TAYUG – For not issuing warrants of arrest and eventually dismissing the cases filed against two accused  in the brutal slaying of Pasay City Judge  Estrellita Paas in September last year, Regional Trial Court Judge Ulysses Raciles Butuyan of Branch 51 here is now facing an administrative case before the Supreme Court.

The case was filed by Renerio Paas, widower of the slain judge, who accused Butuyan on   three counts for violation of the anti-graft and corrupt practices act, two counts of gross ignorance of the law, four counts of violation of judicial conduct, violations of Articles 206 and 207 of the Revised Penal Code and gross incompetence.

This stemmed from the cases of murder and theft filed against Elmer Cabiles and Jornald Vargas whom Butuyan refused to issue their warrants of arrest unless he first examined the complainant and witnesses, and later on eventually dismissing the cases against them.

Judge Paas was brutally killed inside the bathroom of the master’s bedroom of their house in Poblacion, Natividad, with both her hands tied behind her back last September 23, 2005. Her body was discovered by her husband at around 5:00 p.m. that day.

Cabiles and Vargas were tagged as suspects in the grizzly slaying. Cabilles voluntarily surrendered and allegedly confessed his participation in the killing, and later identified Vargas, alias “Boyet” as his companion.

      Separate information for murder and theft were filed against Cabiles and Vargas before the court after a preliminary investigation conducted by lst Asst. Provincial Prosecutor Noel Bince.             

The complainant, Renerio Paas, said that instead of issuing a warrant of arrest for both accused, Judge Butuyan issued an order dated 14 November 2005, stating that he would conduct an examination on the complainant and the witnesses on Nov. 21, 2005 to determine probable cause which is allowed by law.

Paas observed that on 21 November 2005, during the scheduled date of hearing allegedly to determine probable cause, Butuyan insisted that the evidence of the prosecution was weak and based on hearsay.

On November 20, 2005, and while the oral motion for his inhibition was still pending resolution, Judge Butuyan issued a resolution dismissing both cases of murder and theft against the two accused.

In his petition to the Supreme Court, Paas – represented by his lawyer son Ronald – charged that Judge Butuyan has no right to dismiss the case of murder and theft on the ground that “he cannot muster the confidence to issue a warrant for the arrest of the accused”.

He contends that the determination of probable cause for the issuance of warrant of arrest and determination of probable cause on whether an accused should stand trial are entirely two different matters.

Share your Comments or Reactions

comments

Powered by Facebook Comments