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.
FACTS
This case originated from a Petition for the Writ of Amparo filed by Mary Jean B. Tagitis, wife of Engr. Morced N. Tagitis, who had been missing since October 2007. The petition alleged that state security forces were involved in his enforced disappearance. In a Decision dated December 3, 2009, the Supreme Court, while not finding sufficient evidence to hold the individual petitioners liable, ruled that the State has a positive duty to investigate enforced disappearances.
The Court, in that Decision, referred the case to the Court of Appeals (CA) for monitoring. It directed the Philippine National Police (PNP) and its Criminal Investigation and Detection Group (CIDG) to present a plan of action for further investigation and to periodically report their results to the CA. The CA was ordered to submit quarterly reports with recommendations to the Supreme Court. The December 3, 2009 Decision became final and executory on March 17, 2010.
ISSUE
Whether the directives in the Supreme Court’s final December 3, 2009 Decision must be implemented, specifically the submission of the first quarterly report by the Court of Appeals.
RULING
Yes. The Supreme Court, through this Resolution, enforced the directives of its final Decision. The legal logic is anchored on the doctrine of finality of judgments and the continuing nature of the State’s duty under the Writ of Amparo. A decision that has attained finality becomes immutable and unalterable; it must be executed and implemented to resolve the controversy. The Court’s prior ruling established a monitoring mechanism to ensure the government’s compliance with its positive obligation to investigate the disappearance of Engr. Tagitis.
Consequently, the Court resolved to direct the Court of Appeals to submit its first quarterly report and recommendations within ten days from receipt of this Resolution. It also reminded the PNP and PNP-CIDG to faithfully comply with the earlier directives to present their investigation plan and report periodically. This order is a ministerial enforcement of a final judgment, ensuring that the procedural and investigative mandates designed to protect the constitutional right to life, liberty, and security are carried out without further delay. The Court’s supervisory role persists to guarantee that the extraordinary remedy of Amparo achieves its purpose of providing concrete investigative results.