GR 182498; (June, 2010)

🔎 Search 66,000+ AI-Enhanced SC Decisions...

G.R. No. 182498

EN BANC

G.R. No. 182498; June 22, 2010

GEN. AVELINO I. RAZON, JR., Chief, Philippine National Police (PNP); Police Chief Superintendent RAUL CASTAÑEDA, Chief, Criminal Investigation and Detection Group (CIDG); Police Senior Superintendent LEONARDO A. ESPINA, Chief, Police Anti-Crime and Emergency Response; and GEN. JOEL R. GOLTIAO, Regional Director of ARMM, PNP, Petitioners,

vs.
MARY JEAN B. TAGITIS, herein represented by ATTY. FELIPE P. ARCILLA, JR., Attorney-in-Fact, Respondent.

R E S O L U T I O N

BRION, J.:

In our Decision of December 3, 2009, we referred the present case to the Court of Appeals (CA) for appropriate proceedings directed at the monitoring of the PNP and PNP-CIDG investigations, actions and validation of their results with respect to the enforced disappearance of Engr. Morced N. Tagitis. In the same Decision, we also required: (1) the PNP and the PNP-CIDG to present to the CA a plan of action for further investigation, periodically reporting their results to the CA for consideration and action, and (2) the CA to submit to this Court a quarterly report with its recommendations, copy furnished the incumbent PNP and PNP-CIDG Chiefs, as petitioners ,and the respondent, with the first report due at the end of the first quarter counted from the finality of the Decision.

On February 16, 2010, we issued a Resolution, denying the petitioners’ motion for reconsideration and directing that the case be remanded to the CA for further proceedings as directed in our Decision of December 3, 2009.

On March 17, 2010, our December 3, 2009 Decision became final, and an entry of judgment was accordingly made on May 28, 2010.

Considering the foregoing, the Court resolves to DIRECT the Court of Appeals to submit to this Court, within ten (10) days from receipt of this Resolution, its 1st quarterly report and recommendations, copy furnished the incumbent PNP and PNP-CIDG Chiefs, and the respondent, as directed in our Decision of December 3, 2009. The PNP and the PNP-CIDG are likewise reminded to faithfully and promptly comply with the directives in our Decision of December 3, 2009.

SO ORDERED.

ARTURO D. BRION
Associate Justice

WE CONCUR:

RENATO C. CORONA
Chief Justice

ANTONIO T. CARPIO
Associate Justice
PRESBITERO J. VELASCO, JR.
Associate Justice
TERESITA J. LEONARDO-DE CASTRO
Associate Justice
LUCAS P. BERSAMIN
Associate Justice
ROBERTO A. ABAD
Associate Justice
JOSE PORTUGAL PEREZ
Associate Justice
CONCHITA CARPIO MORALES
Associate Justice
ANTONIO EDUARDO B. NACHURA
Associate Justice
DIOSDADO M. PERALTA
Associate Justice
MARIANO C. DEL CASTILLO
Associate Justice
MARTIN S. VILLARAMA, JR.
Associate Justice
(on leave)
JOSE CATRAL MENDOZA*
Associate Justice

C E R T I F I C A T I O N

Pursuant to Section 13, Article VIII of the Constitution, it is hereby certified that the conclusions in the above Resolution had been reached in consultation before the case was assigned to the writer of the opinion of the Court.

RENATO C. CORONA
Chief Justice

Footnotes

* On leave.

Batas Pinas

spot_img

Hot this week

GR 984; (June, 1905) (Critique)

GR 984; (June, 1905) (CRITIQUE)__________________________________________________________________THE AI-ASSISTED CRITIQUEThe court correctly...

GR 2302; (July, 1905) (Critique)

GR 2302; (July, 1905) (CRITIQUE)__________________________________________________________________THE AI-ASSISTED CRITIQUEThe Court's reliance...

GR 2097; (July, 1905) (Critique)

GR 2097; (July, 1905) (CRITIQUE)__________________________________________________________________THE AI-ASSISTED CRITIQUEThe court's application...

GR 2229; (July, 1905) (Critique)

GR 2229; (July, 1905) (CRITIQUE)__________________________________________________________________THE AI-ASSISTED CRITIQUEThe Court correctly...

GR 2249; (July, 1905) (Critique)

GR 2249; (July, 1905) (CRITIQUE)__________________________________________________________________THE AI-ASSISTED CRITIQUEThe court's decision...
⚖️ Case Intelligence
📌 Core Doctrine

"The Supreme Court can direct lower courts to monitor and ensure compliance by state agencies in investigating enforced disappearances to uphold constitutional rights."

💡 Plain English Summary

The Supreme Court ordered the police to keep investigating a missing person's case and report their progress to a lower court for oversight. This ensures that authorities are held accountable and take action to protect people's rights.

📜 Legal Maxim

Ubi jus ibi remedium | Salus populi suprema lex esto

Verified AI Snapshot for Armztrong.org

Popular Categories

spot_imgspot_img