September 13, 2007
Press Release 
For Reference: Atty. Neri Colmenares, NUPL preparatory
Committee member 
Contact No: 09178350459

Miriam’s legal opinion on Doble retraction, incorrect
– lawyers’ group

The human rights lawyers group National Union of
People’s Lawyers on Thursday rebuked the “legal
opinion issued by Senator Miriam Defensor Santiago on
the retraction of testimony made by former Isafp staff
Sgt. Vidal Doble is exceedingly unreliable based on
specific cases decided by the Supreme Court. 

In her privilege speech last Tuesday, Sen. Santiago
gave a “primer like speech” to teach senators how to
appreciate testimony in the Hello Garci hearings. 

Santiago said: A retraction, sometimes called a
recantation, takes place when a witness has previously
given an extrajudicial statement or court testimony,
but later repudiates what he said, by issuing a
contradictory written statement or a contradictory
testimony. As a general rule, retraction has little
weight as evidence. This rule has been stated in very
strong language in specific cases decided by the
Philippine Supreme Court. The court has held in a
number of cases that a recantation of a testimony is
exceedingly unreliable.” 

But NUPL said Senator Santiago’s legal opinion is
incorrect and could mislead the public on the legal
issues involved. 

 “The Supreme Court does not look with favor
recantation of witnesses. It did not rule, however,
that such recantation is of no evidentiary value in
the sense that Sen. Santiago would want the public to
believe. The case of Molina vs People [G.R. Nos.
70168-69.  July 24, 1996] is clear and cannot be
misconstrued by Sen. Santiago,” the lawyers group
said. 

NUPL further said: “The rule is settled that in cases
where previous testimony is retracted and a subsequent
different, if not contrary, testimony is made by the
same witness, the test to decide which testimony to
believe is one of comparison coupled with the
application of the general rules of evidence. A
testimony solemnly given in court should not be set
aside and disregarded lightly, and before this can be
done, both the previous testimony and the subsequent
one should be carefully compared and juxtaposed, the
circumstances under which each was made, carefully and
keenly scrutinized, and the reasons or motives for the
change, discriminatingly analyzed. x x x [Molina vs
People].” 

“It is clear from the above, that the rule is—for the
Court [or the Senate for that matter] to compare or
‘juxtapose’ both testimonies to find out “which
testimony to believe”. It is therefore misleading to
‘misquote’ the ruling of the Supreme Court and state
that the recantation of Sgt. Doble is of no
evidentiary value. Lawyers, especially those who
became Senators, should try to accurately cite
jurisprudence rather than flaunt legal knowledge based
on inaccurate citation of rulings,” the NUPL asserted.


“In fact, the Supreme Court in Molina required that
the circumstances under which the testimony was made,
and the motives for the change “discriminatingly
analyzed”. This, the Senator-Lawyers failed, or
refused, to do,” the lawyers group said.  

Likewise the human rights lawyers group was dismayed
over the reactions of other lawyers-senators against
Doble’s testimony during the Senate hearing on the
revived Hello Garci tape scandal.  

The NUPL reminded senators Santiago, Joker Arroyo and
Juan Ponce Enrile, that they are also lawyers by
profession and their misleading statements and callous
disregard of the testimony of Doble that his family
was held hostage by the Armed Forces of the
Philippines (AFP) in the quarters of the Chief of
Staff was very disappointing. 

“Despite the admission, Senators Arroyo and Enrile
chose to ignore such public admission in their focused
attempt to discredit the witness. Instead of showing
interest in the alleged involvement of the AFP Chief
of Staff in the crime, and summoning those who held
hostage Doble’s family, or at the very least show
concern for the plight of his family, the senators
callously devoted their legal argumentation on the
recantation of Sgt. Doble with the intention, we
believe, of discrediting his testimony rather than
ferreting the truth,” said. 

The lawyers’ group said Senators Santiago, Arroyo and
Enrile should know that as elected officials and
members of the legal profession, they must be
instruments of justice under lawyer’s oath.
“Furthermore, Article 208 of the Revised Penal Code
penalizes with prison correcional any public official
who tolerates the commission of an offense or does not
prosecute or investigate,” the NUPL added. 

The NUPL was also disappointed with Senator Arroyo,
whom the group is expected to act to protect the
rights of Doble and his family held hostage by the
military. “As a human rights lawyer during martial
law, Sen. Arroyo is expected to show concern for the
military’s violation of the human rights of Doble and
his family.  Holding hostage or kidnapping the family
of a witness is surely a concern of a past human
rights lawyer, if not of the other lawyer senators. 
NUPL is saddened by Sen. Joker Arroyo’s departure from
the human rights principles with which he was known
during martial law,” the lawyers’ group said. #