Case Digest (G.R. No. L-63761)
Facts:
In the Matter of the Petition for the Issuance of the Writ of Habeas Corpus for Yolanda H. Gordula, G.R. No. 63761, October 24, 1983, the Supreme Court En Banc, Abad Santos, J., writing for the Court. The petitioners were Leticia H. Gordula, Marina H. Gordula and Nestor H. Gordula (siblings), who sought a writ of habeas corpus to compel respondents to produce the person of their sister, Yolanda H. Gordula. The respondents named in the petition were Hon. Juan Ponce Enrile, Maj. Gen. Fabian C. Ver, Maj. Gen. Fidel Ramos, and Col. Rolando Abadilla (the latter identified with the Metrocom Intelligence Service Group).Petitioners alleged that Yolanda was arrested without warrant or PCO on or about March 30, 1983, somewhere in Caloocan City, by elements of the Metrocom Intelligence Service Group under Col. Abadilla, and that subsequent inquires at multiple detention units (CSG, PC-INP Stockade, PC 12, MISG, M-2, SOG, MIU) and offices (Ministry of National Defense, Office for Detainee Affairs, Civilian Relations Division) officially produced denials of her detention. Petitioners further recounted that on April 19, 1983, Leticia was shown an entry in the M-2 log book — “#1831 18-13-15/83 MISG SCR” — and was told it referred to Yolanda and that she had been brought to MISG on the evening of April 18; yet MISG records denied Yolanda’s detention.
The Court issued the writ of habeas corpus and required a return. In their return, the respondents flatly denied that Yolanda was in their custody, produced a certification by Majors Soriano and Valencia (Constabulary and Metrocom staff judge advocates) denying custody, and explained the M-2 log book entry as a record of the transmittal of petitioners’ April 11 letter (received April 12) requesting assistance to locate Yolanda; the entry reflected routine routing to MISG (the “MISG SCR” notation referred to the recipient initials) and not a detention entry. The traverse and reply left unresolved only the circumstance that Yolanda had been with Dr. Jose Escandor on the evening of March 30, 1983, and that Escandor (reported an NPA “Kumander”) was killed by a Metrocom strike force on April 1, 1983.
The Court reviewed the factual pattern in the context of other reported “disappearances” and petitions pending before it (including G.R. Nos. 62939 and 64500, recited in the decision for illustration). After finding that the respondents persistently denied custody and that the petitioners failed to produce convincing proof to re...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- When respondents deny custody in a habeas corpus proceeding, must the petition be dismissed where petitioners fail to present convincing proof to rebut that denial?
- Was the M-2 log book entry and the circumstantial evidence (Yolanda’s association with Dr. Jose Escandor and his subsequent death) sufficient to compel production or to overcome the respon...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)