PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,
                                           Plaintiff,

                 - versus -                                                                                                      CRIM. CASES NOS. CBU-45303
                                                                                                                                                                    and CBU-45304

FRANCISCO JUAN LARRANAGA @ "PACO";                                                             FOR: KIDNAPPING AND SERIOUS
JOSMAN AZNAR, ROWEN ADLAWAN @ WESLEY;                                                                      ILLEGAL DETENTION
ALBERTO CANO @ "PAHAK"; ARIEL
BALANSAG; DAVIDSON VALIENTE RUSIA @
"DAVID FLORIDO" @ "TISOY TAGALOG"; 
JAMES ANTHONY UY @ "WANGWANG" Uy
and JAMS ANDREW Uy @ "MM" Uy,
                                           Accused.
x - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -/
                                                                                T R A N S C R I P T

                                                                                           of    the

                                                                 Stenographic notes taken before HON. 
                                                                 MARTIN A. OCAMPO, Presiding Judge of
                                                                 Branch 7, Regional Trial Court, Cebu 
                                                                 City, during the hearing on September 14,
                                                                 1998 at 2:20 o'clock in the afternoon.
                                                                 

Present:
                                                                 HON. MARTIN A. OCAMPO
                                                                 Presiding Judge

ASSISTED BY:
                                                                  Mrs. Alicia L. Formentera
                                                                  Stenographer

                                                                   Mrs. Lucila C. Bajarias
                                                                   Court Interpreter

APPEARANCES:
                                                                   Prosecutor Primo C. Miro
                                                                   Prosecutor Cesar Estrera
                                                                   Prosecutor Teresita Galanida
                                                                   Prosecutor Ramon Jose Duyongco
                                                                   Prosecutor Leonardo Carreon
                                                                  For the State                                                 

                                                                   Atty. Honorato Hermosisima
                                                                   Atty. Bienvenido Saniel
                                                                   Atty. Veronico Sardoncillo
                                                                   Private Prosecutors

PAGE 2
                                                                   Atty. Ferdinand Saornido
                                                                   Counsel for Rusia
                                                                   Atty. Venustiano Ypil
                                                                   Atty. Anacleto Debalocus 
                                                                   Atty. John de Jesus
                                                                   PAO Lawyers-Counsel de oficio
                                                                   for the rest of the accused

                                                                   
PROS. MIRO:          
          For the state, Your Honor.

ATTY. HERMOSISIMA:
          Respectfully appearing as private prosecutor in collaboration with Attys. Saniel and Sardoncillo and the prosecuting Fiscals, you Honor. 

ATTY. DEBALOCUS:
          Respectfully appearing a. counsel de oficio for the rest of they accused, Your honor, in collaboration with Atty. de Jesus and Atty. Ypil.

ATTY. SAORNIDO:
          Respectfully appearing as counsel for accused Rusia, your Honor. 

COURT:
          I noticed that the accused have not yet appointed counsels of their choice. They promised to do so before the 24th. Now, what the Court would like to know is - supposed they do not appoint counsels of their choice by the 24th, what will the Court do? Will the prosecution submit a Motion advising the Court what to do in that event? E, papano kung walang abogado yong mga akusado (So, what if the accused don't have lawyers) on the 24th, who is going to conduct the cross-examination? I think - as of now I would ask the accused if they are consenting to the PAO lawyers conducting the cross-examination of the prosecution witnesses including Russia. If they consent, then we will order the PAO lawyers to conduct the cross-examination. If they do not consent, then, what's the use of ordering the PAO lawyers to conduct cross-examination di waste of time lang you. (Then that would be waste of time.) The accused do not honor it anyway. And then the next step would be to ask then, if they do not have lawyers by next week yet and to ask them, are they consenting to the PAO lawyers presenting their defense evidence, di ba? (Isn't it?) If they consent, then we will order the PAO lawyers to present their evidence. But if the accused say they are not consenting, then what's the use of ordering the PAO lawyers to present evidence. How can they present an evidence without the cooperation of the accused? Di, magmumukha tayong luko-luko (Then, we will look crazy) if we will order the PAO lawyers - sige (ok) you present your evi-

(NOTE: For the benefit of our foreign readers, blue wordings is our translation from Tagalog (Philippine language) to English ...the webmaster). 

PAGE 3
dence. Anong evidence and i-present namin e ayaw ng mga accused na mag-present ng evidence. (What evidence will we present, since, the accused does not want to present evidence.) So, in those two events, we will have to consider the accused to have waived cross-examination and presentation of evidence if that happens. Kung ayaw nila, anong magagawa natin? (If they do not want, what can we do?) They do not want to cross-examine. They do not want to appoint lawyers. They do not want to present evidence. Then, the Court will order the prosecution to formally submit its evidence and then ask the PAO lawyers to comment and then consider the case as submitted for decision as of next week. E, papano, kung ayaw nilang mag-hire ng lawyers, (So, how, if they do not want to hire their own lawyers,) what can we do? What can any court do? If the accused refused to name lawyers and to cross-examine the prosecution witnesses and to present evidence, e, ano ba ang magagawa ng husgado? (So, what can the court do?) They insist on my inhibiting myself. The law says, Rule 137 says, if the judge decides not to inhibit himself, then the trial must continue and there shall be no appeal or stay from or by reason of the judge's refusal to inhibit himself until final judgment. That's the provision of the law. So, they cannot appeal my denial of their Motion to Inhibit until final judgment and there can be no restraining order of this proceedings by reason of that denial of their Motion to Inhibit. Yon ang sabi ni Justice Benipayo, (That's what Justice Benipayo said,) the Court Administrator, once the trial begins, tuloy-tuloy na. (it has to be continously already.)  There can be no stopping it within  60 days, ha? (So?) Otherwise, ako naman ang mapapa­sama. (I will be the one in trouble.)

ATTY. DE JESUS:
          Your Honor, please . . . 

COURT:
          Yes, pañero. (my fellow lawyer.)

ATTY. DE JESUS:
          Just to manifest, Your Honor. We are made to understand, Your Honor, that the prosecution are still to present witnesses. May we inquire from the prosecution whether these witnesses are - the testimonies of these witnesses are still in support of the pending motion of accused Rusia for him to be discharged and to be utilized as state witness because - may we know from the prosecution, Your Honor?

COURT:
          Now, the Motion to Discharge may be made at any time before the prosecution rests its case. It is up for the Court to decide and of course - but the requirements of the rule must be followed. What are the requirements of Rule 119, Section 9? They have to be followed including yong - ano ba yon? (that - what was that?) What was that - the case yong (that is) involving moral turpitude? All those requirements have to be considered by the Court before

(NOTE: For the benefit of our foreign readers, blue wordings is our translation from Tagalog (Philippine language) to English ...the webmaster). 

PAGE 4
it discharges the accused Rusia. But the point is, we accepted his testimony already as an accused, not yet as state witness because any accused can make a judicial confession if he wants to. There is no law against an accused wanting to make a judicial confession before the court. Bakit bawal ba yon (Why is it prohibited) for an accused to make a judicial confession? Any of those accused who wants to make a judicial confession, I will accept it. Let them make a judicial confession. Bakit hindi naman bawal yon. (Why, that is not prohibited.) There is nothing illegal in that. Accused Rusia, decided he wanted to make a judicial confession because his conscience was bothering him. What can we do? Babawalan ba na huwag kang mag-confess dito - bawal. (Will we prohibit anyone to confess here.) Paano, ano tayo rito? (How, what are we here?) We are supposed to listen to evidence. We are not supposed to prohibit anybody from confessing if he wants to.

PROS. GALANIDA: 
          May we . . .

COURT: 
          Yes, Fiscal.

PROS. GALANIDA:
          Your honor, please, on the side of the prosecution panel, we would like to inform the defense because they are asking us whether we are presenting these witnesses in a regular trial. That we are indeed presenting these witnesses in a regular trial and the 2 Motions that they have, Motion for Discharge, our Motion for Discharge and their Motion for Bail are just considered as incidents of this regular trial. After all, we already had manifested before that in their Motion for Bail, the prosecution will be given the chance and the opportunity to show that the guilt of the accused is really strong. And that is why, whatever evidence is presented in connection with the Motion for Bail is being reproduced in this regular trial so we are still presenting these witnesses in a regular trial and we still have other witnesses aside from the witnesses that we will be presenting soon. 

COURT: 
          So, let it be understood that synchronous or simultaneous with this trial is being heard also the Motion for Bail and the Motion for Discharge of the accused Rusia. 

ATTY. DE JESUS: 
          Yes, Your Honor, please, Because we are - we received this copy . . . 

COURT: 
          Because the resolution of those 2 Motions to discharge and for bail, depends upon the evidence to be presented

(NOTE: For the benefit of our foreign readers, blue wordings is our translation from Tagalog (Philippine language) to English ...the webmaster). 

PAGE 5
still to be presented by the prosecution. Hindi pa tapos, e, (It is not yet finished,) until the prosecution manifests that they have already presented all the evidence they want to present to support the Motions against bail and for discharge. Pag sinabi nila yon, (If they say that,) that's the time I will resolve these 2 Motions. E, hindi pa naman. (So, they did not yet.)  They are still presenting their witnesses. So, do you have something to say, Pañero? (my fellow lawyer?)

ATTY. D. JESUS:
          Yes, Your Honor, please. We are basing our inquiry, Your Honor, on the Speedy Trial Implementing Rules, Circular No. 38-98 under Section 9, Exclusions, Your Honor.

COURT: 
          What is that, Speedy Trial Act? 

ATTY. DE JESUS: 
          Yes, Your honor, the implementing guidelines of this Speedy Trial Act.

COURT: 
          I don't think I have that yet. I'm guided by the Heinous Crimes Act which is posted here. Administrative Order No. 104-96 which says that we are supposed to conduct mandatory continuous trial. According to Justice Benipayo, ibig sabihin na tuloy tuloy, walang stop-stop, walang suspension-suspension, (that means continuous trial, no stopping, no suspensions) Benipayo himself told that before the IBP, Isa pa, sabi niya yong (One more thing, he said about ) dilatory motion, that depends upon the sound discretion of the judge, di ba? (Isn't it?) Kaya nga judge siya - (That's why he is judge -) he can give discretion to determine what is dilatory. It depends upon the circumstances. I don't hold anybody for contempt. That was the first time I held - anybody, a lawyer for contempt for filing a dilatory motion. Kahit saan kayo magpunta, (Wherever you go) when you were in the course of a trial, the defense counsels suddenly rise up, altogether, and say they are walking out of the court. They are boycotting the trial. We will not return until you inhibit yourself. E, kahit saan sa mundo kayo magpunta, (So, even you go anywhere in the world) that is contempt of Court, my friends. Anywhere in the world, kahit seguro sa Russia magpunta kayo or sa Vietnam, (even perhaps if you go to Rusia or Vietnam,) that is contempt of court. Biro mo, magtayuan lahat sa trial na ganyan tapos biglang magtatayuan - (Imagine, they all stood up during the trial like that -) we are walking out from this trial. We are boycotting, we will not return until you inhibit yourself. Abay, samantalang sinasabi ng batas, (But then, it states in the law) when the judge says he will not inhibit himself, kailangan tuloy yong trial. (the trial must continue.) He doesn't say na (already) stop. E, papano yon? (So, how is that?) Anywhere In the world you go that is contempt of court. That was the first time I held a lawyer in contempt, e, papano, (So, how is that?) that has to be done. Alright, continue,

(NOTE: For the benefit of our foreign readers, blue wordings is our translation from Tagalog (Philippine language) to English ...the webmaster). 

PAGE 6
PROS. MIRO:
          Your Honor, please, we would like to announce to this Honorable Court that we will be presenting 2 witnesses in today's session and their testimonies will be part of our evidence  in chief and as part of our support of our Motion for the discharge of Davidson Rusia and as our opposition to their Motion for Bail. So that, Your Honor, we will be calling upon Mr. Benjamin Colina as our seventh witness.

COURT: 
          By the way, I just want to give you a copy - do you have a copy of this Motion for Early Resolution filed by the accused in that Court of Appeals case? Wala kayo nito? (You don't have this?) 

PROS. GALANIDA: 
          No.

ATTY. HERMOSISIMA: 
          May I see, Your Honor, please? By the way, Your honor, for the record, we have already completed our opposition to the Motion for leave to File Amended petition which was filed by Atty. Armovit, Your Honor.

COURT: 
          But you have a copy of this. Ipa-xerox muna yan (Have that xerox first) because I received that last Friday.

PROS. GALANIDA: 
          Well, we don't have a copy of this yet, Your Honor. 

COURT: 
          Yon ang gawain ni Armovit. (That's Armovit's style) He doesn't give a copy to the prosecution.

ATTY. HERMOSISIMA: 
          This is an advance copy for you, Your Honor. 

COURT : 
          For Armovit, the prosecution does not exist. Ako lang -  ako lang ang kaaway niya. (I am - I am the only one he is fighting.) I'm the only one he is furnishing a copy of this.  

PROS. MIRO: 
          But we are also the proper parties. We should be furnished copies. 

COURT: 
          No, you are not parties according to Armovit. 

(NOTE: For the benefit of our foreign readers, blue wordings is our translation from Tagalog (Philippine language) to English ...the webmaster). 

PAGE 7
PROS. GALANIDA: 
          Only the Solicitor General and this Honorable Court have been furnished. So, may we have this xerox copied?

COURT:
          Yes. According to Armovit you are non-parties. No - according to the lawyers they are lawyers still here because they asked for certiorari. They withdrew on August 27. They have filed a formal motion to withdraw, filed by their clients. E,di na sila abogado rito (So, they are no longer lawyers here) as of August 27. But on September 3, they filed a motion to inhibit me. What right do they have to file a motion to inhibit or petition to inhibit me? E, hindi na sila abogado dito (So, they are no longer lawyers here) as of August 27. They filed with the written constant of their clients to withdraw as of August 27. So, on September 3, hindi na sila abogado rito (they were no longer lawyers here) but they still filed a motion to inhibit me from hearing this case. Hindi na sila abogado ng mga accused. (They were no longer lawyers for the accused.) E, magtatawa ka na lang, ha? (So, you will just have to laugh it out.)

PROS. MIRO: 
          So, we could still understand they're fighting for their own cause of action. So how could they . . .

COURT: 
          I don't know what kind of lawyers they are.

ATTY. HERMOSISIMA: 
          That point, Your Honor, is extensively discussed in our opposition, That is just an advance copy, your Honor. We will be rushing up a copy to the Court of Appeals this afternoon via DHL and the rest will be sent by post office.

COURT: 
          Eto namang (This) motion for intervention, accused doon sa (there in the) Habeas Corpus case, they are asking the Court of Appeals to inhibit me. But inhibition is not an issue in that Habeas corpus. Habeas Corpus - the issue is only the legality of the detention of the lawyers.

PROS. MIRO: 
          That is another cause of action.

COURT: 
          Why are they asking the Court of Appeals to inhibit me? Hindi naman issue yon doon sa (That is not anyway an issue in the) habeas Corpus.

PROS. MIRO: 
          Maybe they are still thinking that they are still counsels for the accused when they have already withdrawn as counsels. Why should they ask for the inhibition of the judge when ...

(NOTE: For the benefit of our foreign readers, blue wordings is our translation from Tagalog (Philippine language) to English ...the webmaster). 

PAGE 8
COURT: 
          You nga - sa (That's it, in the) Habeas Corpus they filed a motion for intervention sa (in the) Habeas Corpus. But the issue in Habeas Corpus is the legality of their detention.

PROS. MIRO: 
          Yes.

COURT: 
         Hindi naman (It's not anyway) inhibition. It's not an issue.

PROS. MIRO: 
          That has nothing to do with inhibition.

COURT: 
          And why are they asking for inhibition? Ano pa ang gusto nila? (What else do they want?) 

PROS. GALANIDA: 
          Early resolution. 

ATTY. HERMOSISIMA: 
          Precisely, Your Honor. There is misjoinder of causes of action. A different cause of action.

COURT:
          And yet, the certiorari was flied by Armovit on September 3. Yong motion nila (That motion of theirs) to intervene was filed on August 27. So, even before Armovit asked for ay inhibition, they asked for my inhibition in the Habeas Corpus case. Ako na lang magtatawa, a papano? (I will just be the one to laugh, so, how?) Sila (For them) it's - alright, they are not lawyers, di ba? (Isn't it?) Mapapagpasensiyahan mo na yon. (We will just give them all our patience.) E, dapat si (It should be) Armovit at saka yong lawyers - (and the other lawyers -)they filed a petition on September 3 when they were no  longer lawyers here. 

PROS. HERMOSISIMA: 
          That's why, they don't have any personality.

COURT :
          They asked for my inhibition. Anong estado nila - (What's their status -)  how could they asked for - can anybody, any of these participants ask for my inhibition. Kahit hindi na sila abogado dito (Even though they are no longer lawyers here) they will file a petition with the Court of Appeals.

PROS. MIRO: 
          I think this Honorable Court should have ruled this inhibition and go on with the hearing.

(NOTE: For the benefit of our foreign readers, blue wordings is our translation from Tagalog (Philippine language) to English ...the webmaster). 

PAGE 9
COURT:
          Sinasabi na lang yan (They only say that) because they think it strikes my ano (what) my sense - my common sense. Common sense lang. (Only.) Alright, present your evidence. Next witness.

PROS. MIRO: 
          We will_. present our next witness, Your Honor. He will be presented by Prosecutor Ramon Duyongco
for his direct testimony.

PROS. DUYONGCO: 
          May I state the purpose, Your Honor?

COURT: 
          Yes, please.

PROS. DUYONGCO: 
          The purpose, Your Honor, offers to prove by the testimony of this witness, Mr. Benjamin Colina, that he is a rent a car driver for about 10 years; that he is a member of the drivers association known as Park Place Uptown Drivers Association; that sometime in the evening of July 16, 1997 about 11:30 o'clock in the evening, he was at the Park Place Hotel waiting for a passenger and about that time, accused Davidson Valiente Rusia and accused Rowen Adlawan alias Wesley, approached him and tried to rent his Nissan Vanette for 2 days at P2,500.00 a day provided that they will be the one to drive it but he refused; the testimony of this witness, Your Honor, is offered to substantially corroborate the testimony of eyewitness, accused Davidson Valiente Rusia to the effect that after the 2 sisters, Jacqueline and Marijoy were kidnapped by Rowen Adlawan and accused Josman Aznar along Archbishop Reyes, Cebu City, the car driven by Aznar where the 2 sisters were boarded and on  board the same car, in front seat was Davidson Valiente Rusia and accused Rowen Adlawan, they proceeded to Fuente Osmeña, Cebu City, to try to rent a self-drive van; and he will testify to some relevant and material matters, preliminary matters in amplification of the above-mentioned purposes, Your Honor.

COURT: 
          /to Court Interpreter 
          Swear the witness.

COURT INTERPRETER TO WITNESS: 
          Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, in this hearing?

(NOTE: For the benefit of our foreign readers, blue wordings is our translation from Tagalog (Philippine language) to English ...the webmaster). 

PAGE 10
WITNESS: 
          I do.

COURT INTERPRETER TO WITNESS:
          Please state your name, age, civil status, and other personal circumstances.

WITNESS:

        Benjamin Molina, 49 years old, married, Rent-a-car driver, and a resident of Wireless, Mandaue City.

ATTY. DE JESUS: 
          We move for the exclusion of other witnesses, Your Honor.

PROS. DUYONGCO: 
          We have no other witness here.

COURT: 
          The other one who is supposed to testify.

PROS. GALANIDA:
          The other one is already outside.

PROS. DUYONGCO: 
          He is outside, Your Honor.

COURT: 
          He is there in the Clerk's office. Alright, proceed.

ATTY. DE JESUS: 
          Where was he?

COURT: 
          Just tell him to wait in the Clerk's office.

PROS. DUYONGCO: 
          With the kind permission of the Honorable court.

COURT: 
          Proceed.

                                                                                   DIRECT-EXAMINATION BY
                                                  PROS. RAMON JOSE DUYONGCO