Bejerano, Allen Jay A.

Hammisani, Ferwina
Sinugbojan, Emmalou
Halid, Krisna

The defence of Command Responsibility to his superior Del Lim cannot be availed in this
case in the following grounds:

(1) Whereas, Chua is presumed to be cognizant with the unlawful arrest and evil intention of his
superior against the victim. It shall be noted however, among all the police officers involved during
the commission of the crime, it was Chua who has the highest command authority holding the
SPO4 position. Therefore, higher expectations are imposed on the part of SPO4 Chua. He has
the responsibility among others to expose and defy the orders of Del Lim recognizing it was
unlawful and unbecoming of a protector of the people.

(2) Whereas, Del Lim delegated his commands to Chua. Therefore, the authority to instruct his
team on what steps and procedures for the arrest of the deceased was turned-over to him. Instead
of going straight to the police station, they drove to Quezon City and blindfolded Kim Jong Lee
and Jane Achay. Chua did not condemn his team behaviour, instead bought a tape for Kris Tawa
to seal the mouth of the deceased which cause the death. With that situation given, it makes a
circumstantial evidence that Chua has something to do with the death of Kim Jong Lee and had
a conspiracy to do unlawful things. Being a high rank position among the others, Chua is cognizant
that their act was unlawful but however didn’t follow the proper procedure of the arrest.

The defence of State Witness cannot be asserted due to the following disqualification on
the requisites for an accused to be discharged as a state witness:

(1) There should be no other direct evidence available for the proper prosecution of the offence committed, apart from
the testimony of the accused. The Prosecution was given enough evidences that was able to determine
the guilt and the acts of commission of the all accused. The court shall exhaust all evidences
presented to arrive to its judgement. Moreover, there is no absolute necessity for the testimony of
Chua as all the evidences presented were able to determine the guilt of conspiracy and all the acts
of commission.
(2) A person charged with the commission of a crime is discharged with his consent so that he may be a witness for
the state. Chua is not qualified to be a state witness because under sec.9 rule 119 of the rule of law
he must not be convicted with other crime. With this case, he's already convicted and he cannot
use and stand as state witness.

(3) He does not appear to be most guilty. Aburo, who is the driver of the 2nd car thus have lesser
interaction with the deceased even they suggested to buy a tape, is a better resort of state witness.
Furthermore, Aburo, having the lowest position PO1 among the others, was under the command
of his seniors.