“Sinturon ni Hudas” (“Judas’s Belt”)
DOJ state prosecutor Emmanuel Velasco clarified yesterday noon in an interview on cable TV that the NBI complaint for rebellion against 49 respondents, arising from the incidents of February 24, 2006, is not based on the bombs exploded, mostly on private property, in the months running up to February. (He must have squirmed at the thought of having to mark in evidence bombs made from “plapla”, “super lolo” and “sinturon ni hudas”). Rather, the armed public uprising in the complaint refers to that being waged by the CPP-NPA in which the respondents have allegedly taken part, because according to him the complaint is for conspiracy.
I thought that as chair of the investigating panel, he hasn’t made up his mind?
In any case, he is bound by his public declaration. If the complaint is based on the “protracted people’s war” or armed struggle of the CPP-NPA, then the 49 cannot be charged as leaders of a rebellion. That provision applies only when the leaders of the rebellion are not known. Here, the leaders and spokespersons of the CPP-NPA are widely known. They give out interviews, they have their own publications and websites. The 49 therefore cannot be charged as leaders, only as alleged “participants”. Therefore bailable.