By Victor Reyes
Malaya
November 06, 2008

THE defense panel in the court martial of 28 Army and Marine officers linked to the alleged attempt to overthrow the Arroyo government in 2004 yesterday renewed its bid for the military tribunal to dismiss the mutiny charges against the accused.

Vicente Verdadero, counsel for former Scout Ranger Regiment commander Brig. Gen. Danilo Lim and several other accused, informed the court that he is filing a formal motion to demurrer. "It’s like a motion to dismiss," Verdadero told reporters. "The evidence cannot sustain the charge of mutiny."

Verdadero, however, declined to elaborate on the supposed weakness of the evidence of the prosecution headed by Col. Jose Feliciano Loy. "I do not want to telegraph my punches to Col. Loy."

Defense lawyers have filed similar motions to dismiss in the past but these were denied by the military tribunal, now presided over by Army Maj. Gen. Jogy Leon Fojas.

The military court started trying the accused officers in December 2006 for their alleged plan, subsequently thwarted, to march to the Edsa Shrine in February 2006, join the anti-government demonstrators there, and publicly withdraw their support from President Arroyo.

The defense yesterday continued marking its evidence with Rogelio Butch Bagabugo, lawyer of former Marine commandant Maj. Gen. Renato Miranda, one of the accused, offering the sworn statement of his client and 11 other officers, including then AFP deputy chief of staff for intelligence now AFP deputy chief Lt. Gen. Rodrigo Maclang.

Miranda’s evidence included the pre-trial investigation report that recommended the dropping of the case of mutiny against the accused for lack of merit. The recommendation was reversed by a pre-trial advice that was approved by then AFP chief Hermogenes Esperon.

The prosecution in turn presented its issues to the court, to wit: whether the court has jurisdiction over the accused officers; whether there was conspiracy; and whether the accused indeed committed mutiny.

The defense panel’s issues included whether there was conspiracy to commit mutiny, whether the prosecution evidence is enough to overcome the presumption of innocence of the accused; and whether the prosecution can convict the accused beyond reasonable doubt.