorganisa sa mulat at palabang mga pampulitikang organisasyon, ng mga Bukluran ng rebolusyonaryong sosyalistang manggagawa, at higit sa lahat, Rebolusyonaryong Partido na may aserong bakal na disiplinang pang-organisasyon.
Ang malawak na masa naman ng uring manggagawa ay naghihintay nang magabayan sila sa direksyon ng pagsulong at mapagpasyang "bigwas" ng pagbabago at paglaya!
Ang paggunita sa kabayanihan ni Ka Popoy ay di na lamang pag-alala kundi pagbibigay inspirasyon sa bawat isang kumikilos at naglilingkod sa uri, mga lider unyon - samahan, sosyalistang manggagawa ng Buklod at mga kadre at kasapi ngPartido, na ito ang buhay. Ang buhay na tinahak din ni Ka Popoy.
Buhay na puno ng mga sakripisyo at inspirasyon, ng mga pakikibaka at tagumpay sa lahat ng aspeto!
Ang masa ng uring manggagawa ay naghihintay at palaging kasama habang nakatangan tayo sa tamang linya ng pagrerebolusyon!
Ang mga sakripisyo, pakikibaka at buhay na tatahakin pa ng mga kasama at masa, tulad ng buhay at pakikibaka ni Ka Popoy ay magiging malakas na ihip ng hanging magpapaapoy at magiging mitsa ng sulo ng paglaban at pakikibaka ng uri tungo sa kanyang ganap na rebolusyon!
Sulong sa Landas na Tinahak ni Ka Popoy!
Sulong sa Rebolusyonaryong Landas!
Rebolusyon Tungong Sosyalismo!
Komiteng Rehiyon ng Metro Manila - Rizal
Partido ng Manggagawang Pilipino
Pebrero 6, 2018, UP Diliman
Martes, Marso 7, 2017
Requiem for a Generation
Patricio N. Abinales
Published 9:30 AM, March 05, 2017
Updated 9:30 AM, March 05, 2017
Why are many 'veterans' of the fight against the Marcos dictatorship now are pitted against each other in the battle between President Rodrigo Duterte and his opponents?
A friend sent a YouTube link to the American pop singer Don McLean’s now iconic song American Pie, and reminded me that the line “and they were singing dirges in the dark the day the music died,” could very well refer to what has happened to the communists of the 1970s and 1980s. This prompted quick check at the bookshelf to pick out a number of memoirs that Filipino communists from the so-called “First Quarter Storm” generation and their successor, the “martial law babies” have written in the last decade.
One of the enduring myths of these memoirs is that even today, when they have all started to drift towards middle age, these cadres and their national democratic understudies have remained brothers and sisters. A couple of writings did acknowledge that this unity had frayed since 1986, and their authors have timidly mentioned the splits of the late 1980s and the early 1990s.
But this is unfortunate for if one wants some historical context as to why many of these “veterans” of the Storm and the dark years of the dictatorship are now pitted against each in the battle between President Rodrigo Duterte and his opponents, one needs to go as far back as the splits of the 1980s, especially after the CPP leadership under Jose Ma. Sison, resolved the ideological debates through a sanctioned killing of those the CPP’s eternal chairman tagged openly as spies and renegades
The stories of these assassinations still have to be written.
We still await the brave ex-cadre who will write about the tragic fortunes of Filemon “Popoy” Lagman, twice the leader of the CPP’s Manila-Rizal regional committee, disciplined and sent to the countryside after 1975, when he and the rest of the committee defied the edict from the Politburo to break up the Party’s electoral alliance with the anti-Marcos traditional politicians and the hated social democrats formed to challenge the dictatorship’s Kilusang Bagong Lipunan Manila slate led by Imelda Marcos and composed of 20 other forgettable characters (the one I only remember was Foreign Secretary Carlos Romulo whose campaign speeches sounded like academic lectures, boring a lot of hakot listeners to sleep).
Lagman did his time in the countryside, sacrificed a lot (his wife was believed killed in a military encounter), and regained his post in the last years of the dictatorship. After Marcos was ousted, however, the Manila-Rizal regional organization broke away from the Party after the 5-man Politburo’s disastrous decision to boycott the 1986 elections (Yes Virginia, only 5 people decided the nearly 1-million communist movement’s fate at a time when the politics of the period was clearly leaning towards the Left. Talk about radical democracy!). It was cadres of the regional organization that formed the initial core group of what is now the party-list group Sanlakas and its labor federation the Bukluran ng Manggagawang Pilipino. In its early years, and under the leadership of Lagman, it was one of the strongest and fiery non-CPP left groups.
Lagman was assassinated on February 6, 2001 at the Diliman campus of the University of the Philippines. According to Ben Reid his was “the first political assassination to occur under the new regime of Gloria Macapagal Arroyo and signals the possible beginning of a campaign of terror targeting the country’s leftist movement.” Reid writes that an unnamed “rightist faction of the military loyal to the ousted president Joseph Estrada was behind the killing,” its aim being to destabilize the still wobbly regime of Gloria Arroyo. This was the official line that Lagman’s Sanlakas would adopt.
Others however suspect that Lagman’s assassination was the first of several rubouts of the top ex-cadres of the Party who disagreed with the Filipino Ayatollah’s return to Maoist fundamentals. Lagman was known as the CPP’s Lenin, because he advocated for a communist movement with a strong influential “proletarian” (i.e., industrial worker base), shared Karl Marx’s disdainful description of the peasantry as a “sack of potatoes” (pace the insistence of Mao and his Filipino acolyte Sison that peasants were the mass base of the revolution), and saw very little value in a long-drawn protracted guerilla warfare against the Philippine government. For Lagman, communists could only come to power though urban uprisings and massive general strikes, and where the New People’s Army was to just play a supportive role.
This urban-centered strategy demanded the broadest unity of the diverse groups and classes that live in the metropolis, to give the revolution the heft to challenge and destroy police and military power, and ultimately the government. To achieve this “united front” the Party needed to make compromises to its anti-Marcos ideological rivals. Hence the Manila-Rizal took seriously the electoral collaboration it made with Benigno Aquino and the elite opposition in 1975 to the chagrin of their Party bosses.
This argument was also used as justification for Lagman questioning the validity and relevance of Mao Tse Tung Thought as the CPP’s ideological foundation after the big 1986 brouhaha. For which he was allegedly extra-judicially killed.
That death and Sison’s indirect threats before that, plus the expulsion or forced resignation of other anti-Sison cadres and the break away by regional organizations like the Manila-Rizal presaged an unceasing contention among these radicals. Its current and perhaps most poisonous edition is the fight between pro- and anti-Duterte radicals and ex-radicals. – Rappler.com
(To be continued)
Filed under:Filemon LagmanFirst Quarter StormMartial LawPatricio N. AbinalesRodrigo DutertepoliticsPhilippines
In this file photo, masked sympathizers guard the coffin bearing the remains of slain labor leader Filemon 'Popoy' Lagman, draped with the hammer and sickle flag as the funeral march heads to Marikina, February 12, 2001. Jay Directo/AFP
Linggo, Pebrero 12, 2017
Grex Lagman recalls his fave uncle ‘Ka Popoy’: He was so freaking cool
For ex- Albay congressman Grex Lagman, late labor group leader Filemon “Ka Popoy” Lagman was quite simply the coolest “tito” on earth.
“To many activists, laborers, clients, his comrades and the media, he was ‘Ka Popoy’ Lagman.
But to an 8 year old kid, he was Uncle Ching–the coolest uncle ever!” Grex wrote on his Facebook Monday (February 6) and he paid tribute to his kin on his 16th death anniversary.
So what made Uncle Ching cool? His survival skills, for one.
Grex fondly described his tito as a “motorcycle riding dude with stories of camping out in the mountains, getting by with just tree barks and leaves and the occasional rat!”
“I learned to ride a 400cc motorcycle when i was 10 years old because of uncle Ching. I mean, i drove his black Honda around Marcelo Green Village in Parañaque–by myself! How cool can this uncle be?!?” he recalled.
Ka Popoy, brother of incumbent Albay 1st district Rep. Edcel Lagman, was assassinated on February 6, 2001.
“Uncle Ching was shot at at the Bahay ng Alumni in UP. My dad lost another brother that day. I lost my favorite uncle,” Grex wrote.
“Uncle Ching was the true working class hero. He organized both Sanlakas and PM–both winning seats in Congress. His legacy lives on even as his death at 47, sixteen years ago, was not in vain,” he stressed. #
Edcel Grex Burce Lagman
Pebrero 5, 2017
To many activists, laborers, clients, his comrades and the media, he was"Ka Popoy" Lagman.
But to an 8 year old kid, he was Uncle Ching--the coolest uncle ever! A motorcycle riding dude with stories of camping out in the mountains, getting by with just tree barks and leaves and the occasional rat! 😊He would stay with us for 2, 3 days... then we would invariably have a deal: if i am able to convince mama and papa to go with him in the "mountains", he will gladly take me. Of course, i always was in tears when "no deal" was my parents' standard answer. Haha
I learned to ride a 400cc motorcycle when i was 10 years old because of uncle Ching. I mean, i drove his black Honda around Marcelo Green Village in Parañaque--by myself! How cool can this uncle be?!?
On Feb. 6, 2001, in the law office my dad set up with him, i heard the most shocking news from my father. Uncle Ching was shot at at the Bahay ng Alumni in UP. My dad lost another brother that day. I lost my favorite uncle.
Uncle Ching was the true working class hero. He organized both Sanlakas and PM--both winning seats in Congress. His legacy lives on even as his death at 47, sixteen years ago, was not in vain.
God bless your restless, revolutionary soul, Uncle Ching...😇
(March 17, 1953 Tabaco, Albay -- February 6, 2001 Quezon City)
Linggo, Setyembre 4, 2016
[G.R. No. 141704. June 7, 2000]
HON. ORLANDO S. MERCADO, et al. vs. EDCEL LAGMAN, et al.
Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a resolution of this Court dated JUN 7 2000.
G.R. No. 141704 (Hon. Orlando S. Mercado, Hon Reuben P. Dela Cruz, Asst. Provincial Prosecutor Apolinario Bruselas, Jr. and State Prosecutor Archimedez Manabat, et al. vs. Edcel C. Lagman and Filemon Lagman.)
Petitioners assail the decision of the Court of Appeals affirming the decision of the Regional Trial Court which disposed thusly:
WHEREFORE, premises considered and pursuant to the mandate granted by the Honorable Supreme Court in its Resolution dated November 18, 1996, it is the decision of this court based on evidence, the law and jurisprudence:
1. To issue a writ of certiorari annulling and setting aside the criminal Information filed in Criminal Case No. 96-1369 MK and the warrant of arrest issued by the respondent court pursuant to said criminal information;
2. To issue a writ of injunction enjoining the respondent court from further proceeding with Criminal Case No. 96-1369 MK;
3. To declare the detention of petitioner Filemon Lagman illegal; to direct the immediate release from detention of petitioner Filemon Lagman in connection with Criminal Case No. 96-1369 MK unless the petitioner is being held pursuant to some other lawful cause or authority;
All the respondents shall be collectively responsible in enforcing the immediate release from detention of petitioner Filemon Lagman
In compliance with the directive of the Honorable Supreme Court, furnish a copy of this decision immediately to the Honorable Supreme Court.
The instant controversy sprung from a letter complaint which was referred by the Presidential Task Force on Intelligence and Counter Intelligence (PTFIC) to the Department of Justice (DOJ), for appropriate action, involving a case for violation of Article 248 (murder) of the Revised Penal Code against Filemon Lagman alias Ka Popoy and seven others, in connection with the ambush slaying of a traffic policemen in Marikina on March 30, 1992.
Attached to the subject letter-complaint are the sworn statements (karagdagang sinumpaang salaysay) of Jose Alvarez dated April 9, 1996 and Rodrigo Porsona also of the same date; the sworn statement of Arthur Oquendo dated March 13, 1992 and his supplemental sworn statement dated June 27, 1996; the Affidavit of PO1 Bonifacio Simbulan PN dated June 27, 1996; the medico-legal report (No. M-052992) dated April 3, 1992; and, the investigation report of SPO1 Ronito L. Villareal dated March 30, 1992,
The DOJ then assigned a three-man investigating panel which in turn issued a subpoena to Filemon Lagman, informing him that a complaint has been filed against him by the PTFIC; commanding him to appear at the DOJ on July 22, 1996 at 2 p.m. for preliminary investigation; and ordering him to submit his counter-affidavit and other supporting documents in his defense, with a warning that failure on his part to submit his counter-affidavit shall be considered as waiver to present his defense in the preliminary investigation resulting in the case being considered submitted for resolution.
On July 22, 1996 setting for preliminary investigation, only counsel of private respondent Filemon Lagman appeared and requested that the defense be given ten days within which to submit its counter-affidavit. That same day, the preliminary investigation was reset to August 2, 1996.
On August 2, 1996, Filemon Lagman, through his lawyer, submitted a verified Motion to Dismiss, explicitly stating that such motion is not intended to be in lieu of his counter-affidavit, and should also not be considered as a waiver of all other legal remedies available to him. The motion to dismiss assailed the jurisdiction of the investigating panel to take cognizance of the referral letter-complaint of the PTFIC dated June 28, 1996. Likewise, it was argued that the letter-complaint of General Libarnes of the PTFIC was not sworn to before an officer authorized to administer oaths as required by Section 3(a), Rule 112 of the Rules of Court. The absence of the verification, it was claimed is fatal, such requirement being mandatory and jurisdictional.
The state prosecutors, did not resolve the motion to dismiss. On the other hand, Filemon Lagman, while waiting for action on his motion to dismiss, did not submit his counter-affidavit. On November 6, 1996, the state prosecutors promulgated their resolution recommending the filing of a criminal information against Filemon Lagman, et al. Said resolution did not bear the signature of 2nd Assistant Provincial Prosecutor Apolinario D. Bruselas, Jr. Nevertheless, it was approved by Assistant Chief State Prosecutor Nilo C. Mariano who signed for the Chief State Prosecutor.
The Information was raffled to Branch 272 of the regional Trial Court of Marikina. On November 8, 1996, a warrant of arrest was issued for Criminal Case No. 96-1369 MK against Filemon Lagman.
Pursuant to said warrant of arrest, Filemon Lagman was arrested and detained by the combined teams of the PTFIC and agents of the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) on November 12, 1996. On November 14, 1996, Filemon Lagman, et al., filed with this Court a petition for Habeas Corpus and Certiorari with a prayer for a restraining order and/or preliminary injunction. Acting on said petition, the Court issued a resolution on November 18, 1996, stating:
Acting on the petition for Habeas Corpus dated November 14, 1996, the Court resolved:
a) to ISSUE the Writ of Habeas Corpus;
b) to RETURN the writ to the Executive Judge of the RTC not later than November 20, 1996;
c) to ORDER the executive Judge of the RTC-Quezon City to conduct an immediate raffle to SET the case for HEARING not later than Thursday November 21, 1996 at 8:30; try and decide the same on the merits and therefore FURNISH this Court with a copy of the decision thereon;
d) the respondents to make a RETURN of the writ on or before the close of office hours on Wednesday, November 20, 1996 and APPEAR PERSONALLY and produce THE PERSON OF Filemon Lagman on the aforesaid date and time of hearing;
The executive judge of the RTC of Quezon City accordingly raffled off the case on November 20, 1996 to Branch 221 of the same court which proceeded to hear the case on the merits and thereafter rendered the decision, the dispositive portion of which we earlier quoted.
Recourse to the Court of Appeals proved to be unavailing. Thus, the instant petition.
Initially, the Court notes that the petition was filed 2 days beyond the 30-day extension granted by us which fell on March 13, 2000, even as petitioners asked for an extension of only 15 days. On this score alone, the petition may be outrightly denied.
Petitioners insist that the ruling of the Court of Appeals that a murder complaint for purposes of preliminary investigation with the prosecutor must be verified or sworn to is contrary to law and jurisprudence. Likewise, petitioners claim that the Court of Appeals erred in holding that the preliminary investigation on the case against respondent was flawed on the ground that the investigating panel did not act on private respondent's motion to dismiss but instead promulgated the resolution recommending the filing of a criminal information; and in finding that the constitutional and fundamental right of respondent Filemon Lagman to due process was violated in the preliminary investigation of the complaint against him.
In regard to the first assigned error, the Court agrees with the Court of Appeals that it can not give credence to the petitioners' contention that the letter-complaint filed by the PTFIC need not be verified or sworn to before a person authorized to administer oaths.
Section 3 of Rule 110 of the Rules of Court clearly supports the stand of the Court of Appeals:
Sec. 3. Complaint defined. - Complaint is a sworn written statement charging a person with an offense, subscribed by the offended party, any peace officer or other public officer charged with the enforcement of the law violated.
Anent the second issue, the Court notes that when private respondent Filemon Lagman filed the motion to dismiss, a manifestation was made where he expressly reserved his right to file a counter-affidavit in the event that his motion to dismiss is denied. But, despite such manifestation, petitioners did not act on the motion to dismiss. Instead, they promulgated the November 6, 1996 resolution recommending the filing of a criminal information against Filemon Lagman, et al., violating private respondents' right to a preliminary investigation.
A preliminary investigation is required for offenses cognizable by the regional trial court under the procedure provided in Rule 112 of the Rules of Court. This procedure is to be observed in order to assure that a person is accorded due process.
It is a basis tenet that when the law provides for preliminary investigation and such right is claimed by the accused, a denial thereof is a denial of due process.
Consequently, the warrant of arrest which was issued pursuant to a flawed information is likewise fatally flawed. True it is, Section 6, Rule 112 of the Rules of Court provides that upon the filing of an information, the RTC may issue a warrant for the arrest of the accused. However, in the case at bar, where the information is defective for lack of a valid complaint and preliminary investigation, no warrant of arrest may validly spring therefrom. Further, any arrest made pursuant to such invalid warrant is, perforce, unlawful; any detention, illegal. It bears stressing that a flawed proceeding cannot ripen into a valid warrant of arrest nor detention.
The Court has ruled that it is axiomatic that where a deprivation of a constitutional right is established, the Court that rendered the judgment is deemed ousted of jurisdiction and habeas corpus is the remedy to assail the legality of the detention (Gumabon vs. Director of Bureau of Prisons, 37 SCRA 420).
WHEREFORE, petition is denied due course.
Very truly yours,
JULIETA Y. CARREON
Clerk of Court