ffi

Republic of the Philippines

OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN

Ombudsman Building, Agham Road, Diliman, Quezon City

JOSE L. ATIENZA, JR.

JONATHAN DELA CRUZ

JOSE ROMERO, JR.
JEREMY GATDULA
Complainant,

-versus -

MTRIAM CORONEL-FERRER (SG 30)

MARVIC M.V.F. LEONEN
SENEN C. BACANI (SG 18)
YASMTN BUSRAN-LAO (SG 31)
MEHOL K. SADAIN
ZENONTDA BROSAS (SG 30)
All members of the Government
of the Philippines Negotiating Panel (GPH)

MOHAGHER IQBAL
DATU MICHAEL MASTURA
MAULANA ALONTO
ABDULLA CAMILLIAN
DATU ANTONIO KINO

All Members of the Moro Islamic Liberation

Front and Transition Commission

IBRAHIM ALI
TALIB ABDULHAMID BENITO
PEDRITO EISMA
RAISSA JAJURIE
FROILYN MENDOZA
HUSSEIN MUilIOZ

AKMAD SAKKAM
SAID SHEIK
ASANI TAMMANG
TIMUAY MELANIO ULAMA
JOHAIRA WAHAB
All members of the Transition Commission

OMB-C-C-I5-0486
For: Treason and Inciting
to Sedition

Page 2

of6

REVIETY KESOLUTION
Atienza, et al. vs. Coronel-Ferrer, el al.

oMB-C-C-r5-0486

TERESITA QUINTOS DELES (SG 3I)

Secretary
Presidential Adviser on the Peace Process

x.-..------ i::::!:n
REVIETV

RESOLUTION
,I

,lJ#,*,r:L.
For review is the 22 October 2015 Resolutionr of the Office of the

City Prosecutor2 (City Prosecutor) dismissing the complaint filed by

Jose

Atieru;a, Jr., Jonathan Dela Cruz, Jose Romero, Jr., and Jeremy Gatdula
(complainants) for Treason and Inciting to Sedition under Articles I 14 and

142 of 'the Revised Penal Code, respectively, against members

of

the

Government of the Philippines Negotiating Panel (GPH): Miriam Coronel-

Ferrer, Marvic M.V.F. Leonen, Senen C. Bacani, Yasmin Busran-Lao,

Mehol

K.

of the Moro

Sadain, Zenonida Brosas; members

Islamic

Liberation Front and Transition Commission: Mohagher Iqbal, Datu Michael

Mastura, Maulana Alonto, Abdulla Camillian, Datu Antonio Kino; members

of the Transition Commission: Ibrahim Ali, Talib Abdulhamid

Benito,

Pedrito Eisma, Raissa Jajurie, Froilyn Mendoza, Hussein Munoz, Akmad

Sakkam, Said Sheik, Asani: Tammang, Timuay Melanio Ulama, Johaira

Wahab; and Teresita Quintos-Deles, Presidential Adviser on the Peace

Process (respondents). The respondents are, among other things, responsible

for drafting the proposed Bangsamoro Basic Law (BBL).

Complainants assert that the proposed

BBL

advocates the view that

the Government of the Republic of the Philippines

will

cede a part

of

its

territory, which will be called "Bangsamoro," in favor of the armed groups

in Muslim Mindanao. The Bangsamoro will eventually replace the

Autonomous Region of Muslim Mindanao. By proposing the BBL,
'Records, Criminal Case Folder I, pp.4-10.
City of Manila.

Page

of 6

REVIEI{ RESOLWION
Atierua, et al. vs. Coronel-Ferrer, et al.
oMB-C-C-r5-0486

respondents insinuate that the Bangsa{noro is entitled to independence, thus,

encouraging armed groups

Republic

in Muslim Mindanao to

of the Phiiippines, to

establish

separate

from

the

a separate Moro State, and to

eventually rise publicly and tumultuously to prevent the government from

freely exercising its functions in its sovereign

tenitoT.Ut

drafting and

pushing for the passage of the BBL into law despite itlKeingviolative of the

Constitution and the prevailing jurisprudence, respondents committed the

crime of Inciting to Sedition and Treason.

In

dismissing the case for Treason, the City Prosecutor held that

complainants failed to present evidence showing that respondents levied war

against the Philippine government or adhered to the enemies by giving them

aid. The mere act of proposing a draft of the BBL, which was introduced

a bill

but failed to pass the deliberation before the Congress of

as

the

Philippines, is not within the'ambit of the mentioned acts. Further, treason is

a war crime and

it does not exist during peacetime, as in the present

case.

The City Prosecutor likewise dismissed the charge of Inciting to

Sedition. Complainants failed to present evidence showing that an act of
sedition exists. Since there is no sedition,

it follows that respondents could

not have taken part in such activity. No proof was likewise presented
showing that respondents had uttered, written, or held any program, which
instigated the public to rise against the government.

This Office agrees with the City Prosecutor's findings.

Page 4 of6
REVIEW RESOLUT]ON

Atierca, et al. vs. Coronel-Ferrer, et al.

oMB-C-C-15-0486

To establish probable cause' that a crime of Inciting to Seditiona was

committed,

it

must be shown that respondents engaged

in any of the

following acts:

1.

the accomplishment of any of the acts which

constitute seditionr by means of speeches, proclamations, writings,

Inciting others

to

emblems, etc.
Uttering seditious words or speeches which tend to disturb the public
peace.
J.

Writing, publishing, or circulating scurrilous libels against

the
Government or any of the duly constituted authorities there of, which
tend to disturb the public peace.o

The allegation that the text of the proposed BBL "encourages the
anned Groups

in Muslim

Mindanao

to

eventually rise publicly and

tumultuously" is mere speculation. Complainants failed to point out any

words in the proposed BBL that can be construed as arousing and instigating
others

to commit sedition. They failed to show that the proposed BBL

contains words

or

statements which tend

to overthrow or undermine the

security of the goveffrment or to weaken the confidence of the people in the

government.

This Office likewise upholds the dismissal of the charge of Treason.T

The act of respondents in drafting and proposing the BBL does not amount

Probable cause has been defined as such facts and circumstances that will engender a well-founded belief
that a crime has been committed and that the respondent is probably guilty thereof and should be held for
trial.(Bavierav. Paglinawan G.R. Nos. 168380 and 170602, February 8,2007,515 SCRA 170, lE4).
o
Article 142. Inciting to Sedition. - The penalty of prision correctional in its maximum period and a fine
not exceeding 2,000 pesos shall be imposed upon any person who, without taking any direct part in the
crime of sedition, should incite others to the accomplishment of any of the acts which constitute sedition,
by means of speeches, proclamations, writing, emblems, cartoons, banners, or other representations tending
to the same end, or upon any person or persons who shall utter seditious words or speeches, write publish,
or circulate scurrilous libels against the Republic of the Philippines or any of the duly constituted
authorities thereof, or which tend to disturb or obstruct any lawful officer in executing the functions of his
office, or which tend to instigate others to cabal and meet together for unlawful purposes, or which suggest
or incite people against the lawful authorities or to disturb the peace of the community, safety and order of
the Govemment, or who shall knowingly conceal such evil practices (Revised Penal Code).
' Sedition, in its general sense, is the raising of commotions or disturbances in the State (People v. Cabrera,
43 Phil 64). The ultimate object of sedition is a violation of the public peace or at least such a course of
measures that evidently engenders it (People vs. Perez 45 Phil 599).
u
Reyes, Revised Penal Code, l4d'Ed,2001, Book 2,p.102.

Page 5 of6
REVIEW RESOLUTION
Atienza, et al. vs. Coronel-Ferrer, et al.

oMB-C-C-15-0486

to "levying wa,r" against the Republic of the Philippines, or adhering to her

enemies; At any rate, treason is a war crime8 and cannot be committed in
time of peace, as in the presenf case.

WHEREFORE, this Office affirms the City Prosecutor's Resolution

dated 22 October 2015 dismissing the complaint for Treason and Inciting to

Sedition against respondents.

SO ORDERED.
14

March 2016; Quezon City, Philippines.

FATIMA

STINE J. FRANCO
Graft Investi ation & Prosecution Officer I
REVIEWED BY:

n flrln

/N
ANNA ISAryPY G. AURELLANO
Acting Director, PIAB-E

RECOMMENDING APPROVAL

MARrLowll6^.o17ffitfrtr8n
Assistant Ombudsman, PAMO

II

APPROVED/W

6^i"a"^^"riffi/'

t Article I 14 of the Revised Penal Code states; "Treason.- Any Filipino citizen who levies war against the
Philippines or adheres to her enemies giving them aid or comfort within the Philippines or elsewhere, shall
be punisged by reclusion perpetua to death and shall pay a fine not to exceed I 00,000 pesos".

' Laurel

vs.

Misa, G.R. No.

L{09,

January 30,1947, Concurring Opinion of Justice Perfecto.

Page 6 of 6
REVIEW RESOLUTION
Atieraa, et al. vs. Coronel-Ferrer, et ol.
oMB-C-C-15-0486

Copy Furnished:
Jonathan Dela Cruz
Jose Atienza, Jr.

Both of: House of Representatives Complex

Constitution Hills, Quezon City
Jose Romero, Jr.

The Peak Tower, 107 L.P. Leviste St.

Salcedo Village, Makati CitY
Jeremy Gatdula
University of Asia and the Pacific
Pearl Drive, Pasig City

Mariio V. Alcala
9tn, iotn, l lthe, & lzs floors, one orion
l lth Avenue corner University Parkway
Bonifacio Global City 1634 Metro Manila
Marvic M.V.F. Leonen
Supreme Court of the Philippines
Padre Faura Sheet, Ermita, Manila
Mehol K. Sadain
No. 79 Jocfer Annex Building
Commonwealth Avenue, Quezon City
Rogelio Adeva Mendoza
Suites 2503-2504 Atlanta Centre,31 Annapolis Street
Greenhills, San Juan City, Metro Manila
Mohagher Iqbal
Datu Michael Mastura
Maulana Alonto
Abdulla Camillian
Datu Antonio Kino
Ibrahim Ali
Talib Abdulhamid Benito
Pedrito Eisma
Raissa Jajurie
Froilyn Mendoza
Hussein Mufloz
Akmad Sakkam
Said Shiek
Asani Tammang
Timuay Melanio Ulama
Johaira Wahab

All ofi Elena V. Co. Building

Don Rufino Alonzo, Street
Cotabato City

(7f

ttRl rFlE0 Tf
J0sltl