CAGAYAN DE ORO — Through their lawyers, detained journalist Frenchie Mae Cumpio and church worker Marielle Domequil filed a petition for certiorari before the Court of Appeals (CA) in Cebu City on Tuesday, May 26, seeking to annul court decisions denying both accused admission to bail following their terrorism financing conviction.

A petition for certiorari, according to Rule 65 of the Rules of Court, may be filed when any tribunal has acted without or in excess of its jurisdiction or with grave abuse of discretion, and there is no appeal or any plain, speedy, and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law.

In their 25-page petition, lawyers for both accused stressed that Tacloban City Regional Trial Court Branch 45 Judge Georgina Uy-Perez allegedly committed grave abuse of discretion amounting to a lack or excess of jurisdiction after she denied their motions for bail despite the grounds presented.

They earlier said that none of the five circumstances negating the grant of bail under Rule 114 of the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure were present, highlighting as well both accused’s active participation in legal proceedings and good records inside and outside prison.

They said that it is illogical for the accused to evade judgment as they already served half of the minimum penalty.

They added that there is no plain, speedy, and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law, as there was no appeal from the denial of both accuseds’ applications for bail.

“For all these reasons, the Respondent Judge’s conjectural assessment of the petitioners’ application for bail and failure to conduct an objective, individualized, and evidence-based inquiry of their circumstances constitute grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction,” a part of the petition reads.

TIMELINE: The prolonged detention of Filipino journalist Frenchie Mae Cumpio

In a February 13 decision, Perez denied the accused’s motion for bail because of potential continuing involvement in alleged terroristic activities. Aside from that, the case is said to be connected to national security and there is a high risk of flight considering the penalty imposed and the two accused’s connection to various organizations.

Read: Groups decry denial of Frenchie Mae Cumpio’s bail

Defense lawyers acknowledged that bail remains discretionary but they stressed that such discretion “must be exercised on the basis of a reasoned, individualized assessment.”

They appealed before the CA to reverse the Tacloban court’s decisions pertaining to motions for bail and allow the accused’s admission to bail.

On April 10, Cumpio and Domequil’s legal team also filed a joint notice before the Tacloban City Regional Trial Court Branch 45 informing the latter that they were appealing the terrorism financing conviction to the appellate court.

For lawyer Ephraim Cortez, president of the National Union of Peoples’ Lawyers (NUPL), the charges against both accused are fabricated. He urged the Office of the Solicitor General—once their terrorism financing case elevates to the CA—to perform its mandate as the “People’s Tribune” and relieve Cumpio and Domequil from these cases. (DAA)

The post Did the Tacloban judge wrongly deny bail for Cumpio, Domequil? appeared first on Bulatlat.

From Bulatlat via This RSS Feed.