MANILA, Philippines — A conviction is necessary before an individual can claim compensation for unjust imprisonment, according to the Supreme Court in a decision promulgated on Feb. 27 but released last Friday.
Convened as a whole, the SC affirmed the decision of the Department of Justice Board of Claims to deny the compensation claim of Main Mohammad, who was released after his acquittal for two counts of murder and piracy.
Court records show Mohammad was arrested, detained and charged for the offenses in 2017. The charges, however, were dismissed in 2019 after the prosecution failed to provide a witness who could identify Mohammad as the same person charged in the information.
Mohammad then filed a compensation claim before the Board of Claims in Zamboanga City, invoking Section 3 (a) of Republic Act 7309 or an Act Creating a Board of Claims Under the Department of Justice for Victims of Unjust Imprisonment or Detention and Victims of Violent Crimes and for Other Purposes.
The law grants compensation to individuals “unjustly accused, convicted and imprisoned but subsequently released by virtue of a judgment of acquittal.”
In filing the compensation claim, Mohammad argued that the conjunction “and” in Section 3(a) should be construed as “or” to avoid injustice to persons unjustly prosecuted and subsequently acquitted by the court.
The Board of Claims denied his claim, noting that “prior conviction in the trial court and subsequent release from detention due to acquittal on appeal” are required for compensation claims to be granted.
The Justice Secretary affirmed the decision of the Board of Claims, prompting Mohammad to bring his petition before the high court.
In denying the petition, the SC ruled that to be granted the compensation under Section 3(a) of RA 7309, an individual must have been “unjustly accused, convicted of the offense, imprisoned due to his conviction and subsequently acquitted by a judgment.”
The SC noted that “all the elements are cumulative rather than alternative since the conjunctive word ‘and’ indicates the union of words or phrases.”
In Mohammad’s case, the SC said there was no conviction since the charges were dismissed.
“A determination of the existence of an unjust accusation, conviction and imprisonment may only be done when the accused is convicted but is later on acquitted on appeal,” the decision read.
Be the first to comment