View full case

GEN. AVELINO I. RAZON v. MARY JEAN B. TAGITIS

FACTS:

The facts of the case revolve around the enforced disappearance of Engineer Morced N. Tagitis. Tagitis, a consultant for the World Bank and a Senior Honorary Counselor for the Islamic Development Bank (IDB) Scholarship Programme, was last seen in Jolo, Sulu on October 30, 2007. He arrived in Jolo with an IDB scholar, Arsimin Kunnong, from a seminar in Zamboanga City. After checking in at ASY Pension House and requesting Kunnong to buy him a return boat ticket to Zamboanga for the following day, Tagitis mysteriously disappeared. The hotel receptionist reported that Tagitis left the pension house to buy food at around 12:30 PM and never returned. Efforts by Kunnong and another IDB official, Muhammad Abdulnazeir N. Matli, to locate Tagitis proved futile, prompting them to report to the local police and eventually to Tagitis’ wife, Mary Jean B. Tagitis. Mary Jean filed a Petition for the Writ of Amparo with the Court of Appeals on December 28, 2007, after multiple unsuccessful attempts to find her husband through various police and military channels. The petition named several high-ranking officials from the PNP and the CIDG, alleging that Tagitis was under their custody based on information from her sources indicating such custody. The police authorities consistently denied these allegations in their responses, failing to produce any substantial investigative results. The Court of Appeals, after hearing and proceedings, found the case to involve enforced disappearance under the Rule on the Writ of Amparo. This conclusion was drawn primarily from reported intelligence and testimonies provided by the respondent and corroborating witnesses, despite the absence of direct evidence.

ISSUES:

  1. Whether the Court of Appeals erred in issuing the Writ of Amparo in favor of Engineer Morced N. Tagitis and his family.

RULING:

  1. The Supreme Court held that the issuance of the Writ of Amparo was justified. The Court affirmed the decision of the Court of Appeals, confirming the enforced disappearance of Engineer Morced N. Tagitis and granted the privilege of the Writ of Amparo. Specifically, the Court found substantial evidence showing government complicity in the disappearance of Tagitis, highlighting defects in the conduct and thoroughness of the police investigation. The Court, therefore, ordered the PNP and PNP-CIDG to disclose material facts known to their offices regarding the disappearance and to conduct proper investigations using extraordinary diligence. The case was referred back to the Court of Appeals to monitor the PNP and PNP-CIDG's investigations and to validate their results.

PRINCIPLES:

  1. Writ of Amparo:

    • A protective remedy against violations or threats of violations against the rights to life, liberty, and security.

    • It does not determine guilt or criminal culpability but focuses on ensuring the protection of constitutional rights.

  2. Enforced Disappearance:

    • Defined as arrest, detention, abduction, or any form of deprivation of liberty by agents of the State or persons acting with the State's authorization, support, or acquiescence, followed by a refusal to acknowledge the deprivation of liberty or concealment of the disappeared person's fate.

    • Government complicity can be presumed based on circumstantial evidence, consistent and unexplained denials, and haphazard investigations.

  3. Burden of Proof:

    • The allegations in a petition for the Writ of Amparo must be proven by substantial evidence.

    • Public officials have the burden to prove that extraordinary diligence was observed in the performance of their duties.

    • The presumption that official duty has been regularly performed cannot be invoked to evade responsibility or liability.

  4. Extraordinary Diligence:

  • Public officials must exert extraordinary diligence in investigating and addressing cases of enforced disappearances to ensure the protection of the victim's rights to life, liberty, and security.
  1. Legal Obligation of the State:
  • The State has the obligation to investigate violations of constitutional rights promptly, thoroughly, and effectively using independent and impartial bodies. Failure to investigate or bringing to justice the perpetrators could constitute a breach of constitutional and international obligations.