TV5, Philstar.com explain legal process in Mandaluyong hit-and-run

CHEERS TO TV5’s Frontline Pilipinas and Philstar.com for explaining the basic rules of criminal procedure in connection with the June 5 hit-and-run incident that injured a security guard on mall duty by the owner- driver of a sports utility vehicle (SUV) in Mandaluyong City. The reports helped the public understand why the police let the driver go despite the apparent evidence of a crime.

Media had been diligently following the case during the week it took to identify the perpetrator. Christian Joseph Floralde, the security guard, survived, but was in hospital for five days. Newscasts included in their reports the dash camera footage circulating in social media. This became the go-to staple clip in the nightly reports, in some instances playing two to three times on a loop in a single report to show how the SUV hit and ran over Floralde. Public outrage ran high, as citizens   lambasted the police for “letting the rich” escape justice.

The registered owner and driver skipped two show-cause order hearings in the Land Transportation Office, surrendering to the Philippine National Police (PNP) only on June 15, ten days after the incident. On the same day, the PNP held a press conference in Camp Crame which was aired live. The 34-year-old Jose Antonio Sanvicente spoke, apologizing to Floralde and family. Without securing a warrant of arrest, the police allowed the perpetrator to go. In a later development, Sanvicente also skipped his first preliminary investigation hearing on June 17, but lawyer said he would appear in the next one.

Recognizing the public frustration and confusion about the development, Frontline Pilipinas explained in Filipino the process that has to be observed in such cases. The report noted that while the failure to arrest Sanvicente seemed unacceptable, the police observed the process including the safeguard provided by law to protect the rights of the accused.

Anchor Ed Lingao cited the three conditions for warrantless arrests under Rule 113 of the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure: in flagrante delicto, or when the accused is caught in the act of committing the crime; “hot pursuit,” or when the accused just committed a crime and is fleeing from apprehenders, who should have personal knowledge of the crime that was committed; and when prisoners escape custody. In the absence of any of these conditions, Lingao said a warrant issued by a judge is required to make an arrest. In Sanvicente’s case, he was not apprehended immediately and police failed to pursue him within the period allowed for a warrantless arrest.

Lingao also explained that a warrantless arrest is followed by an inquest: This involves a summary investigation by a prosecutor to determine whether the suspect should remain in police custody, or should be charged in court. Lingao added that Sanvicente can only be arrested with a warrant from a judge, clarifying that the PNP had only filed complaints (frustrated murder and abandonment) and not charges, the filing of the latter being the responsibility of the prosecutor upon his conclusion of the preliminary investigation. The explainer noted that a preliminary investigation takes longer than an inquest as it involves determining probable cause and deciding whether the complaint filed by the police is appropriate. 

Lingao concluded with emphasis on the seeming irony of the rules that some might interpret as an abuse of due process; Sanvicente would have spent time in jail had he been apprehended immediately. 

Philstar.com added more information to the explanation provided by TV5. The report referred to Supreme court rulings on cases involving warrantless arrests. The article also noted that police effecting warrantless arrests are supposed to inform the arrested person of the circumstances of the arrest, read them their Miranda rights, and ask if the individual understands these rights. 

Philstar.com also cited the PNP’s Guidebook on Human-Rights Based Policing that prohibits “arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, or attacks upon one’s honor and reputation.”

Without legal education, even journalists are wary of including legal points in their reports. But there are enough texts to make the basics accessible and understandable and their inclusion in reports helps the public understand the guarantees of and limitations to their freedoms and liberties. More reports should follow the examples set by TV5 and Philstar.com. Sustained efforts by the media to provide legal information can promote greater awareness of human rights which is essential to a democracy.