Photo from Unsplash | Rogério S.
The following post does not create a lawyer-client relationship between Alburo Alburo and Associates Law Offices (or any of its lawyers) and the reader. It is still best for you to engage the services of a lawyer or you may directly contact and consult Alburo Alburo and Associates Law Offices to address your specific legal concerns, if there is any.
Also, the matters contained in the following were written in accordance with the law, rules, and jurisprudence prevailing at the time of writing and posting, and do not include any future developments on the subject matter under discussion.
AT A GLANCE:
The petition for a writ of amparo is a remedy available to any person whose right to life, liberty and security is violated or threatened with violation by an unlawful act or omission of a public official or employee, or of a private individual or entity.
The writ shall cover extralegal killings and enforced disappearances or threats thereof. (Section 1, A.M. No. 07-9-12-SC)
According to the case of Siegfred D. Deduro vs. Maj. Gen. Eric C. Vinoya, G.R. No. 254753, July 04, 2023, the said remedy was described as a hybrid writ of the common law and civil law traditions, and “provides rapid judicial relief as it partakes of a summary proceeding that requires only substantial evidence to make the appropriate reliefs available to the petitioner; it is not an action to determine criminal guilt requiring proof beyond reasonable doubt, or liability for damages requiring preponderance of evidence, or administrative responsibility requiring substantial evidence that will require full and exhaustive proceedings.”
According to Section 1 of A.M. No. 07-9-12-SC or “The Rule On The Writ Of Amparo” The petition for a writ of amparo is a remedy available to any person whose right to life, liberty and security is violated or threatened with violation by an unlawful act or omission of a public official or employee, or of a private individual or entity.
The writ shall cover extralegal killings and enforced disappearances or threats thereof.
EXTRALEGAL KILLINGS AND ENFORCED DISAPPEARANCES
“Extralegal killings” are ‘killings committed without due process of law, i.e., without legal safeguards or judicial proceedings.”
“Enforced disappearances” 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 person concerned or a refusal to acknowledge the deprivation of liberty which places such persons outside the protection of law.” (Chairperson Siegfred B. Mison vs. Hon. Paulino Q. Gallegos G.R. No. 210759, G.R. No. 211403, June 23, 2015)
In the recent case of Siegfred D. Deduro vs. Maj. Gen. Eric C. Vinoya, G.R. No. 254753, July 04, 2023, the Supreme Court discussed the purpose of the enactment of the Rule on the Writ of Amparo or A.M. No. 07-9-12-SC by tracing the history of the said writ. According to the Supreme Court, It was in 2008 when Chief Justice Puno introduced the purpose of the writ of amparo in the case of Secretary of National Defense vs. Manalo, G.R. No. 180906, October 7, 2008. The said remedy was described as a hybrid writ of the common law and civil law traditions, and “provides rapid judicial relief as it partakes of a summary proceeding that requires only substantial evidence to make the appropriate reliefs available to the petitioner; it is not an action to determine criminal guilt requiring proof beyond reasonable doubt, or liability for damages requiring preponderance of evidence, or administrative responsibility requiring substantial evidence that will require full and exhaustive proceedings.”
HOW MAY A COURT EVALUATE AN AMPARO PETITION?
A court may evaluate an amparo petition twice:
- First, after the filing of the petition in order to determine whether the writ ought to be issued; and
- Second, after the issuance of the writ, the filing of the return, and the conduct of a summary hearing in order to determine whether the privilege of the writ ought to be granted or denied. It is thus conceivable for a court to initially issue a writ but subsequently deny the privilege of the writ after an evaluation of the submissions of the parties.
DISTINCTION BETWEEN THE ISSUANCE OF THE WRIT OF AMPARIO AND THE GRANT OF THE PRIVILGE OF THE WRIT
There is a distinction between the issuance of the writ of amparo from the grant of the privilege of the writ. The initial evaluation for the issuance of the writ of amparo comes after the filing of the petition and is governed by Section 6 of the Rule. Said section governs the initial evaluation and is divided into two parts: the first sentence describes the minimum weight of evidence required for the issuance of the writ, while the second sentence details the procedure for its issuance:
SECTION 6. Issuance of the Writ. — Upon the filing of the petition, the court, justice or judge shall immediately order the issuance of the writ if on its face it ought to issue. The clerk of court shall issue the writ under the seal of the court; or in case of urgent necessity, the justice or the judge may issue the writ under his or her own hand, and may deputize any officer or person to serve it.
In contrast, the subsequent evaluation of the petition for the grant of the privilege of the writ of amparo comes after the issuance of the writ, the filing of the return, and the conduct of a summary hearing. This is governed by Section 18 of the Rule, to wit:
SECTION 18. Judgment. — The court shall render within ten (10) days from the time the petition is submitted for decision. If the allegations in the petition are proven by substantial evidence, the court shall grant the privilege of the writ and such reliefs as may be proper and appropriate; otherwise, the privilege shall be denied.
WHO MAY FILE?
According to Section 2 of A.M. No. 07-9-12-SC or “The Rule On The Writ Of Amparo” The petition may be filed by the aggrieved party or by any qualified person or entity in the following order:
- Any member of the immediate family, namely: the spouse, children and parents of the aggrieved party;
- Any ascendant, descendant or collateral relative of the aggrieved party within the fourth civil degree of consanguinity or affinity, in default of those mentioned in the preceding paragraph; or
- Any concerned citizen, organization, association or institution, if there is no known member of the immediate family or relative of the aggrieved party.
The filing of a petition by the aggrieved party suspends the right of all other authorized parties to file similar petitions. Likewise, the filing of the petition by an authorized party on behalf of the aggrieved party suspends the right of all others, observing the order established herein.
Click here to subscribe to our newsletter
Alburo Alburo and Associates Law Offices specializes in business law and labor law consulting. For inquiries regarding legal services, you may reach us at info@alburolaw.com, or dial us at (02)7745-4391/ 0917-5772207/ 09778050020.
All rights reserved.