GR 111502; (November, 2001) (Digest)
G.R. Nos. 111502-04 November 22, 2001
REYNALDO H. JAYLO, WILLIAM VALENZONA, ANTONIO HABALO and EDGARDO CASTRO, petitioners, vs. SANDIGANBAYAN (First Division), respondent.
FACTS
Petitioners, former PC-INP members detailed with the NBI, were charged with murder before the Sandiganbayan for their involvement in a fatal shoot-out during a purported NBI-DEA joint drug buy-bust operation at the Magallanes Commercial Complex. The DEA agents involved, Phil Needham, Andrew Fendrich, and Jake Fernandez, were American citizens residing in the United States. Prior to trial, petitioners filed a motion to take the oral depositions of these three DEA agents before a Philippine consular official in the U.S., arguing their testimonies were material to establishing the accused’s innocence by corroborating the defense that the shooting occurred in the course of a legitimate police operation and in self-defense.
The Sandiganbayan denied the motion. It found the request was not based on the witnesses’ inability to testify but on petitioners’ speculative fear that their own testimonies might not be believed. The court also noted the defense had other witnesses to testify on the same facts, rendering the depositions merely corroborative and not indispensable.
ISSUE
Whether the Sandiganbayan committed grave abuse of discretion in denying petitioners’ motion to take oral depositions of witnesses abroad.
RULING
The Supreme Court ruled that the Sandiganbayan did not commit grave abuse of discretion. The taking of depositions in criminal cases under Rule 119 is an extraordinary remedy allowed only in exceptional circumstances to prevent a failure of justice, such as when a witness is unable to attend trial. Petitioners failed to demonstrate such necessity. Their primary justification was an apprehension that their own testimony would lack credibility without corroboration, which the Court deemed speculative and insufficient. The Court emphasized the presumption that a trial judge can fairly weigh evidence. Furthermore, petitioners’ bare allegation that the DEA agents could not come to the Philippines for “security reasons” was unsubstantiated and deemed unusual given their profession. Since the proposed testimonies were acknowledged to be merely corroborative and other witnesses were available, the Sandiganbayan correctly exercised its discretion in denying the motion to avoid delay and ensure a focused trial. The petition for certiorari was dismissed.