Republic of the Philippines

REGIONAL TRIAL COURT

Seventh Judicial Region
Branch 12
Cebu City

JUANA DE LA CRUZ
Petitioner,

-versus-

SP No. ________
CHIEF OF THE PHILIPPINE FOR: Writ of Amparo and
NATIONAL POLICE; Inspection Order
REGIONAL DIRECTOR OF PNP
PRO VII OF CAMP SERGIO
OSMENA; MAJOR GENERAL
GARDO PATAY,
Respondent
x------------------------///

PETITION FOR WRIT OF AMPARO WITH PRAYERS FOR

PROTECTION ORDERS, INSPECTION OF THE PLACE AND
PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS

PETITIONER, by counsel, most respectfully states, THAT:

Factual Antecedents:

The factual background of this petition are as follows:

1. Petitioner is of legal age, married, with residence at #21 Dona Rita

Village, Brgy. Talamban, Cebu City and is the mother of the aggrieved
party, Juan dela Cruz, victim in this Petition and is a 4th year Chemical
Engineering student of the University of San Carlos and President of the
Student Council in his college. Petitioner can be served with processes of
this Honorable Court at her attorneys-in-fact and lawyer’s address at
Second Floor, USC Law Bldg., P. del Rosario St., Cebu City;

1
2. Whereas respondents are: POLICE DIRECTOR GENERAL RACSO
OBED (CHIEF-PHILIPPINE NATIONAL POLICE) who holds
office at Camp Crame Quezon City, PCSUPT. BEDO NISA
(REGIONAL DIRECTOR, PHILIPPINE NATIONAL POLICE -
POLICE REGIONAL OFFICE VII) who holds office at Camp Sergio
Osmena Sr., Osmena Blvd., Cebu City and GENERAL GARDO
PATAY who holds office at Camp Sergio Osmena Sr., Osmena Blvd.,
Cebu City;

3. That in the month of September 2018, the student council under Juan de
la Cruz’s leadership sponsored various activities in commemoration of
the declaration of Martial Law;

4. That on September 18, the student council was issued a Permit to Rally
in Fuente Osmena in lieu of such sponsored activity in order to raise
their freedom of speech and spread awareness to the younger
generations on the commemoration and declaration of Martial Law.
Such copy of the permit is hereunto attached as “Annex A”;

5. That days before such declaration of rally, a nationwide warning against

University Professors and students was disseminated by the Philippine
National Police prohibiting the aforementioned from engaging in
activities related to the commemoration of Martial Law;

6. That on September 20, 2018, the rally ensued in the Fuente Osmena
Circle in Cebu City at around 1:30 pm to 6:00 pm wherein most of the
rallyists were students and activists who personally experienced Martial
Law during their younger years.;

7. That after the said activity on September 20, 2018, Juan de la Cruz did
not return home and was unheard of;

8. That Petitioner, worried about the whereabouts of his son, went to his
school and asked the students if someone saw him or was with him after
the rally;

9. That Petitioner talked to Christer Gaspar, a friend of Juan de la Cruz,

and said that he saw the victim at the end of the forum outside the
school waiting for a jeepney. He further reiterated that while waiting for

2
 said jeepney, Juan was approached by men in civilian attire. Photos of
such incident are hereunto attached as Annex “B” ;

10. That he further saw Juan de la Cruz being forced to ride in a waiting
vehicle with a “PNP PRO-VII” sticker in its windshield and was
recognized by Gaspar to be driven by his neighbor who is a police
officer of the Philippine National Police Regional Office-VII; A copy of
Mr. Gaspar’s Judicial Affidavit is hereto attached as Annex “C”;

11. That Petitioner went to the Police Station in Talamban to report that
the victim was missing for more than 24 hours;

12. That days passed and still no update as to Juan de la Cruz’s whereabouts
was given to her. Due to Petitioner’s fear and anxiety as to the state of
his son, she went to the PNP-PRO VII headquarters in Camp Sergio
Osmena, to ask assistance and inquire if any vehicle of such agency
driven by Gaspar’s neighbor was seen to be present on September 20 in
the rally area or outside the school premises of Juan de la Cruz;

13. That upon reaching the reception area, Petitioner recognized the Juan
de la Cruz’s school backpack and further saw the his name tag on it;

14. That Petitioner began to question why said bag was there and the
officer on duty namely: PO1 Ronald Delos Santos, told her that indeed
Juan de la Cruz has been there on September 20 after the rally, but the
he further reiterated that Juan de la Cruz was merely invited there and
was released right away. As to why the Petitioner saw his son’s bag inside
the station, PO1 Delos Santos said that he may have forgotten to bring it
since the boy was in a rush to go home;

15. That days before the rally ensued, Petitioner saw in the news a public
warning against University professors and students perceived to be
destabilizers against the government from further engaging in the
participation of Martial Law commemoration activities;

16. That furthermore, Petitioner saw on the news the rampant extra-judicial
killings and different human rights issues ongoing in our country today;

17. That Petitioner became more worried considering that Juan de la Cruz
was very vocal in his social media posts against Human Rights violations

3
 most especially on the prevalent rampant senseless killings related to the
war on drugs; Screenshots of these posts are made an integral part of
this petition and hereunto attached as Annexes “D” to “D-4”;

18. That Petitioner, in dire hope of knowing the whereabouts of Juan de la

Cruz asked around vendors and residents near Camp Sergio Osmena if
they saw her son exiting the headquarters on September 20, 2018. One
vendor said that he saw Juan being forcibly taken in the station but all of
the vendors were unanimous in answering that they did not see a student
going out of the Camp on said date. Also, Petitioner had a hint that
some of them appeared apprehensive and fearful of the implication of
giving any information to the Petitioner so they refused to answer
queries about the alleged invitation of Juan de la Cruz by the PNP and
his whereabouts.

19. That to date and after insidious inquiry and persistent efforts of the
Petitioner to look into the whereabouts and personal safety of Juan de la
Cruz, the same remain unanswered and uncertain on account of the
disappearance of the Juan de la Cruz after the alleged invitation by the
PNP-PRO VII;

Law and Jurisprudence:

20. Section 1 and 2, Article III of the 1987 Constitution provides, to wit:

Section 1. No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property

without due process of law, nor shall any person be denied the equal
protection of the laws;
Section 2. The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses,
papers, and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures of
whatever nature and for any purpose shall be inviolable, and no search
warrant or warrant of arrest shall issue except upon probable cause to be
determined personally by the judge after examination under oath or
affirmation of the complainant and the witnesses he may produce, and
particularly describing the place to be searched and the persons or things
to be seized.

21. Pursuant to its rule-making power as provided in Section 5(5) Article

VIII of the 1987 Constitution, the Honorable Supreme Court issued
A.M. No. 07-12-SC, otherwise known as “The Rule on the Writ of

4
 Amparo.” The remedy of the Rule was described in the Supreme Court
case of Secretary De Lima v. Gatdula, G.R. No. 204528, February 19, 2013,
as follows:

The remedy of the Writ of Amparo is an equitable and

extraordinary remedy to safeguard the right of the people to
life, liberty, and security as enshrined in the 1987
Constitution. The Rule on the Writ of Amparo was issued as an
exercise of the Supreme Court's power to promulgate rules
concerning the protection and enforcement of constitutional
rights. It aims to address concerns such as, among others,
extrajudicial killings and enforced disappearances. (Emphasis
supplied)

22. The Honorable Supreme Court also ruled in the case of The Secretary of
National Defense v. Manalo, GR 180906, October 7, 2008, that:

The Court promulgated the Amparo Rule "in light of the

prevalence of extralegal killing and enforced disappearances." It
was an exercise for the first time of the Court's expanded power
to promulgate rules to protect our people's constitutional rights,
which made its maiden appearance in the 1987 Constitution in
response to the Filipino experience of the martial law regime. As
the Amparo Rule was intended to address the intractable problem
of "extralegal killings" and "enforced disappearances", its
coverage, in its present form, is confined to these two instances or
to threats thereof. "Extralegal killings" are "killings committed
without due process of law, i.e., without legal safeguards or
judicial proceedings." On the other hand, "enforced
disappearances" are "attended by the following
characteristics: an arrest, detention or abduction of a person
by a government official or organized groups or private
individuals acting with the direct or indirect acquiescence of the
government; the refusal of the State to disclose the fate or
whereabouts of the person concerned or a refusal to
acknowledge the deprivation of liberty which places such
persons outside the protection of law." (Emphasis supplied);

5
23. Section 2 of the same Rule provides for the enumeration of the people
who could file in behalf of the aggrieved party:

SEC. 2. Who May File. – The petition may be filed by the

aggrieved party or by any qualified person or entity in the
following order:
Any member of the immediate family, namely: the spouse,
children and parents of the aggrieved party;
Any ascendant, descendant or collateral relative of the aggrieved
party within the fourth civil degree of consanguinity or affinity, in
default of those mentioned in the preceding paragraph; or
Any concerned citizen, organization, association or institution, if
there is no known member of the immediate family or relative of
the aggrieved party. (Emphasis supplied);

24. Section 14 of the same Rules provides for the interim relief that could be
afforded upon filing of the petition or at anytime before final judgment:

Section 14. Interim Reliefs. — Upon filing of the petition or at

anytime before final judgment, the court, justice or judge may
grant any of the following reliefs:
Temporary Protection Order. – The court, justice or judge,
upon motion or motuproprio, may order that the petitioner or the
aggrieved party and any member of the immediate family be
protected in a government agency or by an accredited person or
private institution capable of keeping and securing their safety.
xxx
Inspection Order. — The court, justice or judge, upon verified
motion and after due hearing, may order any person in possession
or control of a designated land or other property, to permit entry
for the purpose of inspecting, measuring, surveying, or
photographing the property or any relevant object or operation
thereon.
xxx
Production Order. – The court, justice or judge, upon verified
motion and after due hearing, may order any person in
possession, custody or control of any designated documents,
papers, books, accounts, letters, photographs, objects or tangible
things, or objects in digitized or electronic form, which constitute
or contain evidence relevant to the petition or the return, to

6
 produce and permit their inspection, copying or photographing by
or on behalf of the movant.
Xxx

25. As discussed in the case of Rodriguez v Arroyo, GR 191805, November

15, 2011, citing the case of Yano v Sanchez, the Supreme Court said that:
"these provisional reliefs are intended to assist the court before it
arrives at a judicious determination of the Amparo petition."
Being interim reliefs, they can only be granted before a final
adjudication of the case is made. In any case, it must be
underscored that the privilege of the Writ of Amparo, once
granted, necessarily entails the protection of the aggrieved party.”

Application:

26. That Petitioner seeks relief by the Privilege of Writ of Amparo, so that
respondents would be ordered to produce the body of Juan de la Cruz,
they being the last one to have been seen to be with the victim after his
disappearance, and granting that the victim is under their custody, to
release him to the custody of the Petitioner among other available reliefs.

27. That the victim, Juan de la Cruz, enjoys the right to life, liberty, and
property guaranteed by the Constitution and that Petitioner has shown
preponderantly that victim was lastly seen under the custody of
respondents and is to date unaccounted for. A copy of the Petitioner’s
Judicial Affidavit is hereto attached as Annex “E”.

28. The eyewitnesses’ corroborated statements of the abduction clearly show

that Juan de la Cruz was taken without a valid warrant of arrest. The
police’s refusal to show Mrs. Dela Cruz the reports, police invitations,
and release order proves the unwarranted and baseless abduction of the
Juan de la Cruz and a blatant violation of Sec 2 Art 3 of the 1987
Constitution;

29. That Petitioner has exhausted all efforts legally available in the past few
months and that there is no other plain, speedy, and adequate remedy to
protect the rights of the victim except by this application for a Writ of
Amparo.

7
 30. That the alleged violations of Juan de la Cruz’s Constitutional rights are
clearly established and hence Petitioner is entitled to the privilege of the
Writ of Amparo.
PRAYER

WHEREFORE, it is respectfully prayed that by the privilege of the Writ

of Amparo, the respondents be ordered to produce the body of Juan de la Cruz
who was seen last under their custody and to release him to the custody of the
Petitioner; IN THE EVENT THAT THE RESPONDENTS WOULD
DENY CUSTODY, it is most respectfully prayed unto this Most Honorable
Court that upon filing of this petition to immediately issue an interim relief for
the inspection of detention areas in Camp Sergio Osmena, Cebu City; it is
likewise prayed that the court issue the Writ of Amparo prayed for
commanding the herein respondents to make a verified return within the
period and containing the specific matters required by law; it is prayed that
Petitioner be granted the other interim reliefs allowed by the Amparo Rule and
other reliefs prayed for in the petition but not covered by the Amparo Rule;
and that the Court, after hearing, render judgment as required in Sec. 18 of the
Amparo Rule; and such other just and equitable reliefs under the premises are
likewise prayed for.

Cebu City, Philippines, 1 March 2019.

JUANA DELA CRUZ

Petitioner

Assisted by:
BAV-JT LAW OFFICE
2F, USC Law Building
P. Del Rosario St., Cebu City
Email: info@abbalawoffice.com
Tel No.: (032) 254 1434

8
 Charlene Lord Aton
Counsel for Petitioner
Roll No. 64338
PTR No. 123456; 01-02-18; D.C.
IBP Life Member Roll 445789
MCLE Compliance No. V-897656; 01-10-2018
Issued at Cebu City
2F, USC Law Building
P. Del Rosario St., Cebu City

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES }

CITY OF CEBU } SS.

VERIFICATION AND CERTIFICATION OF NON-FORUM

SHOPPING

I, JUANA DELA CRUZ, of legal age, married to Juano Dela Cruz,

with residence and postal address at #21 Dona Rita Village, Brgy. Talamban,
Cebu City; after having been duly sworn in accordance with law, depose and
state that:

1. I am the Petitioner in the above-stated case;

2. I have read and understood the said Petition and all the allegations
therein are true and correct and of my own personal knowledge based
on authentic records;
3. I have not commenced any other petition or proceeding involving same
issues in the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeals, or different
Divisions thereof or any other tribunal or agency;
4. To the best of my knowledge, no similar Petition is pending in the
Supreme Court, the Court of Appeals, or different Divisions thereof or
any other tribunal or agency;
5. If I should thereafter learn that a similar action or proceeding has been
filed or is pending before said courts or tribunals, I hereby undertake to
promptly inform this Honorable Court within five (5) days therefrom.

9
 JUANA DELA CRUZ
Affiant

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this 1st day of March 2019 at 2F,
USC Law Building, P. Del Rosario Street, Cebu City affiant exhibiting to me
her Unified Multi-Purpose ID CRN-000-0234-9876-8 and CTC 01262255 issued
on January 3, 2018 at Cebu City, Philippines.

ATTY. FLORDELIS CARMEL MARIE B. VELAYO

Notary Public
For and within the territorial jurisdiction of RTC
Cebu City, San Fernando and Carcar
Notarial Commission No. 295
Valid Until Dec 31, 2019
IBP No. 984565 Lifetime, Cebu City
MCLE Compliance No. V 02247 (Jan 17, 2018)
Attorney’s Roll No. 63279
PTR No. # 9843990, Jan 5, 2018, Cebu City
No. 5 Oliva-Perez Bldg., Junquera Ext., San Antonio,
Cebu City

Doc. No. 6
Page No. 2
Book No. 1
Series of 2019

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I certify that on the 1st day of September 2019, the original of this document
was filed with the Clerk of Court; and the true and accurate copy of this
document was served on the other party by mail, addressed to the following:

POLICE DIRECTOR GENERAL RACSO OBED

(CHIEF-PHILIPPINE NATIONAL POLICE)
Camp Crame
Quezon City
Philippines

PCSUPT. BEDO NISA

(REGIONAL DIRECTOR, PNP PRO-VII)

10
Camp Sergio Osmena Sr.
Osmena Blvd.
Cebu City
Philippines

GENERAL GARDO PATAY

Camp Sergio Osmena Sr.
Osmena Blvd.
Cebu City
Philippines

EXPLANATION

A copy of this petition is served on opposing counsel and the Regional Trial
Court by registered mail, instead of personal service, due to the urgency of the
filing of the same, and personal service is impracticable.

March 1, 2019 . Cebu City, Philippines.

ATTY. FLORDELIS CARMEL MARIE B. VELAYO

Notary Public
For and within the territorial jurisdiction of RTC
Cebu City, San Fernando and Carcar
Notarial Commission No. 295
Valid Until Dec 31, 2019
IBP No. 984565 Lifetime, Cebu City
MCLE Compliance No. V 02247 (Jan 17, 2018)
Attorney’s Roll No. 63279
PTR No. # 9843990, Jan 5, 2018, Cebu City
No. 5 Oliva-Perez Bldg., Junquera Extension
San Antonio, Cebu City

Doc. No. 7
Page No. 3
Book No. 1
Series of 2019

11
 ANNEX “A”
Republic of the Philippines
City of Cebu
Office of the Mayor

September 18, 2018

Juan Dela Cruz

President
University of San Carlos Supreme Student Council

Re: Request for a permit to conduct rally/assembly

Dear Mr. Dela Cruz,

This is to acknowledge the receipt of your letter dated September 17, 2018
requesting for a permit for some of the students of the University of San Carlos for the
use of the Fuente Osmeña Circle on September 20,2018 at 1:30 in the afternoon to
conduct a rally.

On your letter, you are requesting for a permit to use the Fuente Osmeña Circle of
this city on the above-mentioned date and time to express some of the students’
sentiments, concerns and observations regarding the Martial Law declarations and
commemorations. As such, you would like to exercise your rights to freedom of
expression and speech, right to peaceful assembly after a permit to use the said area will
be granted by this office.

As recognition of your constitutional rights, the office grants your request to the
following terms and conditions:

• The permit will be valid only on September 20, 2018 at 1:30 in the afternoon until 6:00
in the evening.
• The rally will be held only on the Fuente Osmeña Circle, Cebu City and will not
include Osmeña Blvd. and Mango Avenue.

May this serve as the official permit for the rally.

Done this 18th day of September, 2018 at the Office of the City Mayor.

Signed and approved by

Tomas Osmeña
Mayor, Cebu City

12
 ANNEX “B”

Photo showing the abduction of Juan de la Cruz.

13
 ANNEX “C”
Republic of the Philippines
REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
Seventh Judicial Region
Branch 12
Cebu City

JUANA DE LA CRUZ
Petitioner,

-versus-

SP No. ________
CHIEF OF THE PHILIPPINE FOR: Writ of Amparo and
NATIONAL POLICE; Inspection Order
REGIONAL DIRECTOR OF PNP
PRO VII OF CAMP SERGIO
OSMENA; MAJOR GENERAL
GARDO PATAY,
Respondent
x------------------------///

JUDICIAL AFFIDAVIT

I, Christer Gaspar, of legal age, single and Chemical Engineering

student of the University of San Carlos, after having been duly sworn to in
accordance with law, hereby depose and state:

PRELIMINARY STATEMENT

That in accordance with A.M. No. 12-8-8-SC, which prescribes

the use of judicial affidavits to serve as the direct examination testimony of the
witness, on the basis of which the adverse party may conduct their cross-
examination on such a witness, I hereby execute this judicial affidavit in a
question and answer format;

That conformably with section 3(b) of the said A.M. No. 12-8-8-
SC, I also state that it was Atty. Ira Jennena J. Bero of BAV-JT Law Office
located at 2ND Floor, USC Law Building, P. del Rosario Street, Cebu City who
conducted the examination of the undersigned affiant;

That conformably also with section 3(c) thereof, I hereby state

under the pain of perjury that in answering the questions asked of me, as
appearing herein below, I am fully conscious that I did so under oath, and that
I may face criminal liabilities for false testimony or perjury;

14
 AND UNDER OATH, AVERS THE FOLLOWING:

[knowledge/information
about the abduction]

1. Q : What are the reasons why you voluntarily came to this Office?

A : Because I want to make things right and I want to give justice to

my missing friend. I believe that the information which I know will shed light
as to his whereabouts.

2. Q : How are you related to the victim?

A : I am a close friend of Juan Dela Cruz. We are classmates in some of

our engineering subjects and we also share the same interests particularly on
actively participating in rallies and assemblies especially involving the Martial
Law issues.

3. Q : Have you been attending rallies?

A : Yes Ma’am, I have been attending rallies since I am vocal on my

political stands one of those activities which I attended are those in
commemoration of the declaration of the Martial Law.

4. Q : What is your purpose in attending these rallies?

A : believe that I have the duty and obligation to make a stand and urge
fellow students to be aware of the evils of martial law and do something to find
justice for the oppressed victims and to never allow such excruciation to
happen again. Never again.

5. Q : For how long have you been attending rallies?

A : I have been attending rallies since I started college. I figured that I have
to be a voice to make a difference for this country and to my fellow Filipinos.
Thus, I decided to dedicate my spare time being a catalyst of change for this
country since someone has to start it in order to make a difference.

6. Q : Where you there at the rally held on Sept. 20, 2018?

A : Yes sir, I was. I am also a student activist who participated in the rally
that was held on September 20, 2018.

7. Q : Can you name some people you know who attended such rally?

A : I attended together with Juan Dela Cruz. He was one of the organizers
for the said rally.

8. Q : How long did the rally last?

15
 A : The rally started at 1:30 in the afternoon and ended at 6:00 in the
evening.

9. Q :If that is the case, can you tell us all your knowledge/information
about the sudden disappearance of Juan Dela Cruz?

A : At the end of the rally, we went together to the school to return

the materials which we used for the rally. Later on, we went on our separate
ways, ready to go home after a tiring but fulfilling day. Juan Dela Cruz was at
the other side of the street waiting for a jeepney ride when I saw three men in
civilian attire approaching him. They were having a conversation until all of a
sudden, he was forced to ride in a waiting vehicle.

10. Q : How do you describe these men?

A : They just blend in with the people around and you wouldn’t think
that they are up to something because they are wearing civilian attire and no
arms or guns on hand. They are all taller than Juan Dela Cruz with bigger build.

11. Q : What time did this happen?

A : Around 6:30- 7:00 in the evening Sir.

12. Q : What about the vehicle they are using?

A : It was a white van parked just a few meters where Juan Dela Cruz
was waiting for a jeepney. The waiting van has a sticker at the windshield that
says “PNP PRO-VII”.

13. Q : Did you recognize any of the men?

A : I didn’t recognize the men who approached Juan Dela Cruz but I
recognized the driver of the van.

14. Q : Can you describe him?

A : He is our neighbor in Brgy. Labangon ever since I was young. He is

Major General Gardo Patay. He is a police officer whom I used to look up
to,seeing him in police uniform every time he passes by our house on his way
to and from work. I am sure it was him because I have been very familiar with
him.

15. Q : Do you know where he works?

A : He is working in Camp Sergio Osmeña Sr., Osmeña Blvd., Cebu City.

16. Q : What happened after the alleged abduction?

16
 A : The vehicle drove so fast while crossing the intersection of Pelaez Street
and P.del Rosario Street.

17. Q : Did you report to the police?

A : I did not know what to do and was afraid so I went home. Now I
cannot sleep properly unless I will tell them what I know.

18. Q : You said Juan Dela Cruz is active in participating rallies.

A : Yes, he participates actively.

19. Q : Is he also open and straightforward in social media about his

stand?

A : He is very vocal in social media that once in a while he posts and

shares some news and issues tackling about martial law.

20. Q : So he posts about the political situations in our country?

A : Yes Sir, he does but most of the time I can read his posts are
about martial law and extrajudicial killings.

21. Q : Can we have access or see those post?

A : Yes Sir, these are the screenshots of some of the posts on

Facebook of Juan Dela Cruz criticizing the martial law.

Atty Bero: At this juncture, a faithful reproduction of the aforementioned

social media posts are marked in the Petition as “Annex D”.

22. Q : Aside from Facebook posts do you know of any other social
media platform where he posts his criticism?

A : None that I know of, Ma’am.

23. Q : Where you alone when the incident happen?

A : Yes I was alone that time. I was using my cell phone because I
was texting my mom that I am going home when I saw what happened, so I
took a photo of the Juan Dela Cruz being held by the men.

24. Q : Do you still have the photo now on your phone taken on Sept.
20, 2018?

A : Yes, Ma’am.

17
25. Q : Are you willing to have the photo exhibited?

A : Yes Ma’am, I am willing.

Atty. Bero: At this juncture, a faithful reproduction of the aforementioned

photo taken from Christer Gaspar’s phone is marked in the Petition as “Annex
B”.

26. Q : Can you recognize anyone of the men in the photo?

A : Unfortunately, I don’t recognize. As what I said earlier I only

recognized, Major General Gardo Patay, who was the driver of the white van.

27. Q : For the meantime, I don’t have further questions, do you have
any statements to add or take away on this affidavit?

A : I don’t have sir for the meantime.

28. Q : Are you willing to sign this affidavit consisting of three (5) pages,
to certify that all the statements you made are true.

A : Yes sir.
---------END OF STATEMENT----------

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I hereunto set my hand below this 1st day of

March, 2019 at BAV-JT Law Office, 2ND Floor, USC Law Building, P. del
Rosario Street, Cebu City.

_____________________
Christer Gaspar
Affiant

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this 1st day of March, 2019 at

Cebu City, Philippines, personally appeared and exhibited to me his NBI
Clearance with ID 19-000-0234-9876-8. I hereby certify that I have personally
examined the affiant; that he has read and understood the foregoing statements
and executed the same of his own free will.

_______________________
ATTY. IRA JENNENA BERO
Notary Public
For and within the territorial jurisdiction of RTC
Cebu City, San Fernando and Carcar
Notarial Commission No. 296
Valid Until Dec 31, 2019
IBP No. 984115 Lifetime, Cebu City
MCLE Compliance No. V 02241 (Jan 17, 2018)

18
 Attorney’s Roll No. 61279
PTR No. # 9843919, Jan 5, 2018, Cebu City
No. 5 Oliva-Perez Bldg., Junquera Extension
San Antonio, Cebu City

Doc. No. 10
Page No. 5
Book No. 1
Series of 2019

SWORN ATTESTATION
I, ATTY. IRA JENNENA BERO, Filipino, of legal age, with office address
at 2F USC Law Building, P. Del Rosario St., Cebu City, after having been
sworn to in accordance with law, hereby attest and state: THAT—
1. I personally conducted the examination of the witness, CHRISTER
GASPAR;
2. The examination was conducted in English, a language known to the
witness;
3. I have faithfully recorded and/or caused to be recorded the questions
asked and the corresponding answers that the witness gave in the foregoing
Judicial Affidavit, free from any undue influence or interference; and;
4. Neither I nor any other person then present or assisting him coached the
witness regarding the latter’s answers.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto affixed my hand this 1st day of

March 2019, at Cebu City, Philippines.

ATTY. IRA JENNENA BERO

Affiant

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this 1st day of March 2019 in

Cebu City, Philippines. Affiant is personally known to me and she
acknowledged that she freely and voluntarily executed the same.

ATTY. FLORDELIS CARMEL MARIE B. VELAYO

Notary Public
For and within the territorial jurisdiction of RTC
Cebu City, San Fernando and Carcar
Notarial Commission No. 295
Valid Until Dec 31, 2019
IBP No. 984565 Lifetime, Cebu City

19
 MCLE Compliance No. V 02247 (Jan 17, 2018)
Attorney’s Roll No. 63279
PTR No. # 9843990, Jan 5, 2018, Cebu City
No. 5 Oliva-Perez Bldg., Junquera Ext., Cebu City

Doc. No. 9
Page No. 4
Book No. 1
Series of 2019

20
 ANNEX “D”

Screenshots of Facebook posts of Juan de la Cruz showing how vocal he

is against the Marcoses and the current administration’s War on Drugs.

21
22
ANNEX “D-1”

23
ANNEX “D-2”

24
25
ANNEX “D-3”

26
ANNEX “D-4”

27
 ANNEX “E”
Republic of the Philippines
REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
Seventh Judicial Region
Branch 12
Cebu City

JUANA DE LA CRUZ
Petitioner,

-versus-

SP No. ________
CHIEF OF THE PHILIPPINE FOR: Writ of Amparo and
NATIONAL POLICE; Inspection Order
REGIONAL DIRECTOR OF PNP
PRO VII OF CAMP SERGIO
OSMENA; MAJOR GENERAL
GARDO PATAY,
Respondent
x------------------------///

JUDICIAL AFFIDAVIT
I, JUANA DE LA CRUZ, of legal age, Filipino, married and a resident
Dona Rita Village, Brgy. Talamban, Cebu City, after having been sworn in
accordance with law hereby depose and state, that:

PRELIMINARY STATEMENT
The person examining me is Atty. Ira Jennena Bero with office address at 2F
USC Law Building, P. Del Rosario St., Cebu City, Philippines. The
examination is being held at the same address. I am answering the questions
asked of me by Atty. Bero fully conscious that I do so under oath and that I
may face criminal liability for false testimony or perjury.
This judicial affidavit is written in the English language that is known to me.
My examination in question and answer form is as follows:
1.Q: Please state your name and other personal circumstances?

A: My name is JUANA DE LA CRUZ, of legal age, Filipino,

married, and a resident of Dona Rita Village, Brgy. Talamban,
Cebu City.

28
2.Q: Subject of this case [Civil Case No. CEB-123456] for Writ of
Amparo and Order of Inspection of Place filed on 28th day of
September 2018 by one named Juana de la Cruz. How are you
related to her?

A: I am that same person who caused the filing of this case in behalf
of the victim.

3.Q: How are you related to the victim, Juan de la Cruz?

A: He is my only child.

4.Q: Is he studying?

A: Yes, the victim is a 4th year Chemical Engineering student

currently enrolled in the University of San Carlos.

5.Q: Do you know any student organization where he is actively

participating?

A: Yes, the victim is the President of the Student Council in his

college.

6.Q: Do you know any activities sponsored under the leadership of the
victim?

A: I only knew of the activity they had last September 20.

7.Q: Do you have any idea what it is?

A: It is a rally in Fuente Osmena Circle as commemoration of

Martial Law as shown in the Permit to Rally.

8.Q: Do you have proof of this Permit to Rally?

A: Yes, I saw while I was cleaning the victim’s study table.

Atty. Bero: At this juncture, a faithful reproduction of the

aforementioned Permit to Rally issued by the Cebu City
Government is marked in the petition as “Annex A”.
9.Q: What happened in September 20, 2018?

29
 A: After having our breakfast, the victim prepared and left our house
around 12:00 noon. He said he would be participating in the rally
at Fuente Osmena Circle.

10. Q: What happened after?

A: As usual, I was in our house doing household chores.

11.Q: Did the victim return home?

A: No ma’am.

12.Q: What was your reaction?

A: Around 10:00 in the evening I started to get worried that he

might be in danger because he has not returned home. I was not
able to sleep well during that night and was very anxious about his
whereabouts and condition.

13.Q: When was the last time you saw the victim?

A: It was when he left our house on September 20, 2018 around

12:00 noon.

14.Q: What did you do on September 21, 2018?

A: I got anxious on why my son has not returned home so I went to

his school. I asked some students if they saw the victim or was
with him after the rally.

15.Q: What happened after?

A: I happened to talk to a student named Christer Gaspar, a friend

of the victim. He said that he saw my son outside the school
waiting for a jeepney. While waiting for a jeepney, he was
approached by men in civilian attire and was forced to ride in a
waiting vehicle with a “PNP PRO-VII” sticker in its windshield.

16.Q: How did you feel?

30
 A: I started to fear about the personal safety and welfare of the
victim.

17.Q: After talking to the friend of the victim, what did you do?

A: I went to the Police Station in Talamban to report that the victim

is missing for more than 24 hours. The case of the victim was
assigned to a police officer. They assured me that will inform me
of any progress being made to locate the victim.

18.Q: Did you receive any updates as to the victim’s whereabouts?

A: No. Four days since the day the victim was missing I have not
received any updates.

19.Q: What did you do?

A: Due to my fear and anxiety, I went to the PNP-PRO VII

headquarters in Camp Sergio Osmena to ask assistance and
inquire about any vehicle of such agency driven on September 20
in the rally area or outside the school premises of the victim.

20.Q: Upon reaching the reception area, did you notice anything?

A: While I was standing in the reception area waiting for the police
officer I noticed the victim’s school backpack with the victim’s
name tag on it.

21.Q: Where is the victim’s bag placed?

A: On top of the table of the PRO-VII reception area.

22.Q: What was your reaction after seeing the victim’s backpack?

A: I was surprised on how the victim’s bag happened to be there. So

I questioned the police officer on duty.

23.Q: What did the officer on duty tell you?

31
 A: He said that the victim was there on September 20 after the rally
in Fuente Osmena. They merely invited the victim for inquiries
and was released right away. As to why the victim’s bag was left,
he said that the victim might have forgotten it.

24.Q: Were you satisfied with his answer?

A: No ma’am.

25.Q: Why?

A: I am really afraid about the victim’s fate knowing the rampant

Extrajudicial killings ongoing in our country today.

26.Q: What do you understand about these Extrajudicial killings?

A: It is when any person is killed absent any judicial proceedings.

The killings are usually executed by the police officers.

27.Q: What made you think the victim is in danger?

A: I became more worried knowing that the victim is very vocal in

his social media posts against Human Rights violations on the
rampant senseless killing.

28.Q: Do you have a proof of the said social media posts?

A: Yes, ma’am. It can be publicly viewed in his social media posts in

“Facebook”.

Atty Bero: At this juncture, a faithful reproduction of the

aforementioned social media posts are marked in the petition as
Annexes “D” to “D-4”.

32
 29.Q: Have you come across a public warning against University
professors and students prohibited from further engaging in the
participation of Martial Law commemoration?

A: I think I happen to see it in TV news.

30.Q: Can you recall when was this?

A: This was days before the rally.

31.Q: Did you continue to search for the victim?

A: Yes ma’am. I asked around the vendors and residents near Camp
Sergio Osmena by showing them a photo of the victim if they
saw him exiting the headquarters.

32.Q: What did they tell you?

A: One vendor said that he saw the victim forcibly taken in the
station but did not saw the victim going out of the Camp.

33.Q: To this date, do you have any updates as too the location and
sudden disappearance of the victim?

A: Unfortunately, none. And I am really worried of the personal

safety of the victim.

34.Q: What, if any would you ask the Court?

A: I am praying that this Honorable Court grant the privilege of the

Writ of Amparo and the respondents be ordered to produce the
body of Juan dela Cruz. In the event that the respondents would
deny custody it is most respectfully prayed unto this Most
Honorable Court to allow the inspection of the detention areas in
Camp Sergio Osmena, Cebu City.

***NO FURTHER QUESTIONS FROM THE AFFIANT***

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I hereunto affix my signature this 1st of March,

2019 at Cebu City, Philippines.

33
 JUANA DELA CRUZ
Affiant

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this 1st of March, 2019 at Cebu

City, Philippines, personally appeared and exhibited to me her Unified Multi-
Purpose ID CRN-000-0234-9876-8 and CTC 01262255. I hereby certify that I
have personally examined the affiant; that she has read and understood the
foregoing statements and executed the same of her own free will.

_______________________
ATTY. IRA JENNENA BERO
Notary Public
For and within the territorial jurisdiction of RTC
Cebu City, San Fernando and Carcar
Notarial Commission No. 296
Valid Until Dec 31, 2019
IBP No. 984115 Lifetime, Cebu City
MCLE Compliance No. V 02241 (Jan 17, 2018)
Attorney’s Roll No. 61279
PTR No. # 9843919, Jan 5, 2018, Cebu City
No. 5 Oliva-Perez Bldg., Junquera Extension
San Antonio, Cebu City

Doc. No. 11
Page No. 6
Book No. II
Series of 2019

34
 SWORN ATTESTATION
I, ATTY. IRA JENNENA BERO, Filipino, of legal age, with office address
at 2F USC Law Building, P. Del Rosario St., Cebu City, after having been
sworn to in accordance with law, hereby attest and state: THAT—
1. I personally conducted the examination of the witness, JUANA DE LA
CRUZ;
2. The examination was conducted in English, a language known to the
witness;
3. I have faithfully recorded and/or caused to be recorded the questions
asked and the corresponding answers that the witness gave in the foregoing
Judicial Affidavit, free from any undue influence or interference; and;
4. Neither I nor any other person then present or assisting her coached the
witness regarding the latter’s answers.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hands this 1st day of
March 2019, at Cebu City, Philippines.

ATTY. IRA JENNENA BERO

Affiant

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this 1st day of March 2019 in

Cebu City, Philippines. Affiant is personally known to me and she
acknowledged that she freely and voluntarily executed the same.

ATTY. FLORDELIS CARMEL MARIE B. VELAYO

Notary Public
For and within the territorial jurisdiction of RTC
Cebu City, San Fernando and Carcar
Notarial Commission No. 295
Valid Until Dec 31, 2019
IBP No. 984565 Lifetime, Cebu City
MCLE Compliance No. V 02247 (Jan 17, 2018)
Attorney’s Roll No. 63279
PTR No. # 9843990, Jan 5, 2018, Cebu City
No. 5 Oliva-Perez Bldg., Junquera Extension
San Antonio, Cebu City

Doc. No. 10
Page No. 4
Book No. I
Series of 2019

35