Webb’s lawyers led by Demetrio Custodio Jr. cited technical grounds in asking the High Court not only to deny but also strike off the record the motion for reconsideration filed by Vizconde last Dec. 29.

They argued that Vizconde’s lawyers led by Public Attorney’s Office (PAO) chief Persida Rueda-Acosta do not have legal standing on the criminal case.

“The PAO has no authority to argue on behalf of the People of the Philippines. It has no legal authority to file this motion for reconsideration. In fact, the PAO’s act of filing a motion for reconsideration in a criminal case, which it is prohibited from handling, is an unlawful act which should neither be condoned nor given any legal effect,” Webb said in his 13-page omnibus motion.

His lawyers stressed that PAO, an attached agency of the Department of Justice (DOJ) that provides indigent litigants free legal assistance, does not have the authority to prosecute a criminal case.

They said only the Office of the Solicitor General has the power to appeal the ruling and intervene in the case.

“Honorable Court has consistently held that actions on behalf of the people that are not initiated by the Solicitor General will be summarily dismissed,” they said.

Apart from outright dismissal of the appeal, Webb’s camp also asked the court to issue a show cause order against Acosta and other PAO lawyers who signed the MR. They believe the PAO lawyers should explain why they should not be cited in contempt for filing the pleading “despite knowing that they had no authority to do so.”

“Filing such a motion would be to interfere in the prosecution of a criminal case, and the PAO should know better than to do that,” Webb said.

He said Article II Section 7 of PAO Memorandum Circular No. 18, Series of 2002 – a circular issued by Acosta herself – expressly prohibits PAO lawyers from handling the prosecution of criminal cases in court.

He said this prohibition is also provided under Article II Section 8 of the PAO Operations Manual dated Aug. 27, 2010.

“What make matters worse is that Attorney Acosta was one of the private lawyers who acted as counsel of Private Complainant Lauro Vizconde during the trial of the case when she was not yet the PAO chief. By assigning the case to twelve (12) PAO lawyers, including herself, it is lamentable that she is now using government resources and the PAO to handle a private case which she knows all too well the PAO is prohibited from handling,” Webb alleged.

It was learned, however, that Acosta did not sign the pleading filed by Vizconde in the SC last Dec. 29. Those who signed it were Macapangcat Mama, Silvestre Mosing, Amelia Garchitorena, Howard Areza, Revelyn Ramos-Dacpano, Meizelle Antonio, Demiteer Huerta, Vanessa Joy Ong Pe, Nazario Bancoro Jr., Madonna Ebreo and Ana Lisa Soriano.

Asked for reaction, Acosta said lawyers of Webb apparently need to brush up on their legal knowledge.

“They should read RA 9406 (the new law reorganizing PAO). Section 3 gives PAO the power to be principal law office of the government. Yes, PAO lawyers can’t act as public prosecutor in trial in courts but they can act on appeals level such as this one (Vizconde case),” she explained.

The PAO chief stressed that their lawyers assisted Vizconde only after the OSG failed to file an appeal of the SC ruling. And under the rules, private parties can appeal rulings of the High Court “if there are valid grounds - especially for cases of national interest.”

Acosta also lamented why Webb did not address the issue on double jeopardy, which was the main contention cited in the MR.

She branded Webb’s motion as “harassment of lawyers who are helping Vizconde.”

Vizconde alleged in his 84-page appeal that the High Court “decided the case in a manner that resulted in the miscarriage of justice” and “committed grave abuse in its treatment of the evidence and the prosecution witnesses.”

“The judgment is a tainted judgment and is an exception to the double jeopardy rule. The highly questionable and suspicious evidence for the defense taints with serious doubts the validity of the decision acquitting the accused,” his lawyers argued.

In seeking exemption to the rule, they cited the High Court’s ruling on the double murder case of the late Sen. Benigno Aquino Jr. and his alleged assassin Rolando Galman.

Vizconde reminded the High Court of its decision that granted the second MR filed by the wife of Galman and several taxpayers, which later led to the conviction of the previously acquitted suspects in the double murder case.

He also insisted that accepting the appeal would allow the Court to “correct its errors” in its ruling last Dec. 14.

Meanwhile, a group led by former vice president Teofisto Guingona has organized the “People’s Run for Vizcondes

and Other Victims of Injustice” set on Monday in front of the SC building in Manila starting at 6:30 a.m.

The Justice for All Movement invited participants to join the event and wear white and red.

Edu Punay, Philippine Star