Subic Rape Case: Major Legal Decisions

GUILTY On Dec. 4, 2006, Judge Benjamin Pozon of the Makati City Regional Trial Court Branch 139 meted out a guilty verdict against Lance Cpl. Daniel Smith but acquitted his three co-accused – Lance Corporals Dominic Duplantis and Keith Silkwood and Staff Sergeant Chad Carpentier – for raping 22-year-old “Nicole" in Subic on Nov. 1, 2005. DENIAL OF APPEAL ON SMITH'S DETENTION As soon as the court clerk finished reading the verdict, Smith's lawyer promptly filed an appeal for the judge to reconsider his decision to send the soldier to the Makati City Jail. Judge Pozon swiftly denied the appeal. DENIAL OF MOTION ON SMITH'S CUSTODY Lawyer Jose Justiniano, Smith's new lead counsel, on Dec. 5 filed a motion for reconsideration asking for the soldier's transfer to the custody of the US. Attached to the motion was chief state prosecutor Jovencito Zuño's note favoring the motion. The next day, Smith's lawyers filed a manifestation before Makati RTC 139, saying he should be transferred to the US Embassy. However, Nicole's lawyers filed an opposition to the motion of Smith's lawyers. On Dec. 8, Smith’s lawyers submitted to Makati RTC 139 a written agreement between the US and Philippine governments to return Smith to the custody of the US pending the resolution of his appeal. The agreement was signed by US Ambassador Kristie Kenney and Zuño. Judge Pozon refused to honor it, saying that it looked to him like the one who signed the document was not the “appropriate officer." The lawyers immediately produced a new agreement – this time signed by Kenney and Justice Secretary Raul Gonzalez, but Pozon had already decided to hold a hearing on Dec. 11. Smith had to spend the weekend at the Makati City Jail. Pozon was not able to release the decision on Dec. 11. He claimed that he needed more time to study the motion for reconsideration. In an order dated Dec. 12, 2006, Pozon denied the request of the United States government to transfer Smith under its custody. Pozon insisted that Gonzalez and Zuño are not allowed to enter into an agreement with the US government. The resolution stated that under the Administrative Code of 1987 only the President and the foreign secretary are allowed to enter into such pacts. The day after the order was released, Smith's lawyers filed before the Court of Appeals a petition for a temporary restraining order against Pozon's order. The petition was later rejected by the CA, saying that it will not issue a TRO because that would in effect reverse the order of Judge Pozon and find irregularity in his decision when there was still no determination to that effect yet. SMITH’S TRANSFER On Dec. 15, Solicitor General Antonio Eduardo Nachura filed before the Court of Appeals a petition asking the court to "render a new decision upholding the authority of the US Embassy to take custody of Smith until the termination of judicial proceedings." Nachura, representing the DFA, filed before the Court of Appeals on Dec. 19 a "very urgent manifestation and motion" that cited an agreement between Foreign Affairs Secretary Alberto Romulo and US Ambassador to the Philippines Kristie Kenney. The agreement states: “The government of the Republic of the Philippines and the government of the United States of America agree that, in accordance with the Visiting Forces Agreement signed between the two nations, Lance Corporal Daniel J. Smith, United States Marine Corps, be returned to US military custody at the US Embassy in Manila." On Dec. 29, officers of the Department of Interior and Local Government transferred Smith to the US Embassy shortly before midnight. On Jan. 2, 2007, the Court of Appeals 16th Division dismissed Smith's appeal, saying the issue on his custody has been rendered "moot" since he has already been transferred to the US Embassy. On Jan. 8, Nicole asked the SC to nullify the agreement forged by the Philippine and US governments regarding the custody of Smith. The petition, filed by Atty. Evalyn Ursua, said the turnover of Smith to the US Embassy violated the Constitution and the Rules of Court. On Jan. 16, 2007, the Supreme Court ordered Malacañang to explain Smith's transfer of Smith from the DILG to the US Embassy. SC said that the Palace has 10 days to submit their comments on the petition of "Nicole." On Feb. 6, the Supreme Court dismissed Nicole's petition questioning the constitutionality of Article V, paragraph 6 of the VFA which requires a one-year period to complete judicial proceedings and assigns custody of accused soldier to the US. In a three-page en banc resolution, the High Tribunal ruled that the petition has become moot since the trial of the case has been terminated. As regards the custody of Smith, the issue would be more properly addressed in another petition, the resolution said. On Feb. 11, 2009, the Supreme Court ruled that Smith be placed under the custody of Philippine authorities, canceling the agreements between Romulo and Kenney. "The Romulo-Kenney Agreements of Dec. 19 and 22, 2006, which are agreements on the detention of the accused in the United States Embassy, are not in accord with the VFA itself because such detention is not 'by Philippine authorities'," the court said. Sources: RTC Branch 139 documents, GMANEWS.tv, iNews