G.R. No. 242257, October 15, 2019
IN THE MATTER OF PETITION FOR WRIT OF AMPARO OF VIVIAN A. SANCHEZ. VIVIAN A. SANCHEZ, PETITIONER, VS. PSUPT. MARC ANTHONY D. DARROCA, CHIEF OF POLICE, SAN JOSE MUNICIPAL POLICE STATION; PSSUPT. LEO IRWIN D. AGPANGAN, PROVINCIAL DIRECTOR, PNP-ANTIQUE; PCSUPT. JOHN C. BULALACAO, REGIONAL DIRECTOR, PNP-REGION VI, AND MEMBERS OF THE PNP UNDER THEIR AUTHORITY, RESPONDENTS.

FACTS

Petitioner Vivian A. Sanchez filed a Petition for a Writ of Amparo, alleging threats to her and her children’s life, liberty, and security following the death of her husband, Labinghisa, in an alleged encounter between the PNP and the NPA. She claimed that police officers interrogated and threatened her with arrest for obstruction of justice when she visited a funeral home to identify her husband’s body. She further alleged, based on information from PO2 Dela Cruz (her police contact and friend) and her brother, that her photos were being circulated within the PNP and posted at police stations, and that she was under surveillance and monitoring. The respondents, police officials, denied these allegations. PO2 Dela Cruz testified that she informed Sanchez there was a possibility she would be monitored because she would not disclose her husband’s real name, but denied telling Sanchez her picture was being circulated or posted. The respondents also presented evidence of their compliance with the writ, including orders for police personnel not to come within a one-kilometer radius of Sanchez and her children, except in the performance of regular duties.

ISSUE

Whether petitioner Vivian A. Sanchez presented substantial evidence to prove a violation or threat to her right to life, liberty, or security, justifying the issuance of a Writ of Amparo.

RULING

No. The dissenting opinion finds that Sanchez failed to present substantial evidence to prove her entitlement to the writ. The Writ of Amparo specifically covers extralegal killings and enforced disappearances or threats thereof. Sanchez filed the petition on her own behalf, not for her deceased husband, and made no allegation that his death was an extralegal killing. Regarding threats to herself and her children, the alleged threat of being charged with obstruction of justice does not equate to a threat of extralegal killing. The allegations of surveillance and monitoring, even if true, do not by themselves establish a threat covered by the writ. Sanchez also failed to prove the elements of enforced disappearance, as there was no allegation or proof of arrest, detention, abduction, or government participation in such an act. The main sources of her information were her brother, who did not testify or execute an affidavit, and PO2 Dela Cruz, who testified for the respondents and denied the core allegations. Applying the totality of evidence standard for Amparo cases, the evidence presented by Sanchez does not constitute substantial evidence—relevant evidence a reasonable mind might accept as adequate—to prove a violation or threat warranting the extraordinary remedy of the Writ of Amparo.