Suspended Negros Oriental 3rd District Rep. Arnolfo “Arnie” A. Teves Jr. on Friday, April 14, asked the Department of Justice (DOJ) to dismiss the illegal possession of firearms and explosives filed against him by the Philippine National Police (PNP).
However, DOJ Prosecution Attorney Hegel Jasper A. Balderama said the charges against Teves and his co-respondent Jose Palo Gimarangan is already submitted for resolution.
Teves’ lawyer Ferdinand S. Topacio said the hearing conducted on Friday, April 14, was the last hearing as he confirmed that the charges against his client is already submitted for resolution.
The charges against Teves and Gimarangan were filed last March 13 for violations of Republic Act No. 10591, the Comprehensive Firearms and Ammunition Regulation Act, and RA 9516 on illegal possession of explosives.
The firearms and explosives were allegedly seized when the PNP’s Criminal Investigation and Detection Group (CIDG) served search warrants in Teves’ properties in Bayawan City and in Basay in Negros Oriental.
While Teves, through Topacio, filed a motion to dismiss the charges, Gimarangan’s lawyer Michael Mella filed a counter-affidavit for his client.
Teves is still abroad despite the expiration of his official travel last March 9. Justice Secretary Jesus Crispin C. Remulla believes that Teves I now in Cambodia.
Teves has been implicated as an alleged mastermind in the March 4 killings of Negros Oriental Gov. Roel R. Degamo and eight other persons in Pamplona town. Teves has denied all the allegations against him.
Topacio said that under the DOJ’s Revised Manual for Prosecutors, a prosecutor is supposed to release the resolution of the preliminary investigation “60 days from the time the investigation started.”
“There is no question on the fact that Respondent Teves was not present when and where the alleged search and seizure transpired. This is settled from the supporting affidavits and other documents attached to the complaints. Physical or actual possession of any of the subject firearms, ammunitions and explosives on his part is, therefore necessarily absent,” he said in his motion to dismiss.
He admitted that under the Revised Manual for Prosecutors, a respondent “shall not be allowed to file a motion to dismiss in lieu of a counter-affidavit” and that the counter-affidavit should be subscribed and sworn before any prosecutor or an authorized government official.
But he said the filing of a motion to dismiss is allowed if there is an absence of probable cause, among the points he raised.
“In sum, complainants, with their evidence, even left uncontroverted, miserably failed to discharge their duty to establish probable cause against Respondent Teves as nothing has been shown to support his alleged constructive possession of any of the confiscated articles, much less of the premises where they were allegedly found,” Topacio also said in his motion.
He pointed out that after inquest proceedings of those arrested during the police raids, the prosecutor already issued a resolution dated March 14 which stated “it did not find probable cause against the respondents but, instead, found the need to conduct preliminary investigation to fully ascertain who between the respondents should be charged for possession of the said firearms, ammunitions and explosive, considering that ‘although respondent Gimarangan was present at the property when the search warrant was implemented, nonetheless, there is an allegation that the property subject thereof is owned by respondent Teves Jr.’”
He said that Prosecutor Balderama even gave the complainants the opportunity to submit additional evidence last March 29.
“Despite the ample opportunity allowed to the complainants, it miserably failed to prove the element of possession -- the gravamen of both offenses,” he pointed out in his motion.