The lawyer of one of the respondents in the Horacio “Atio” Castillo hazing case has assailed the Department of Justice for accepting Aegis Juris fraternity member Marc Anthony Ventura as state witness to pin down those allegedly responsible for the death of the University of Santo Tomas freshman law student.
Lawyer Paris Real, counsel of respondent Alex Bose, one of the 23 fratmen implicated by Ventura in Castillo’s death, argued that Ventura is not qualified as government witness and for coverage of the DoJ’s Witness Protection Program.
“Mr. Ventura, under Section 10 of the Witness Protection Program, is actually disqualified from becoming a state witness due to the fact that he actually participated in the supposed hazing, punching of the late Atio Castillo as he admitted in his sworn affidavit,” Real said in an interview.
The lawyer argued that as an officer of the fraternity and one of the master initiators and also secretary, Ventura does not qualify as the least guilty of the offenses charged against the fratmen.
“He should be considered not as the least guilty, but as the most guilty not only because of his decision but practically because of what he did. Whatever it is, his admissions cannot be admitted against and cannot be used against his co-respondents on the basis of the res inter alios acta doctrine [law doctrine which holds that a contract cannot adversely affect the rights of one who is not a party to the contract],” Real said.
But Justice Secretary Vitaliano Aguirre II had explained earlier that Ventura is eligible as state witness especially since his statement is necessary for the prosecution of the cases.
Aguirre said the witness need not be the least guilty of the offenses, but only needs to be not the guiltiest among the respondents.
Meanwhile, the Aegis Juris fraternity also moved to have members of the media penalized for reporting on the supposedly confidential affidavit of Ventura.
Real asked the investigating panel of the DoJ to issue a show cause order against journalists who reported the contents of the affidavit.
During a hearing last Monday, the lawyer asked the panel chaired by Assistant State Prosecutor Susan Villanueva to order the media to explain why they should not be held criminally liable for the leakage of Ventura’s affidavit.
The motion intends to subject journalists to disciplinary actions and hold them criminally liable for violation of Section 7 of the Witness Protection Program Act.
Real said that his action was “in light of the fact that the procurement of that particular sworn statement of Mr. Ventura had been done without any written authority from the Department secretary as well as no written order to that effect in which case that is clearly penalized and a serious violation of Section 7 of the Witness Protection Program Act.”
The defense lawyer said that members of the media could be held liable for online libel.
“Because of what you did, the respondents especially the innocent ones, have been practically vilified, embarrassed, including the reputation of the respective families,” he added.
Real urged the DOJ to act against the media on this issue, warning of possible repercussions of the leakage.
“If this confidential document would just be stolen or at least obtained without the authority and without protection from the Secretary of Justice, there must be something wrong not only with our system but most importantly, we would be exposed to very serious danger, national security, public safety and top secrets of the government could just be obtained illegally,” he said.
The lawyer also said that the media should be held liable even after DOJ Secretary Vitaliano Aguirre II himself made public the contents of Ventura’s affidavit in a press conference last week.
“There’s a difference between the announcement of the Secretary which was somehow general and the discussions in the media reports which have been made on the basis of the sworn affidavit and which quoted everything,” he said.
Lawyer Lorna Kapunan, counsel of Castillo’s parents who stand as complainants in the charges for murder, hazing, obstruction of justice and perjury against Aegis Juris members, immediately opposed the bid for issuance of show cause order against the media.
Kapunan said that Ventura’s affidavit is irrelevant to the preliminary investigation since it was not yet submitted to the DOJ panel for consideration.
Villanueva agreed with Kapunan’s argument and told Real to instead address their plea to Sec. Aguirre.
Aguirre has already issued a warning to members of the media for reporting parts of Ventura’s affidavit.
He cited Section 7 of the Republic Act No. 6981, which provides for the Witness Protection Program, which states that, “No information or documents given or submitted in support of an application for admission to the WPP shall be released except upon written order of the Department or the proper court.”
“Any copy of the Sinumpaang Salaysay obtained by anyone and released publicly is a clear violation of the law and will be dealt with accordingly,” he warned.