My exclusive
By Raïssa Robles
I counter-checked three times this statement she had made in her recently-filed urgent petition.
And three times I got the same answer – the Philippines has no extradition treaty with Spain.
Why is this so important, you might ask. That is a very valid question.
Because this is one of the core arguments that Justice Secretary de Lima used to turn down ex-President Gloria Macapagal- Arroyo’s request to travel. De Lima said it would be highly negligent on her part to allow Arroyo to travel “where extradition cannot be effected.” She said all five countries where the Arroyo couple wanted to go had no extradition treaty with the Philippines. She named the following countries: Singapore, Germany, Italy, Austria and Spain.
Arroyo’s 44-page supplemental petition, which ABS-CBN’s Ina Reformina so ably discussed – in effect said De Lima was lying:
“The Philippines has a signed Extradition Treaty, a signed Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters Treaty and a Transfer of Sentenced Persons Agreement with Spain, which is one of the countries listed by petitioner GMA for her medical treatment abroad,” Arroyo’s petition pointed out.
Reformina counter-checked this and appended what she found to her report:
Foreign Affairs spokesman Raul Hernandez, meantime, told ABS-CBN News that the Philippines’ extradition treaty with Spain has yet to be concurred by the Senate.
“Extradition signed but still with Senate for concurrence, hence has not entered into force,” Hernandez said in a text message.
Hernandez confirmed Spain and the Philippines have inked a Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty (MLAT) which is an agreement that “helps locate persons, secure information and evidence, serve documents” in legal matters involving one or both countries.
You can read Ina Reformina’s entire report on Arroyo’s supplemental petition by clicking here.
Checking out the treaty with Spain
Surely, I asked myself, a former Philippine President – who holds a minor degree in international affairs and who prides herself in dealing with international issues – surely, she would know what treaties are in effect.
Still, I decided to check this out because of Ina Reformina’s report. And what better place to check this than in the Bills and Index Section of the Senate. This is the repository of all the bills and other measures ever filed, killed and approved.
Having covered the Senate gave me familiarity with its ins and outs. One of the constitutional functions reserved for the Senate alone is the ratification of all international treaties by two-thirds vote.
UPDATE:
Some commenters on Facebook told me that we do have an extradition treaty with Spain which was used to bring Francisco Juan “Paco” Larrañaga, convicted of double rape-slay, to Spain in 2009. This is not an extradition treaty but a Philippines-Spain Transfer of Sentenced Persons Agreement ratified by the Senate in 2009.
We also have a treaty on Mutual Legal Assistance on Criminal Matters with Spain ratified by the Senate in 2008.
Neither, however, can be used to extradite Philippine nationals from Spain to Manila.
I learned from the Bills and Index Section that the Treaty on Extradition between the Republic of the Philippines and the Kingdom of Spain was transmitted to the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations on September 18, 2007. And there it lies to this day awaiting Senate ratification.
Upon further digging, I found out that the Treaty was signed on March 2, 2004 by Acting Justice Secretary Merceditas Gutierrez and by Spain’s Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs Ramon Gil-Casares Satrustegui.
I asked Arroyo’s lawyer Raul Lambino about Arroyo’s supplemental motion which stated that the Philippines has a treaty with Spain.
He said he concurred with what the motion said – which pointed out that contrary to what De Lima said – we have an extradition treaty with Spain.
Lambino said:
It is false. They have been deceiving the people. I don’t know if that is just mere black propaganda and they say it with a straight face (that) we have no extradition treaty with Spain.
I told Lambino what I found out at the Senate. That there really is no extradition treaty with Spain, which means all five countries she wants to visit have no extradition treaties with the Philippines.
Lambino replied:
That is a non-issue. Don’t forget the issue here is the right to travel. The existence or non existence of any treaty will not affect the principles involved here.
There are many countries in the world where we have no extradition treaty. That does not mean the Philippines cannot serve the ends of justice when they travel to the particular area. All the country has to do is cancel their passport.
And this is extradition treaty has been a mechanism that has been adopted in the pre-ICT times. The modern times. Now we are very modern. The world has become very small. There are many alternatives – without such instruments – whereby justice can be served.
PNoy is making a big issue out of that, which is a non-issue at all.
The issue is the individual’s rights to travel.
Is the Philippine government really making a big deal over the non-existence of an extradition treaty with Spain?
Am I making a big deal over the fact that Arroyo’s petition clearly state we have one when in fact we don’t?
I’m glad that tomorrow, the Supreme Court will deliberate on Arroyo’s travel request.
Supreme Court’s silent majority keeps mum on why it granted the Arroyos’ travel request
What I find highly intriguing is the stunning silence of all eight Supreme Court Associate Justices who moved to allow the Arroyo couple to travel together, even if it’s only one of them saying she needed the medical treatment.
Not one of the eight justices has explained to the Filipino people why the Arroyos should be allowed. They know that this is of an extremely high public issue. Of course nothing in the law requires them to speak out and explain themselves.
Even the Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) they issued did not give any inkling of the very “thorough” deliberation that Court spokesman and administrator Midas Marquez said the justices undertook in arriving at their decision.
However, one associate justice who dissented – Maria Lourdes Sereno – gave us a tiny glimpse of what had gone on. She also left us with a lot to ponder about. I was particularly struck with the following that she said:
The Rules of Court and jurisprudence prescribe very stringent requirements before a TRO can be issued. Among these is the requirement that the TRO “may be granted only when: (a) the application or proceeding is verified, and shows facts entitling the applicant to the relief demanded…” (Rule 58, Section 4)
A petition that contains a false verification can have many consequences among which are: (a) the Petition can be dismissed or denied, (b) the person making the false verification can be punished for contempt of court, and (c) the person making the false verification can be punished for perjury.
So strong is the requirement of truthful allegations in pleadings filed before the Court that many adverse inferences and disciplinary measures can be imposed against a person lying before the Court. This requirement of truthfullness is especially important when a provisional remedy, and more so when the remedy is sought to be granted ex-parte, is under consideration by the Court. When on its face, the material averments of a pleading contain self-contradictions, the least that the Court should do, is consider the other side of the claim.
This is the situation with the Petition of former President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo. It appears that she has given inconsistent, and probably untruthful statements before this Court.
Sereno also touched on the fact that it was Arroyo’s own justice secretary who had issued Department Circular 41 – which De Lima had used as the basis for the Arroyos being placed on the Watchlist Order. Not Hold Departure Order, which is only issued by the courts.
I ask Arroyo’s lawyer Lambino about Yogie Martirizar
Earlier, I had written about a certain Yogie Martirizar, who had had been prevented from traveling abroad by virtue of DC 41.
See my story – Gloria Arroyo stopped a woman, with an illness and a case just like hers, from leaving the country for four years
I asked Lambino about Martirizar’s case and all the Watchlist Orders issued by Arroyo’s justice secretaries. I asked him why Arroyo should get a different treatment compared to Martirizar, who had almost the same calcium deficiency disorder as that of Arroyo.
Lambino told me:
Well, I really don’t know about her. They should have questioned it (DC 41).
Mahina ang abugado niya.
That’s the problem with other lawyers. Maybe the lawyer of Martirizar – she doesn’t know her law. Why blame us for her non- action . For not fighting for her clients. That’s not our fault. That’s the fault of her lawyer if the lawyer does not know her.
The problem with some of their lawyers is they really don’t know their law.
Interestingly, Associate Justice Sereno had a mouthful to to say about Arroyo’s action of trying to strike down as unconstitutional a circular issued by her own justice secretary:
B. Petitioner Former President Arroyo Must Explain
Why She Is Claiming
That Her Constitutional Right Is
Being Violated, When The Claimed
Violation Is Being Caused By Her
Own Administrative IssuanceTo a certain degree, the doctrine on equitable estoppel should guide the hand of this Court. In its simplest sense, estoppel prevents a person from disclaiming his previous act, to the prejudice of another who relied on the representations created by such previous act. The logic behind the doctrine comes from the common societal value that a person must not be allowed to profit from his own wrong.
While this Court will not hesitate to protect former President Arroyo from the adverse effect of her own act – whose validity she now denounces – in order to protect her constitutional right, the minimum requirement of fairness demands that the government must be heard on the matter for two important reasons.
First, by adopting Department of Justice (DOJ) Circular No. 41, the Arroyo Government must be presumed to have believed in and implicitly represented that it is valid and constitutional. An explanation from her must be heard on oral argument on why this no longer seems to be the case. Such disclosure will reveal whether she is dealing in truth and good faith with this Court in respect of her allegations in her Petition, a fundamental requirement for her Petition to be given credence.
Second, it will reveal whether in fact her administration then believed that there was statutory basis for such issuance, which is important to resolving the question of the existence of a basis, including policy or operational imperatives, for the administrative issuance that is DOJ Circular No. 41.
Petitioner Arroyo comes before this Court assailing the constitutionality of the said Circular, which was issued by Alberto Agra, the Justice Secretary appointed by petitioner during her incumbency as president. This Circular thus bears the stamp of petitioner as President ordering the consolidation of the rules governing Watchlist Orders. Under the doctrine of qualified political agency, the acts and issuances of Agra are acts of the President and herein petitioner herself. As the Court recently ruled:
The President’s act of delegating authority to the Secretary of Justice by virtue of said Memorandum Circular is well within the purview of the doctrine of qualified political agency, long been established in our jurisdiction.
Under this doctrine, which primarily recognizes the establishment of a single executive, “all executive and administrative organizations are adjuncts of the Executive Department; the heads of the various executive departments are assistants and agents of the Chief Executive; and, except in cases where the Chief Executive is required by the Constitution or law to act in person or the exigencies of the situation demand that he act personally, the multifarious executive and administrative functions of the Chief Executive are performed by and through the executive departments, and the acts of the secretaries of such departments, performed and promulgated in the regular course of business, are, unless disapproved or reprobated by the Chief Executive, presumptively the acts of the Chief Executive.”7
Thus, the acts which petitioner claims to have violated her constitutional rights are the acts of her alter ego, and consequently, her own.
Why I’m eager to hear the arguments tomorrow
These are only two of the reasons why I’m looking forward to the arguments that will be made tomorrow.
The Supreme Court will be making history when it rules whether Arroyo – who appointed most of them to their office – should be allowed to go beyond the nation’s borders.
You can read Justice Sereno’s full dissenting opinion below. If anyone accuses me of bias, I would say – give me copies of the majority opinions and I will post them at once. Meanwhile, there isn’t any.
But you can click on this link to read the TRO.
Meanwhile, here is Sereno’s dissenting opinion:
PAGE ONE
PAGE TWO
PAGE THREE
PAGE FOUR
PAGE FIVE
PAGE SEVEN
PAGE NINE
Related Stories
Read Supreme Court’s TRO allowing Gloria Arroyo to travel
How GloriaMacapagal-Arroyo got caught in her own mousetrap – halo vest and all
The only cure for ex-President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo
Filipino endocrinologist calls GMA spokeswoman “funny”
GMA photo wearing “halo vest” released by lawyer of last resort
Jerome R Ompoc says
Hi Ms. Raissa,
Is it okay with you to share the articles to my friends through FB?
I’m starting to read also your previous articles and I am awed on how diligent and careful you are to details and facts.
Again, Thank you very much.
raissa says
Sure.
Just put a link to my site.
raissa says
Sure. I would be honored.
Jerome R Ompoc says
Thank you Ms. Raissa.
Please do continue what you do. Your articles are indeed daring…yet very genuine and honest.
Only few are willing to write what they see as facts..the rest do it for money.
Kudos to you and your Hubby.
raissa says
Thank you, Jerome.
Ernie Delfin says
Thank you for sharing us your well written analytical articles… Readers like me are being educated with your professional presentation of facts that a partisan lawyers, like this Lambino, will definitely will not write or divulge to protect their clients.
More power to you and let your pen not run out of ink to spread the truth of what’s going on in our forsaken land!
raissa says
Thank you for taking the time out to read.
balat sibuyas says
communista ka raissa!
raissa says
Are you an idiot or a killer?
During Marcos’ Martial Law, accusing someone of being a communist was CODESPEAK for liquidating that person.
It’s simple. You can check whether I’m a communist by asking Gen. Esperon. I’m sure he did a background check on me before I interviewed him.
Also, if you want to know, I was once the stage manager in a University of the Philippines play which starred Imee Marcos.
LOL. But that’s another story.
balat sibuyas says
bakit gusto nyong magkagulo bayan natin raissa?” comunista ang may gusto ng ganyan!
raissa says
That;’s a very STUPID conclusion.
And a very IDIOTIC slur – that only communists want GMA to be held accountable.
Are you perhaps missing a few screws in your head?
balat sibuyas says
no screws are missing raissa bcos i have no head!
raissa says
You only have the excretory system intact?
Johnny Two III says
@ balat sibuyas: That explains it! You have no head and therefore no brain. Please make your statements elsewhere. This blog is for sane and rationale beings.
mando rugas says
balat sibuyas = utak gulay
balat sibuyas says
salamat mando, mabuhay ka! ipagdasal na lang natin ang mga biktima ni sendong. wag na tayo magchristmas party. c pnoy na lang ang magenjoy sa christmas party!
gLitch_xix says
@balat sibuyas: One word.
S-T-U-P-I-D
balat sibuyas says
raissa alam ko mabait ka, pero wag ka maniwala jan sa mga politiko, sila rin ang mga nagpapagulo sa atin, sa bayan natin. wag ka rin pagamit sa kanila. pera lang at kasikatan ang hanap nila para iboto sila ulit. nagpapayaman lang sila.
budoktagok says
balat sibuyas ka nga, dahil kahit anong klaro ng mga arguments na naipakita sa iyo, maka gloria ka pa rin thats a sign of a close minded, stupid dork like you. nangan kasi kurakot ka rin sgro katulad ka rin ng mga amo mong manggagantso. you shut up
balat sibuyas says
bugok tagok mabuhay ka! sana dumami pa ang mga katulad mong mga doble dila! mas dumami pa ngaun ang mga patay sa sendong! puro kc galit ang mga nasa isip nyo, napabayaan na ang mga taong kailangan ang tulong ng gob natin. akala ko grabe ang gob ni gloria noon. doble pala ka grabe ang gob ni pnoy mas marami patay!
raissa says
teka nga. Si balat sibuyas ay si balahibong pusa at si master mind din.
Ano ba kayo? Multiple personality disorder.
Warning na ito, ha.
Dapat isa lang kung hindi i-ban ko KAYONG LAHAT.
Kasi madaya ang ginagawa niyo. Nagkukunwari kayong 3 tao na nakikipagdiskusyon sa isa’t isa.
master mind says
ok raissa, say goodbye na kami. suportahan nalang natin ang presidente. sa isang electrical circuit di magliliwanag ang ilaw kung walang negative. happy new year sa inyong lahat!
balahibong pusa says
sampa ka ng asunto bugok tagok sa magnanakaw! malinaw na pala sa yo!
raissa says
Alam mo, pareho kayo ng IP address ni master mind.
Schizoid ba kayo o split personality?
balat sibuyas says
wala pa ring kaso c gma dahil sa pagnanakaw! bakit? kayo na kaya raissa ang magsampa sa kanya!
raissa says
Kais magaling si GMKA mag-block ng mga kaso niya. Nilgay niya si Merceditas G. na Ombudsman.
Sa pagsabi mong ako na ang magsampa ng kaso – nang-aasar ka, ano.
O baka hidni mo alam na Ombudsman lang ang puwdeng magsampa.
balat sibuyas says
eh di maging ombudsman ka! matagal na ang mga paratang nyo sa kanya ah! matagal na ring nagresign c gutierez matagal ng hindi sya ang ombudsman. baka tangingot ung bagong ombudsman o baka wala talagang kasalanan ang pandakikoy. fair lang cguro c morales ayaw pagamit kay supot, dahil pumutok ang botse ng supot sa resulta ng disisyon ng supreme court tungkol sa hacienda luisita. maging testigo ka laban sa pandakikoy punta ka sa ombudsman at sabihin mo ang mga ebidensya mo.
merry christmas raissa! pasalamat tayo at di tayo kasama sa mga biktima ni sendoy. ipagdasal na lang natin sila!
Baltazar says
@balat sibuyas,
Ipinagdadasal ko na ang mga nabiktima ng bagyo sa CDO. Kasama na rin dito ang pagdarasal na sana’y igawad na ng Diyos ang hustisya sa mga naapi. Na makamit ng mga magsasaka sa Hacienda Luisita ang nararapat nilang bahagi nang sa gayon, mas lalong makita ng taong bayan ang “tuwid na daan”, sa mga nanakawan na taong bayan, sana’y maparusahan na ang mga tunay na magnanakaw; Na maparusahan din ang nag misuse ng pera naming mga OFW and OWWA Fund. Na ang mga nagpapanggap na maysakit ay tuluyang magkasakit at hindi maka recover. Na ang mga nagbubulag bulagan ay tuluyang mabulag. God despises liars and hypocrites anyways and He said “vengeance is mine”. Hwag kang mag-alala, wala nang mas matuwid pa sa Diyos. He will impose the right punishment at the right time. Merry Christmas.
balat sibuyas says
sampahan mo ng asunto ang magnanakaw, may baltik ka kasi sa ulo!
balahibong pusa says
korek ka jan balat sibuyas! sampahan nila, marami sila ebidensya! malinaw kc sa kanila ang mga tsismis. mga tsismosoooooo!
raissa says
Si balahibong pusa ay si mastger mind din.
wan yabang says
tsismis pa lang hindi pa truth!
Johnny Two III says
@ wen yabang Tsismis are not necessarily untrue. It could be the truth already. Just waiting to be exposed.
balat sibuyas says
more power to you raissa and let your pen run out of ink to spread the tsismis of what is going on in our forsaken land!
Andie says
@balat sibuyas, @masrtermind, @kung -sino-sino-parte ng pagkato mo:
Magtrabaho ka. Tapos magbayad ka ng buwis, yung tama ha. Tapos pag may maipapakita ka nang ikatutuwa ng magulang mo, katulad ng paggamit ng utak — libre yun, by the way, then come back to this forum. You’re wasting space. Shame on you.
But I guess you don’t understand what the heck Raissa is talking about.
FRANCIS says
more power to you raissa…we need critical minds like you that exposes issues of both sides….people can sugar coat a lot of their arguments…but the TRUTH will always come out
raissa says
I believe that too.
Thank you for reading.
wan yabang says
ang dahilan kung bakit galit na galit c pannoy sa pandak ay dahil sa pinakawalan nya ang mga sankot sa pag patay kay ninoy. yan ang truth!
Andy says
Just ask to you and maybe can ask also to the rest of the world. hehehe
If the Arroyo cheated on the election and Arroyo administration is a haux then all the appointees of the Arroyo should step down since they are not considered ligitimate?
raissa says
Interesting proposition you have.
That would – um – include the Chief Justice.
wan yabang says
kung wala kayong ebidensya, kayo ay mga false witness! nasa bible yan!
gLitch_xix says
She’s just asking a question. You remind me of the Pharisees and the Sadducees. Quoting a verse in the Holy Bible. Twisting the verses to suite their theories.. When cornered, they resort to Biblical dogma. Grow up. Kung di mo talaga alam, wag ka na magsalita. You just condemn yourself.