Republic of the Philippines

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
National Prosecution Service
OFFICE OF THE PROVINCIAL PROSECUTOR
PROVINCE OF ZAMBOANGA DEL SUR
Hall of Justice
Pagadian City

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,

Plaintiff, I.S. No. IX-09-INV-12C-00123

- versus - - for -

JHON-JHON ADLAON, MURDER

Respondent.
x - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - /

R E S O L U T I O N

It appearing from the record of this case that respondent Jhon-Jhon Adlaon, whose
known address is at Legarda Uno, Dinas, Zamboanga del Sur, cannot be subpoenaed. The return
was never made up to the present by the concerned PNP on the subpoena issued by this Office as
early as in April 10, 2012. Hence, this case shall be resolved on the basis of the evidence for the
prosecution.

A perusal and careful examination of the affidavit of the complainant, as well as that of
her witness, shows that there exist a probable cause to indict respondent Jhon-Jhon Adlaon
who allegedly without provocation attacked and shot the victim Emedio Capablanca Romero
of Purok 1, Legarda Dos, Dinas, Zamboanga del Sur, with a hand gun, hitting the latter’s breast
that caused his death on arrival at the hospital. The incident happened on February 17, 2012, at
about 12:30 p.m., while said victim was sitting on a bench inside the store just adjacent to his
house.
WHEREFORE, let Information for Murder be immediately filed with the Regional Trial
Court, Branch 29, San Miguel, Zamboanga del Sur, having the authority to try and decide this
case, as to both venue and jurisdiction.

Done this 18th day of July, 2012, at Pagadian City, Philippines.

LUCIO ORIO TAN JR.

3rd Assistant Provincial Prosecutor
MCLE Compliance No. III-0018149
Issued on July 29, 2010
APPROVED:

VICTORIANO B. GONZAGA
Provincial Prosecutor
MCLE Compliance No. III-0018146
Issued on July 28, 2010
Copy Furnished:

1. MRS. GUIULLERMA M. ROMERO

Purok I, Legarda Dos, Dinas, Zamboanga del Sur
By Registered Mail 2. FILE
 Republic of the Philippines
REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
9th Judicial Region
Branch 29
San Miguel, Zamboanga del Sur

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,

Plaintiff, CRIM. CASE No. ___________
( I.S. No. IX-09-INV-12C-00123)

- versus - - for -

JHON-JHON ADLAON, MURDER

Accused.
x - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - /

INFORMATION

The undersigned Assistant Provincial Prosecutor of Zamboanga del Sur, hereby accuses

Jhon-Jhon Adlaon of the crime of Murder, committed as follows:

That on or about 12:30 in the afternoon of February 17, 2012, in Purok 1, Barangay
Legarda Dos, Municipality of Dinas, Province of Zamboanga del Sur, Philippines, and within
the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the accused Jhon-Jhon Adlaon armed with a hand
gun of undetermined caliber, did then and there, with malice aforethought or evident
premeditation and with deliberate intent to take the life of Emedio Capablanca Romero,
willfully, unlawfully, feloniously, suddenly, unexpectedly, and treacherously fired shot directly to
the latter, employing means, manner and form in the execution thereof which tended directly and
specially to insure its commission without danger to the person of said accused, the result of
which attack was that the said victim, who did not even know that he would be attacked as he
was merely sitting on a bench, received fatal wound on his breast, thereby causing the direct and
immediate death of said victim to the great damage and prejudice of his heirs.
The commission of the crime of murder was attended by the aggravating circumstance of
treachery (alevosia) which the said accused purposely sought for to facilitate the commission of
the offense.
ACTS CONTRARY TO LAW.
Pagadian City, Philippines, July 18, 2012.

LUCIO ORIO TAN JR.

3rd Assistant Provincial Prosecutor
MCLE Compliance No. III-0018149
Issued on July 29, 2010
Information for Murder
Continue … … … - PAGE 2 -
X========== /

WITNESSES:

1. Guillerma M. Romero - Purok 1, Legarda Dos, Dinas, Zamboanga del Sur;

2. Jomar B. Lagutin - Poblacion, Dinas, Zamboanga del Sur;
3. and Many Others

NO BAIL RECOMMENDED

APPROVED:

VICTORIANO B. GONZAGA
Provincial Prosecutor
MCLE Compliance No. III-0018146
Issued on July 28, 2010

CERTIFICATION

I hereby certify that I, as shown by the records, an authorized Officer, have personally
examined the complainant and her witness; that there is a reasonable ground to believe that the
crime of Murder has been committed by the accused who is probably guilty thereof, and should
be held for trial; that the accused has been duly informed of the complaint and the evidence
submitted against him and that he was given the opportunity to controvert the same.

LUCIO O. TAN, JR.

3rd
Assistant Provincial Prosecutor
MCLE Compliance No. III-0018149
Issued on July 29, 2010

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this ____ day of July, 2012, at Pagadian
City, Philippines.

VICTORIANO B. GONZAGA
Provincial Prosecutor
MCLE Compliance No. III-0018146
Issued on July 28, 2010
 Republic of the Philippines
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
National Prosecution Service
OFFICE OF THE PROVINCIAL PROSECUTOR
PROVINCE OF ZAMBOANGA DEL SUR
Hall of Justice
Pagadian City

CARMELITO M. TINDOC,
Plaintiff, I.S. No. IX-09-INV-12D-00154

- versus - - for -

2nd Lt. BENITO V. GARCIA (Ret.), GRAVE THREATS

Respondent.
x - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - /

R E S O L U T I O N

Issues having been joined for resolution of this case with the filing of the counter-affidavit of
2nd Lt. Benito V. Garcia (Ret.) and the joint affidavit of his witnesses. Respondent 2nd Lt.
Benito V. Garcia [Ret.] (Respondent for brevity) has his present address at Sitio Balabag,
Barangay Depuri, Bayog, Zamboanga del Sur, where the Toronto Venture Incorporated-
Resource Development Philippines, Inc. (TVIRD) has its mine/camp site; The respondent
serves as Security Manager of the TVIRD; he is charged before the Office of the Provincial
Prosecutor of Zamboanga del Sur with the alleged crime of Grave Threats.

Prosecution evidence shows that on or about 1:00 o’clock in the afternoon of April 9,
2012, Carmelito M. Tindoc (Complainant for brevity), together with one Alfredo E. Darang, Sr.
rode on one truck, described as Isuzu Elf, colored white, driven by Joseph Suan who was also
assisted by his truck man, Marlon Floro; the said truck was loaded with assorted cargoes
consisting of sacks of rice, dried fish, boxes of soft-drinks, and one unit baking materials owned
by a certain Julito Monding. They were transporting the said cargoes to Purok Tinago, Sitio
Balabag, Barangay Dipore, Bayog, Zamboanga del Sur. Upon their arrival at the Inter-Agency
Checkpoint in Sitio Balabag, Barangay Dipore, Bayog, Zamboanga del Sur, they were prevented
from proceeding to their destination by security guards fully armed with armalite M16 rifles and
other high-powered firearms with hand held radios, led by the respondent who informed the
complainant that he (respondent) was instructed by the TVIRD management that all materials,
equipment, machinery, crude oil, commodities and other implements of the small-scale miners
operating at Sitio Balabag, Barangay Depuri, Bayog, Zamboanga del Sur, are not allowed to be
brought to their plants and/or tunnels situated at the hilly portion of the said barangay.
Thereupon, due to the insistence of the respondent, and even if that was against their will,
complainant and his companions aforementioned who were already frightened were compelled
to return to their place of departure, particularly, at Barangay Maganay, Buug, Zamboanga
Sibugay, without having fulfilled their purpose. The act complained of was corroborated as to its
material points by witnesses Joseph Suan and Marlon Floro in their joint affidavit supporting
the affidavit of complainant.

On the other hand, in his counter affidavit supported by the joint affidavit of his
witnesses, Security guards Nemrod C. Achay, Jemar A. Collora and Arnel K. Solomon, all
members of the security department of TVIRD, the respondent vehemently denied the alleged
accusation of the complainant and his witnesses. He alleged that the allegations stated in the
affidavit of complainant and his witnesses are bereft of merit. He also alleged that they were
manning a checkpoint “to secure their area of responsibility which did not in any way contravene
any law nor it captivates an aura of fear within the people residing therein, conversely, it secures
their lives and limbs”. He further added that nowhere in the complainant’s allegations would the
RESOLUTION
I.S. NO. IX-09-INV-12D-00154 - PAGE 2 -
X============/

elements of the crime charged suffice.

This case illustrates between denial, on one hand, and the positive identification of the
accused for his commission of a crime, on the other hand.

The positive identification of the respondent as the person responsible for preventing
complainant and his companions has been clearly, categorically and consistently established on
record. Moreover, the undersigned noted that no evidence was presented to establish that these
eyewitnesses for the prosecution harbored any ill-will against the respondent or that they have
reasons to fabricate their allegations under oath. It is thus believed that the allegations of the
complainant, as corroborated by his witnesses on the incident narrated in the foregoing, are
accepted as true for being consistent with the natural order of events, human nature and the
presumption of good faith. [see People v. Amodia, G.R. No. 173791, April 7, 2009, 584 SCRA
518, 541]. Such positive identification prevails over respondent’s uncorroborated and weak
defense of denial. Positive identification of a culprit is of great weight in determining whether
an accused is guilty or not.[People v. Bihag, Jr. and Hilot, 396 Phil. 289, 296 (2000)]. The
Supreme Court has held that the defense of denial is insipid and weak as it is easy to fabricate
and difficult to prove; thus, it cannot take precedence over the positive testimony of the offended
party. [People v. Pangilinan, 443 Phil. 198, 235-236 (2003)]. The defense of denial is
unavailing when placed astride the undisputed fact that there was positive identification of the
accused.[ People v. Quimzon, 471 Phil. 182, 203 (2004)].

Moreover, respondent’s defense of denial, being evidentiary in nature, can only be

determined in a full blown hearing before a judicial proceeding, not when a preliminary
investigation is conducted in the face of the positive identification by the prosecution witnesses
herein of the identity of the respondent as the very person responsible for the act complained of,
so as to indict him and to hold him for further trial.

However, the undersigned opines and so holds that the crime committed by the
respondent is Grave Coercion defined and penalized under first paragraph of Article 286 of the
Revised Penal Code, which provides:

“The penalty of prison correccional and a fine not exceeding 6,000

pesos shall be imposed upon any person who, without authority of law, shall
by means of violence, threats or intimidation, prevent another from doing
something against his will, whether it be right or wrong.” (bold supplied for
emphasis).

There are two ways of committing grave coercion: 1) by preventing another by means of violence
from doing something which is not prohibited by law; and ) by compelling another by means of violence
to do something against his will, whether it be right or wrong.

Thus, it is the considered view of the undersigned that the respondent, together with his security
guards who were then armed with high powered firearms, has committed the first kind of grave coercion,
that is, without authority of law, prevented complainant and his companions by means of violence from
doing something which is not prohibited by law, that is, transporting their cargoes on board a truck to
their destination which is Purok Tinago, Sitio Balabag, Barangay Depuri, Bayog, Zamboanga del
Sur, and there is no existing law yet that punishes them in doing so. The prohibition merely came
from the respondent, per instruction of the TVIRD management that all materials, equipment,
machinery, crude oil, commodities and other implements of the small-scale miners operating at
Sitio Balabag, Barangay Dipore, Bayog, Zamboanga del Sur, are not allowed to be brought to
their plants and/or tunnels situated at the hilly portion of the said barangay. If ever complainant
and his companions were violating any existing law, the respondent through his employer should
have reported the matter to the proper authorities and filed a case against the complainant and his
companions. It must be so emphasized that the objective of the law on coercion is to enforce the
RESOLUTION
I.S. NO. IX-09-INV-12D-00154 - PAGE 3 -
X============/

principle “that no person is allowed to take the law into his hands; that ours is a
government of law and not of men”. (see The Revised Penal Code Made Easy, Book II, 2001
ed., p. 300; bold supplied for emphasis).

WHEREFORE, let the attached information for Grave Coercion be immediately filed
with the court of competent jurisdiction against accused 2nd Lt. Benito V. Garcia [Ret.],
recommending the amount of Twenty Four Thousand (Php24,000.00) Pesos, representing bail
for his temporary liberty.

Done this 1st day of October, 2012, at Pagadian City, Philippines.

LUCIO ORIO TAN JR.

3rd Assistant Provincial Prosecutor
MCLE Compliance No. III-0018149
Issued on July 29, 2010

APPROVED:

VICTORIANO B. GONZAGA
Provincial Prosecutor
MCLE Compliance No. III-0018146
Issued on July 28, 2010

Copy Furnished:

1. Mr. Carmelito M. Tindoc

832 Makabibihag, Balangasan District
Pagadian City
By Registered Mail

2. 2nd Lt. Benito V. Garcia [Ret.]

Sitio Balabag, Barangay Dipore
Bayog, Zamboanga del Sur
By Registered Mail

3. OFFICE FILE
 Republic of the Philippines
MUNICIPAL CIRCUIT TRIAL COURT OF
KUMALARANG-LAKEWOOD-BAYOG
9th Judicial Region
Kumalarang, Zamboanga del Sur

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, CRIMINAL CASE No. _______________

Plaintiff, (I.S. No. IX-09-INV-12D-00154)

- versus - - for -

2nd Lt. BENITO V. GARCIA (Ret.), GRAVE COERCION

Accused.
X-------------------------/

I N F O R M A T I O N

The undersigned Assistant Provincial Prosecutor of Zamboanga del Sur, hereby accuses
2nd Lt. BENITO V. GARCIA (Ret.) of the crime of GRAVE COERCION defined and
penalized under first paragraph of Article 286 of the Revised Penal Code, committed as follows:
That on or about past 1:00 o’clock in the afternoon of April 9, 2012, at Sitio Balabag,
Barangay Dipore, Municipality of Bayog, Province of Zamboanga del Sur, Philippines, and
within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused without authority of
law, and armed with a high-powered firearm, did then and there willfully, unlawfully and
feloniously, prevent complainant Carmelito M. Tindoc and his companions by means of violence
from doing something which is not prohibited by law, that is, transporting their cargoes on board a truck
to their destination which is Purok Tinago, Sitio Balabag, Barangay Dipore, Bayog, Zamboanga del
Sur, and there is no existing law yet that punishes them in doing so, and as a consequence
thereof, the latter went back to their place of departure, that is, Buug, Zamboanga Sibugay, to the
great damage and prejudice of the said complainant.

ACTS CONTRARY TO LAW.

Done this 1st day of October, 2012, at Pagadian City, Philippines.

LUCIO O. TAN, JR.

3rd
Assistant Provincial Prosecutor
MCLE Compliance No. III-0018149
Issued on July 29, 2010

WITNESSES:

1. Mr. Carmelito M. Tindoc - 832 Makabibihag, Balangasan District, Pagadian City;

2. Marlon M. Floro - Barangay Betinan, San Miguel, Zamboanga del Sur;

3. Joseph P. Suan - Barangay Talairan, Buug, Zamboanga Sibugay;

4. And Many Others

BAIL RECOMMENDED: TWENTY FOUR THOUSAND (Php24,000.00) PESOS.

INFORMATION FOR
GRAVE COERCION - PAGE 2 -
X===========/

APPROVED:

VICTORIANO B. GONZAGA
Provincial Prosecutor
MCLE Compliance No. III-0018146
Issued on July 28, 2010

CERTIFICATION

I hereby CERTIFY under oath that I, or as shown by the record, an authorized officer,
have personally examined the complainant and his witnesses; that there is reasonable ground to
believe that the crime of GRAVE COERCION has been committed and that the accused is
probably guilty thereof and should be held for trial; that the accused was informed of the
complaint and the evidence submitted against him; and that he was given the opportunity to
controvert the same.

LUCIO O. TAN, JR.

3rd Assistant Provincial Prosecutor
MCLE Compliance No. III-0018149
Issued on July 29, 2010

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO before me this _____ day of October, 2012,

at Pagadian City, Philippines.

VICTORIANO B. GONZAGA
Provincial Prosecutor
MCLE Compliance No. III-0018146
Issued on July 28, 2010
 Republic of the Philippines
REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
9th Judicial Region
BRANCH 23
Molave, Zamboanga del Sur

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, CRIM. CASE No. _______________

Plaintiff, (I. S. No. IX-09-INV-12D-00148)

- versus - - for -

ROSALIE CAÑETE y OMANDAM, TRAFFICKING IN PERSONS

Accused. defined and penalized under Sec.
x--------------------------/ 4 (a), in relation to Sec. 3 (a, b, c & d),
Of REPUBLIC ACT No. 9208

I N F O R M A T I O N

The undersigned Assistant Provincial Prosecutor of Zamboanga del Sur, hereby accuses
ROSALIE CAÑETE Y OMANDAM of the crime of Trafficking in Persons defined and
penalized under Section 4 (a), in relation to Section 3 (a, b, c & d), all of Republic Act No. 9208,
otherwise known as the Trafficking in Persons Act of 2003, committed as follows:
That in or about and during the period comprised between October 11, 2010 and
February 14, 2012, inclusive, first, in Purok Makugihon, Barangay Blancia, Municipality of
Molave, Province of Zamboanga del Sur, Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this
Honorable Court, the above-named accused, being the sister of the full blood of the offended
party, Patricia Rebusora y Cañete, did then and there willfully, unlawfully and feloniously
defraud the latter and her 17-year old daughter Lovella Rebosura y Cañete, by way of false
pretenses, which are executed prior to or simultaneously with the commission of the fraud, as
follows, to wit: the accused knowing fully well that she is not authorized job recruiter for persons
intending to secure employment abroad, recruited and convinced the said offended parties and
pretended that she could secure a job for Lovella Rebosura y Cañete in Malaysia; the said
offended parties, deceived and convinced by the false pretenses employed by the accused agreed
wherein eventually (on October 26, 2010) Lovella Rebosura y Cañete went with the accused to
Malaysia where she was utilized as a house helper at the house of the accused, and far from her
expectations and contrary to her will, the said Lovella Rebosura y Cañete was subjected to
inhuman treatment by her aunt, accused herein, and she was forced to render acts for the purpose
of prostitution, forced labor, slavery and involuntary servitude; and every time that Patricia
Rebusora y Cañete would inquire through the phone regarding the condition of her said
daughter Lovella Rebosura y Cañete, the accused was always under the pretext that said minor
victim was in good hands until the matter had gone worst for the said minor Lovella Rebosura y
Cañete to bear with her ordeal, and fortunately through the help of other Filipinos thereat, she
chanced to get home on February 14, 2012, to the great damage and prejudice of the said
offended parties.

ACTS CONTRARY TO LAW.

Pagadian City, Philippines, October 1, 2012.

LUCIO O. TAN, JR.

3rd
Assistant Provincial Prosecutor
MCLE Compliance No. III-0018149
Issued on July 29, 2010
INFORMATION
CONTINUE……………. - PAGE 2 -
X===========/

BAIL BOND RECOMMENDED: EIGHTY THOUSAND (P80,000.00) PESOS.

WITNESSES:

1. Patricia C. Rebusora - Purok Makugihon, Barangay Blancia, Molave, Zamboanga del Sur;
2. Lovella C. Rebosura - - do -
3. And Many Others

APPROVED:

VICTORIANO B. GONZAGA
Provincial Prosecutor
MCLE Compliance No. III-0018146
Issued on July 28, 2010

CERTIFICATION

I hereby certify that I, an authorized Officer, have conducted the requisite preliminary
investigation in this case and have personally examined the complainants wherein a reasonable
ground of belief exist that the crime as charged was committed by the accused who is probably
guilty thereof and should be held for trial, and that the accused could not be subpoenaed,
considering that she is presently residing at Malaysia.

LUCIO O. TAN, JR.

3rd Assistant Provincial Prosecutor
MCLE Compliance No. III-0018149
Issued on July 29, 2010

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this _____ day of October, 2012, at

Pagadian City, Philippines.

VICTORIANO B. GONZAGA
Provincial Prosecutor
MCLE Compliance No. III-0018146
Issued on July 28, 2010
 Republic of the Philippines
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
National Prosecution Service
OFFICE OF THE PROVINCIAL PROSECUTOR
PROVINCE OF ZAMBOANGA DEL SUR
Hall of Justice
Pagadian City

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, I. S. No. IX-09-INV-12D-00148

Plaintiff,
- versus - - for -

ROSALIE CAÑETE y OMANDAM, TRAFFICKING IN PERSONS

Respondent. defined and penalized under Sec.
x--------------------------/ 4 (a), in relation to Sec. 3 (a, b, c & d),
Of REPUBLIC ACT No. 9208

RESOLUTION

Private complainants Patricia Rebosura y Cañete and her daughter Lovella Rebosura y
Cañete have executed their respective sworn Complaint-Affidavit (made under oath), showing in
substance that on October 2, 2012, respondent Rosalie Cañete y Omandam arrived home in
Barangay Blancia, Molave, Zamboanga del Sur, from Malaysia to attend the burial of her father.
Incidentally, respondent herein is the sister of the full blood and the aunt of, private complainants
herein. On October 11, 2010, the respondent asked the permission of her sister, Patricia
Rebosura y Cañete, if she could bring with her niece Lovella Rebosura y Cañete (then a 17-
year old minor daughter of Patricia) to Malaysia. Patricia was at first hesitant by reason of the
minority of her said daughter. But her sister Rosalie (respondent herein) promised her that she
(Rosalie) will take care of everything for Lovella who was offered job in Malaysia. Thinking
then that her said minor daughter would be safe and in good hands with her sister Rosalie and for
the good future of Lovella, Patricia finally acceded to the offer of the respondent. Thus,
subsequently on October 26, 2010, the respondent and her niece Lovella went to Malaysia. Few
months passed when complainant Patricia made a long distance call to her said daughter but it
was always the respondent who would answer the phone and kept telling Patricia that Lovella
was alright and that Patricia has nothing to worry about. There were three (3) times during long
distance call that Patricia pleaded her sister Rosalie that she wanted to speak to her said daughter,
and she (Patricia) was allowed to converse only a few minutes with her daughter Lovella.
Surprisingly, however, on February 14, 2012, Lovella Rebosura y Cañete arrived home at
Purok Makugihon, Barangay Blancia, Molave, Zamboanga del Sur. The latter narrated to her
mother about her ordeal in Malaysia where she was maltreated and forced to work as a prostitute
by the respondent. She was placed in a hotel in Malaysia where she was instructed to go inside a
room therein where a customer was waiting for her. She further added that she was beside the
respondent every time she and her mother Patricia had conversation to each other at the phone,
and that the respondent would forcibly dictate what to say to her mother in order to hide her real
situation in Malaysia. Lovella got the chance to escape from Malaysia with the help of some
concerned pinay (Filipina) who bought her ticket back to the Philippines.

The respondent Rosalie Cañete y Omandam could not be subpoenaed as she is at

present living in Malaysia, and the resolution of this case is based on the evidence presented by
the complainants herein. Thus, the foregoing narration of facts remained uncontroverted, taking
into consideration that the allegations of the complainants, corroborating to each other, are
accepted as true for being consistent with the natural order of events, human nature and the
RESOLUTION
I.S. NO. IX-09-INV-12D-00148 - PAGE 2 -
X============/

presumption of good faith. [see People v. Amodia, G.R. No. 173791, April 7, 2009, 584 SCRA
518, 541].

The undersigned opines and so holds that the crime committed by the respondent is
TRAFFICKING IN PERSONS defined and penalized under Section 4 (a), in relation to Section
3 (a, b, c & d), of Republic Act (R.A.) No. 9208, otherwise known as the Trafficking in
Persons Act of 2003.

Section 3 (a, b, c & d), of Republic Act (R.A.) No. 9208, among others, gives the
definition of the following terms:

(a) Trafficking in Persons - refers to the recruitment, transportation, transfer or harboring, or

receipt of persons with or without the victim's consent or knowledge, within or across national
borders by means of threat or use of force, or other forms of coercion, abduction, fraud,
deception, abuse of power or of position, taking advantage of the vulnerability of the person, or,
the giving or receiving of payments or benefits to achieve the consent of a person having control
over another person for the purpose of exploitation which includes at a minimum, the
exploitation or the prostitution of others or other forms of sexual exploitation, forced labor or
services, slavery, servitude or the removal or sale of organs. (bold and underlining supplied for
emphasis).

The recruitment, transportation, transfer, harboring or receipt of a child for the purpose of
exploitation shall also be considered as "trafficking in persons" even if it does not involve any of
the means set forth in the preceding paragraph.

(b) Child - refers to a person below eighteen (18) years of age or one who is over eighteen (18)
but is unable to fully take care of or protect himself/herself from abuse, neglect, cruelty,
exploitation, or discrimination because of a physical or mental disability or condition. (bold and
underlining supplied for emphasis).

(c) Prostitution - refers to any act, transaction, scheme or design involving the use of a person
by another, for sexual intercourse or lascivious conduct in exchange for money, profit or any
other consideration. (bold and underlining supplied for emphasis).

(d) Forced Labor and Slavery - refer to the extraction of work or services from any person by
means of enticement, violence, intimidation or threat, use of force or coercion, including
deprivation of freedom, abuse of authority or moral ascendancy, debt-bondage or deception.
(bold and underlining supplied for emphasis).

On the other hand, Section 4 (a) of the afore-cited law, specifically set forth, among
others, an act of trafficking in persons wherein it shall be unlawful for any person, natural or
juridical, to commit the same, viz:

(a) To recruit, transport, transfer; harbor, provide, or receive a person by any means, including
those done under the pretext of domestic or overseas employment or training or apprenticeship,
for the purpose of prostitution, pornography, sexual exploitation, forced labor, slavery,
involuntary servitude or debt bondage; (underlining supplied for emphasis).

Thus, it is the considered view of the undersigned that the respondent Rosalie Cañete y
Omandam has committed the crime of trafficking in persons, the acts complained of are well within all
the elements thereof, as shown above. Moreover, as the respondent is probably guilty thereof, she should
be indicted and hold for further trial.

WHEREFORE, let the attached information to that effect be immediately filed with the
proper family court and/or the RTC, Branch 23, Molave, Zamboanga del Sur, against accused
RESOLUTION
I.S. NO. IX-09-INV-12D-00148 - PAGE 3 -
X============/

Rosalie Cañete y Omandam, recommending the amount of Eighty Thousand (Php80,000.00)

Pesos, representing bail for his temporary liberty.

Done this 1st day of October, 2012, at Pagadian City, Philippines.

LUCIO ORIO TAN JR.

3rdAssistant Provincial Prosecutor
MCLE Compliance No. III-0018149
Issued on July 29, 2010

APPROVED:

VICTORIANO B. GONZAGA
Provincial Prosecutor
MCLE Compliance No. III-0018146
Issued on July 28, 2010

Copy Furnished:

1. Mrs. Patricia C. Rebosura

Purok Makugihon, Barangay Blancia
Molave, Zamboanga del Sur
By Registered Mail

2. Miss Lovella C. Rebosura

Purok Makugihon, Barangay Blancia
Molave, Zamboanga del Sur
By Registered Mail

3. OFFICE FILE
 Republic of the Philippines
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
National Prosecution Service
OFFICE OF THE PROVINCIAL PROSECUTOR
PROVINCE OF ZAMBOANGA DEL SUR
Hall of Justice
Pagadian City

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, I. S. No. IX-09-INV-12C-00121

Plaintiff,
- versus - - for -

ARNOLD GARAN Y DIASANA ILLEGAL POSSESSION OF

Respondent. FIREARM AND AMMUNITION
x--------------------------/
==========================================================

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, I. S. No. IX-09-INV-12C-00122

Plaintiff,

- versus - - for -

PAUL VINCENT N. ARIAS and ROBBERY and

MARLOU D. CORAÑEZ ATTEMPTED MURDER
Respondents.
x--------------------------/
==========================================================

SEPARATE
JOINT RESOLUTION

This is a joint resolution of the above-entitled cases separately made by the undersigned
member of the Panel of Investigators, pursuant to the Memorandum dated May 17, 2012, of Hon.
Victoriano B. Gonzaga, Provincial Prosecutor of Zamboanga del Sur.

It appears that these cases happened on the same date (March 27, 2012) at the same place,
more particularly, at Sitio Balabag, Barangay Depore, Bayog, Zamboanga del Sur, and involving
substantially the same parties, having a different version of accusation against each other. More
surprisingly, however, the alleged separate incident narrated in these two cases was separately
reported and blottered at a particular PNP Station in a municipality outside the province of
Zamboanga del Sur, and outside the situs of the alleged crimes shown hereunder. Copies of
certifications on separate blotter regarding the alleged incidents were attached to the original
records of these cases. The antecedents are as follows:

I. S. No. IX-09-INV-12C-00121

In this particular case, PO1 Michael Galvez Avenido, a member of the PNP assigned at
the ZDS Inter-Agency Task Group on Mining, Environment, Public Order & Safety at Sitio
Balabag, Barangay Depore, Bayog, Zamboanga del Sur, charged respondent Arnold Garan y
Diasana with illegal possession of firearm and ammunition on the strength of a criminal
RESOLUTION
I.S. NO. IX-09-INV-12C-00121 - PAGE 2 -
I. S. No. IX-09-INV-12C-00122
X============/

complaint filed with the Office of the Provincial Prosecutor of Zamboanga del Sur, allegedly
committed as follows:

“That on or about the 27th day of March 2012, at about 5:30 in the afternoon, more or
less, in Sitio Balabag, Barangay Depore, in the municipality of Bayog, province of Zamboanga
del Sur, Philippines and within the jurisdiction of the Honorable Investigating Office, the above-
named accused, knowing fully well that unauthorized possession of firearm and ammunition is
punishable by law, did then and there willfully, unlawfully and feloniously have in his
possession and control one (1) Caliber 45, Colt MK 1V, Series 80, bearing Serial Number 37586,
loaded with seven (7) live ammunition, without any legal authority to possess the same”. This
accusation against said respondent was supported by no less than the complaint-affidavit of the
said Police Officer, having been corroborated by the affidavit of witness, Paul Vincent Arias, the
Security Manager of TVIRD, in that both have personal knowledge having seen respondent
herein tucking a pistol on his waist with the handle thereof plainly visible to them. According to
PO1 Michael Galvez Avenido, he inquired the respondent if he has valid documents or permit
to carry his firearm, and when said respondent failed to show any, the former grab the pistol
which was found to be a caliber 45, as earlier described. Thereupon, the respondent allegedly ran
and was able to evade arrest. The said police officer together with his companions proceeded to
the Diplahan Police Station at Diplahan, Zamboanga Sibugay, which is another province, and
have the incident blottered therein, as evidenced by a Certification (Marked as Annex “6-F”)
issued by PO2 Rey Saagundo Danago (investigator), dated on even date, at 7:30 in the evening.
Also attached to the record are colored pictures of the subject firearm which was allegedly
accounted for at the said Diplahan Police Station.

I. S. No. IX-09-INV-12C-00122

In this other case, on the other hand, respondents Paul Vincent Arias and Marlo
Curañez were charged with robbery and attempted murder by complainant Arnold Garan y
Diasana. The charge, as reflected in his affidavit-complaint, substantially reads:

That on or about March 7, 2012, at around 5:30 o’clock in the afternoon, at Sitio Balabag,
Barangay Depore, Bayog, Zamboanga del Sur, while the said complainant was beside his store
standing by with Arnel Adem Cineza and Jimmy Campos Balukan, among others, the above-
named respondents Paul Vincent Arias and Marlo Curañez, together with their then
companions, suddenly arrived aboard the service vehicle of TVIRD. The complainant was then
carrying a black bag containing a sum of Php300,000.00, some other important documents, and a
licensed 9MM pistol, together with the authority to carry the same firearm outside his residence
or house, as evidenced by a machine copy of a Permit to Carry Firearm Outside of Residence
(PCFOR), marked as Annex “A” and attached to the record of this case. Right then and there, the
said respondents, without valid or just reason whatsoever, and without provocation on the part of
complainant, forcibly grabbed the black bag of the latter, containing the items above-mentioned.
The complainant, being harassed by the respondents at that juncture, was so frightened because,
according to him, they were outnumbered and could easily be harmed further by said
respondents Paul Vincent Arias and Marlo Curañez and their companions who were then
armed, and considering that respondent Marlo Curañez also opened the said bag from which
the 9MM pistol was taken out and pointed to the complainant, coupled with the utterance of
respondent Paul Vincent Arias, saying: “Barilin mo, Barilin mo!, meaning: “Shoot him, Shoot
him” (referring to the complainant). Not long thereafter, the respondents and their companions
left taking away complainant’s black bag containing the said items. Subsequently, the
complainant also caused the same incident to be blottered before the Diplahan Police Station,
Diplahan, Zamboanga Sibugay, as shown by a copy of a Certification dated March 28, 2012,
attached as Annex “C” to the original record of this case. These allegations were corroborated by
the joint affidavit of witnesses Arnel Adem Cineza and Jimmy Campos Balukan. Likewise
attached as Annex “D” to the original record of this case is a copy of the Medico-Legal
RESOLUTION
I.S. NO. IX-09-INV-12C-00121 - PAGE 3 -
I. S. No. IX-09-INV-12C-00122
X============/

Certificate dated March 28, 2012, of the complainant, having been examined as a result of the
harassment made on his person by the said respondents. Further, these allegations of the
complainant were adopted in Toto in his counter-affidavit in I. S. No. IX-09-INV-12C-00121
wherein he is the respondent.

The defense offered a different version of the incident in this case placing more reliance
upon the clarificatory/reply affidavit of PO1 Michael Galvez Avenido, reiterating the incident
narrated in I. S. No. IX-09-INV-12C-00121, as what actually transpired, and that the allegations
of complainant Arnold Garan y Diasana are fabricated lies.

It must be noted that in both instances, all the parties in these two cases made their
respective allegation under oath, each claiming to be the truth of what actually happened. The
undersigned has to separate the grain from the chaff or is confronted with the duty to carefully
assess the parties’ respective evidence, as follows:

I. S. No. IX-09-INV-12C-00121

The undersigned entertains doubt as to the veracity and truthfulness of the allegations of
the complainant and his witnesses on two (2) grounds, firstly, PO1 Michael Galvez Avenido, a
member of the PNP assigned at the ZDS Inter-Agency Task Group on Mining, Environment,
Public Order & Safety at Sitio Balabag, Barangay Depore, Bayog, Zamboanga del Sur, where the
incident happened, deliberately did not report the crime of illegal possession of firearm and
ammunition allegedly perpetrated in his presence by respondent Arnold Garan y Diasana to the
police authorities in Bayog, Zamboanga del Sur, being the situs of the alleged crime, as the
standard operating procedure for the police to do so. In the initial inquiry conducted by no less
than the Provincial Prosecutor of Zamboanga del Sur, PO2 Rey S. Danago, the Police
Investigator of Diplahan, Zamboanga Sibugay, having been subpoenaed to appear before the
Office of the Provincial Prosecutor, to shed light on the matter, did not know of any reason why
the foregoing incident was caused to be blottered in Diplahan by PO1 Michael Galvez Avenido
who was in possession of the subject firearm (see Sworn Statement of PO2 Rey S. Danago
taken on May 16, 2012, at the Provincial Prosecution Office). Assuming that the PNP in
Diplahan is the nearest police station from the place of the commission of the crime, which is
Sitio Balabag, Barangay Depore, Bayog, Zamboanga del Sur, however, that is not sufficient
reason for the undersigned to be persuaded and convinced that the blotter thereof should be made
at Diplahan, considering that the Bayog Police Station, Bayog, Zamboanga del Sur, was in a
better position to investigate the matter as the criminal process of investigating crimes starts with
the proper police authorities. Secondly, the chain of custody on the subject firearm was greatly
affected and was not properly established, so much so that the firearm itself was never presented
to the office of the Provincial Prosecutor where the criminal complaint was initially filed for
appropriate action. There was no clear showing that the subject firearm was the very object that
was confiscated from the respondent himself at the place where he was allegedly caught
possessing the same. Further examination on the subject firearm needs to be undertaken, like
ballistics and fingerprints examination to determine whether that was exactly taken from the
respondent who may readily be subjected to the same process of scientific examinations to
compare his own finger prints with what may appear, vis-à-vis, as a result, on the firearm itself.
Moreover, there was no explanation as to the present custodian of the subject firearm, which
could have made the proper markings thereof, if only to preserve its evidentiary value.
Otherwise, it could be easily tampered even to the extent of sending innocent person to jail.
Thus, on reasonable doubt which the undersigned entertains, this case should necessarily fall to
the ground having without legs to stand on and to continue with the inquiry of the same.

I. S. No. IX-09-INV-12C-00122

Likewise, on the same degree of doubt, the undersigned could not take the allegations of
RESOLUTION
I.S. NO. IX-09-INV-12C-00121 - PAGE 4 -
I. S. No. IX-09-INV-12C-00122
X============/

complainant Arnold Garan y Diasana with a grain of salt, hook, line and sinker. The
complainant alleged under oath that he was then carrying a black bag containing a sum of
Php300,000.00, some other important documents, and a licensed 9MM pistol, together with the
authority to carry the same firearm outside his residence or house, as evidenced by a machine
copy of a Permit to Carry Firearm Outside of Residence (PCFOR), marked as Annex “A” and
attached to the record of this case. To the mind of the undersigned, these allegations with all
probability are a mixture of half-truth and half-lies bordering on fabrication, if not, resorted to as
a subterfuge to neutralize whatever unfavorable action may be taken against him by his accusers.
By public knowledge, and even on the part of a court of law taking judicial notice, Sitio Balabag,
Barangay Depore, Bayog, Zamboanga del Sur, is a hilly place and mountainous which does not
appear to be a center of trade and human activity, except for the purpose of mining and/or
farming. For a person, like complainant Arnold Garan y Diasana, to bring along with him and
have in his possession a large sum of Php300,000.00, among others, inside a black bag on a hilly
and mountainous area, would somewhat aghast a person of ordinary intelligence who virtually
would not believe such a scenario as quite preposterous, being contrary to the natural order of
events, human nature and experience. There was not any convincing explanation on his part
whether the complainant would be going somewhere, like the nearest municipality of Buug,
Zamboanga Sibugay where more than two banks exist, to have his said money deposited therein
for his own safety and to secure his money in a safer place. He merely alleged that he was beside
his store standing by with Arnel Adem Cineza and Jimmy Campos Balukan, among others,
when the respondents allegedly harassed and robbed him. Worst, he too reported this incident to,
and caused the same to be blottered before the Diplahan Police Station, Diplahan, Zamboanga
Sibugay, as shown by a copy of a Certification dated March 28, 2012, attached as Annex “C” to
the original record of this case. In other words, the following day, March 28, 2012 which was
after the incident, instead of going to the Bayog Police Station, Bayog, Zamboang del Sur, he
went to another province, more particularly, Diplahan, Zamboanga Sibugay, to reflect his own
story therein.

In a preliminary investigation, the finding of probable cause is virtually the basis for
which an information for the crime charged may be filed with the court of competent
jurisdiction. Thus, the undersigned Public Prosecutor is not unmindful of the guideline/s set by
the Supreme Court in the following cases in determining probable cause, viz:

“This concept of probable cause was amplified and

modified by our ruling in Stonehill vs. Diokno, (20 SCRA
383) that probable cause ‘presupposes the introduction of
competent proof that the party against whom it is sought has
performed particular acts, or committed specific omissions’,
violating a given provision of our criminal laws.”
(La Chemise Lacoste, S.A. vs. Fernandez, 129 SCRA 373).

“Probable cause implies probability of guilt and

requires more than bare suspicion but less than evidence
which would justify a conviction. A finding of probable cause
need only to rest on evidence showing that more likely than
not, a crime has been commited by the suspect.” (Nava vs.
Commission On Audit, 419 Phil. 544 (2001) cited in Alfredo
Ching vs. Secretary of Justice, G.R. No.164317, February 6,
2006; bold supplied for emphasis)

Stated otherwise, the officer conducting the requisite preliminary investigation cannot
just simply state that “there is a disputable presumption” in finding probable cause to a
RESOLUTION
I.S. NO. IX-09-INV-12C-00121 - PAGE 5 -
I. S. No. IX-09-INV-12C-00122
X============/

particular case under inquiry, or to the affidavit-complaint and its annexes. The affidavit-
complaint and its annexes, it must be emphasized, are the very mirror that reflect the absence
of probable cause if so warrant. (bold supplied for emphasis)

Consequently, applying the foregoing rule to the instant cases under preliminary
investigation, a perusal of the affidavit-complaints of the respective complainant, as well as the
affidavit of their witnesses, which they had confirmed and affirmed under oath, will readily show
the absence of probable cause on the ground that they are hearsay bordering on conclusions,
speculations, surmises and conjectures, which create serious doubt as its truthfulness. As such
they are not competent proof under the rule on evidence, and pursuant to the guidelines of our
Supreme Court heretofore set forth.

Indeed, under Section 4, Rule 112 of the 2000 Rules of Criminal Procedure, the
Information shall be prepared by the Investigating Prosecutor against the respondent only if he or
she finds probable cause to hold such respondent for trial. The Investigating Prosecutor acts
without or in excess of his authority under the Rule if the Information is filed against the
respondent despite absence of evidence showing probable cause therefor. (see Enemecio vs.
Office of the Ombudsman, G.R. No. 146731, January 13, 2004, 419 SCRA 82; bold and
underlining supplied for emphasis).

IN LIGHT OF ALL THE FOREGOING, the above-entitled cases not being supported
by competent proof to establish the required probable cause, the undersigned so recommends to
the Honorable Provincial Prosecutor that the same should be, as it is hereby, DISMISSED.

Pagadian City, Philippines, this 1st day of October, 2012.

LUCIO ORIO TAN JR.

3rd Assistant Provincial Prosecutor
MCLE Compliance No. III-0018149
Issued on July 29, 2010

APPROVED:

VICTORIANO B. GONZAGA
Provincial Prosecutor
MCLE Compliance No. III-0018146
Issued on July 28, 2010

Copy Furnished:

1. PO1 MICHAEL GALVEZ AVENIDO 3. Paul Vincent N. Arias

Camino Nuevo, Zamboanga City Sitio Balabag, Barangay Depore
By Registered Mail Bayog, Zamboanga del Sur
By Registered Mail

2. Arnold D. Garan 4. Marlou D. Coranez

Sitio Balabag, Barangay Depore Sitio Balabag, Barangay Depore
Bayog, Zamboanga del Sur Bayog, Zamboanga dewl Sur
By Registered Mail By Registered Mail

5. OFFICE FILE