Showing posts with label DOJ. Show all posts
Showing posts with label DOJ. Show all posts
Friday, February 24, 2017
LOOK: Police take De Lima mug shot
MANILA - Police on Friday took Senator Leila de Lima's activity shot at Camp Crame following her arrest at the Senate.
De Lima was arrested Friday after a judge found merit in criminal charges filed by the Department of Justice last week. She will be detained at the Custodial Center at the national police headquarters, Camp Crame.
EARLIER: PNP SOCO personnel preparing Sen. De Lima for her mugshots. @ABSCBNNews pic.twitter.com/nte5e6ALrY
— Maan Macapagal (@maan_macapagal) February 24, 2017
The embattled senator has vowed to face all charges against her which she has branded as "political persecution."
"The truth will come out and I will achieve justice. I am innocent," she told reporters shortly before law enforcers escorted her away from her office.
Apart from De Lima, her former driver and bodyguard Ronnie Dayan was also arrested.
De Lima, a human rights lawyer before joining government, said the charges are a vendetta against her after she last year led a Senate probe into alleged extrajudicial killings during Duterte's anti-drugs crackdown.
-- reports from Maan Macapagal, ABS-CBN News, Reuters
source: news.abs-cbn.com
Thursday, February 23, 2017
De Lima ordered arrested by RTC
LOOK: RTC order vs. Sen. Leila de Lima saying there is probable cause and a warrant should be issued pic.twitter.com/J0HLGGHO7j
— Adrian Ayalin (@adrianayalin) February 23, 2017
MANILA - A Regional Trial Court (RTC) has ordered the arrest of Senator Leila de Lima for her alleged involvement in the New Bilibid Prison (NBP) illegal drug trade.
Presiding Judge Juanita Guerrero of Muntinlupa Regional Trial Court (RTC) Branch 204 issued the arrest warrant.
De Lima's three criminal cases were raffled off to Muntinlupa RTC branches 204 (Judge Juanita Guerrero), 205 (Judge Amelia Fabros-Corpuz) and 206 (Judge Patria Manalastas-de Leon) last Monday.
Justice Secretary Vitaliano Aguirre told ANC Thursday he was expecting the issuance of the arrest warrant.
"I am expecting it because we have filed a strong case against the Secretary-Senator and in her defense, she did not file a counter affidavit," Aguirre said.
"The warrant of arrest is inevitable," he added.
Aguirre said "any of the police agencies—the Philippine National Police, the Criminal Investigation and Detection Group, or even the National Bureau of Investigation could arrest the senator."
"But I prefer that the service of the warrant of arrest be done not by the NBI," said Aguirre.
The order for De Lima's arrest is in connection with the criminal case pending before Muntinlupa RTC branch 204 filed by the Department of Justice.
Last week, the Department of Justice (DOJ) indicted De Lima for violating sections 5 and 22 of Republic Act 9165 or the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act pertaining to the sale, administration, dispensation, distribution and transportation of dangerous drugs.
Several complaints filed by Volunteers Against Crime and Corruption (VACC), former NBI deputy directors Reynaldo Esmeralda and Ruel Lasala, and Bilibid inmate Jaybee Sebastian alleged that De Lima directed high-profile Bilibid inmates to distribute huge volumes of shabu to help fund her 2016 senatorial bid.
Also indicted along with De Lima were her former driver-bodyguard and estranged lover Ronnie Dayan, former Bureau of Corrections (BuCor) Director-General Franklin Jesus Bucayu, former BuCor OIC and NBI deputy director Rafael Ragos, Wilfredo Elli, Jaybee Sebastian, Joenel Sanchez and Jose Adrian Dera.
Ragos, in his affidavit and testimony before the House of Representatives, claimed he delivered P10 million to De Lima and Ronnie Dayan in separate occasions.
He said he delivered a bag containing P5 million to Dayan in De Lima's residence in South Bay Village last November 2012. He claimed he saw Dayan hand the bag over to De Lima.
He also claimed delivering a plastic bag full of money from inmate Peter Co to Dayan inside De Lima's house in ParaƱaque in December 2012.
He also claimed giving P1.6 million to Dayan and another P800,000 for De Lima's expenses after Dayan asked for funds allegedly for De Lima's senatorial bid.
He also claimed delivering P1.7 million to Dayan at De Lima's house on four occasions in January 2013.
De Lima last Monday said she would challenge the jurisdiction of the RTC where the drug cases were filed.
She said her lawyers will be filing motions questioning the jurisdiction of the Muntinlupa RTC over her drug cases.
“Ang principal issue na nire-raise dito ay jurisdictional. Dapat dinerecho iyan sa Ombudsman, hindi sa RTC.”
(The principal issue to be raised here is the jurisdiction of the court. The cases should have been filed before the Ombudsman, not the RTC.)
But Justice Secretary Vitaliano Aguirre II said recently that the local court is the proper venue to hear the charges.
"On the matter of jurisdiction, it is the RTC that has original and exclusive jurisdiction over the three cases, regardless of the high position of the respondent," Aguirre said. -- report from Ina Reformina, ABS-CBN News
source: news.abs-cbn.com
Wednesday, July 22, 2015
Chris Brown barred from leaving PH
MANILA -Singer Chris Brown was barred by airport authorities from leaving the country on Wednesday, a day after his concert at the Mall of Asia Arena.
Brown's plane, a Gulfstream G450 aircraft, was supposed to depart at 1 p.m. Wednesday from a private hangar near Terminal 4 of the Ninoy Aquino International Airport.
However, the singer was advised by immigration and the Civil Aviation Authority of the Philippines to secure clearance from the Department of Justice (DOJ).
Justice Secretary Leila de Lima confirmed that the DOJ had issued a lookout bulletin against Brown in relation to a complaint over the singer's canceled show at the Philippine Arena in Bulacan last New Year's Eve.
De Lima did not mention who specifically filed the complaint.
As of writing, Brown was still seeking clearance from authorities, with the singer hoping to leave the country within the day. -- with reports from Raoul Esperas and Dexter Ganibe, DZMM
source: www.abs-cbnnews.com
Friday, May 1, 2015
DOJ warns public on online shopping fraud
MANILA, Philippines - The Department of Justice (DOJ) warned the public against online fraud amid the increasing use of online transactions.
In a 15-page advisory dated April 29, 2015, the department said "risks, trade malpractices, and operational challenges exist in online shopping in view of the anonymity being offered by the internet."
"This advisory is issued to inform online shoppers of the risks involved in dealing online, as well as to guide online shopping providers in providing a safe and secure online shopping environment, in the promotion of consumer welfare."
"It is the policy of the state to protect the interests of the consumer, promote his general welfare, and guard against against deceptive or unfair business practices, as it recognizes the vital role of information and communications technology, and the importance of an online environment conducive to social and economic development," the advisory read.
The DOJ said the public must be able to protect themselves against the following when shopping online:
- frauds and scams;
- misleading or deceptive product advertisements;
- difficulty in returns and replacements;
- unexpected Customs dues, transaction costs, and surcharges;
- privacy breaches and abuse of user information; and
- chaotic delivery procedures.
Consumers must be cautious of the following "red flags" of online shopping fraud, the DOJ said. These include the following:
- products are advertised at very low prices compared to other websites;
- online sellers with poor ratings and/or feedback;
- online sellers who ask you to pay by money transfer service or direct to their bank account rather than through the site's preferred payment method;
- websites with no contact details such as a physical address or telephone number; and
- websites with limited or not information about privacy and their terms and conditions of use.
The DOJ enumerated the following "deceptive sales practices" employed by unscrupulous individuals or entities online:
- a consumer product or service has the sponsorship, approval, performance, characteristics, ingredients, accessories, uses, or benefits it does not have;
- a consumer product or service is of a particular standard, quality, grade, style, or model when in fact it is not;
- a consumer product is a new, original or unused, when in fact, it is in a deteriorated, altered, reconditioned, reclaimed or second-hand state;
- a consumer product or service can be supplied in a quantity greater than the supplier intends;
- a specific advantage of a consumer product exists when in fact it does not; and
- the sales act or practice involves or does not involve a warranty, a disclaimer of warranties, particular warranty terms or other rights, remedies or obligations if the indication is false.
To prevent fraud online, the following must be properly identified and provided for by online sellers and traders:
-Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) and/or Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) registration;
-name of the owner/proprietor of the retail establishment in case of single proprietorship, and names of directors and other officers in case of a corporation;
-principal address of the retailer, seller, distributor, supplier or manufacturer, and, when applicable, of offices of agents in the Philippines;
-website, email address or other electronic means of contact, telephone and fax numbers; any relevant local or foreign government registration/license numbers such as but not limited to the local government unit's permit to operate, taxpayers identification number (TIN), when applicable;
-contact details about any business association or organization membership, when applicable; and representative agent(s) in the Philippines for purposes of summons.
The DOJ advised the public to protect their computers by installing security software (anti-virus) and update their anti-spyware.
The public is also advised to exercise caution when using public computers for online purchases. It will also greatly help to do research on the background of suppliers and sellers, including customer feedback on these suppliers.
As for passwords, it is recommended that strong passwords are used in setting up online accounts. Online purchases must also be recorded, and bank, credit casrd, and store card statements constantly checked for unusual transactions.
The DOJ identified the following laws and issuances applicable in the case of online fraud: the Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012 (Republic Act No. 10175), Consumer Act of the Philippines (RA No. 7394), Electronic Commerce Act of 2000 (RA No. 8792), and Administrative Order No. 01, Series of 2008, of the DTI, Department of Health (DOH), of Department of Agriculture (DA).
source: www.abs-cbnnews.com
Sunday, November 27, 2011
Report: 130+ domain names taken down in piracy crackdown
United States authorities took down some 130 domain names as they continued to crack down on counterfeit and piracy-related websites.
The latest crackdown took place just a few days before “Cyber Monday,” according to an article on Torrentfreak.com.
It said the US Department of Justice (DOJ) and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) have resumed “Operation In Our Sites,” the domain name seizing initiative designed to crack down on online piracy and counterfeiting.
According to Torrentfreak.com, the new round comes a year after 82 domains, including Torrent-Finder, were taken over in 2010.
Cyber Monday refers to the Monday following Thanksgiving where consumers are persuaded to shop online.
TorrentFreak posted on its site a list of some 130 domains taken over by the US government in the last 24 hours.
"The authorities have yet to comment via official channels, but we assume that they will use the same justification for the domain seizures as they did last year," it said.
TorrentFreak also noted that this year's action appears to be limited to sites that directly charge visitors for their services.
It said most of the domains are linked to the selling of counterfeit clothing (such as 17nflshop.com), and at least one (autocd.com) sold pirated auto software.
"Last year several sites were taken down because they allowed their users to access free music and movie downloads, and these were followed by several streaming services a few months later. No similar sites have been reported in the current round," TorrentFreak said.
On the other hand, many torrent site owners began to work on backup plans in case they too become a target, after the November 2010 seizures were covered widely in the press.
A few dozen sites have switched over to alternative domains, and other torrent site operators have purchased additional backup domains just in case.
A separate article on CNET noted most of the domain names suggest sites that traffic in counterfeit clothing items: cheap-louisvuitton-replica.com, nfljerseyswhole.com, uggbootsclearanceoutletstores.com, and so on.
"The list is also sprinkled with names that suggest digital piracy: dvdsetonline.com, for example," it added. —MRT/LBG, GMA News
source:gmanetwork.com
The latest crackdown took place just a few days before “Cyber Monday,” according to an article on Torrentfreak.com.
It said the US Department of Justice (DOJ) and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) have resumed “Operation In Our Sites,” the domain name seizing initiative designed to crack down on online piracy and counterfeiting.
According to Torrentfreak.com, the new round comes a year after 82 domains, including Torrent-Finder, were taken over in 2010.
Cyber Monday refers to the Monday following Thanksgiving where consumers are persuaded to shop online.
TorrentFreak posted on its site a list of some 130 domains taken over by the US government in the last 24 hours.
"The authorities have yet to comment via official channels, but we assume that they will use the same justification for the domain seizures as they did last year," it said.
TorrentFreak also noted that this year's action appears to be limited to sites that directly charge visitors for their services.
It said most of the domains are linked to the selling of counterfeit clothing (such as 17nflshop.com), and at least one (autocd.com) sold pirated auto software.
"Last year several sites were taken down because they allowed their users to access free music and movie downloads, and these were followed by several streaming services a few months later. No similar sites have been reported in the current round," TorrentFreak said.
On the other hand, many torrent site owners began to work on backup plans in case they too become a target, after the November 2010 seizures were covered widely in the press.
A few dozen sites have switched over to alternative domains, and other torrent site operators have purchased additional backup domains just in case.
A separate article on CNET noted most of the domain names suggest sites that traffic in counterfeit clothing items: cheap-louisvuitton-replica.com, nfljerseyswhole.com, uggbootsclearanceoutletstores.com, and so on.
"The list is also sprinkled with names that suggest digital piracy: dvdsetonline.com, for example," it added. —MRT/LBG, GMA News
source:gmanetwork.com
Tuesday, November 22, 2011
Corona argument on Arroyo watch list order centers on right to life
Unlike his fellow magistrates who focused on a person's right to travel, Chief Justice Renato Corona instead centered on the right to life during Tuesday's oral arguments for and against the watch list orders issued against the Arroyo couple.
During the latter part of the arguments, Corona posed a question to Anacleto Diaz, counsel for former President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, on what does he think is the right violated by the Department of Justice's (DOJ) Department Circular 41, which paved the way for the watch list order against the Arroyo couple.
Diaz took the stand to insist the watch list order violated Mrs. Arroyo’s right to travel, which they described as "absolute" and was enshrined under Section 6 Article III of the 1987 Philippine Constitution.
In response to Corona's question, Diaz said: "I place a person's right to life paramount to all other rights."
Corona uttered back: "Yes, right to life. That's a right guaranteed not only by the Philippine Constitution but also guaranteed by the United Nations Human Rights Commission."
Added Corona, who was one of the 12 current magistrates appointed by Mrs. Arroyo while she was president: "[A person has a right] to live life as life should be lived."
No basis
Diaz claimed there was no basis for the DOJ to issue DC 41, which he said was "violative of a person's right to travel. "Public officials should not be allowed to strike when and where they please. They should not be allowed to use unchanneled governmental power," he said.
Under the Constitution, a person's right to travel should not be impaired except in the interest of national security, public, health, and public safety.
Diaz said there is no law authorizing the DOJ to issue a watch list or a hold departure order to anyone being subjected to a preliminary investigation by the department.
"With the absence of any law, there is no basis for DC No. 41. It is clear that DC is clearly violative of a person’s right to travel," he said.
For his part, Justice Antonio Carpio likened the issuance of a watch list order to the issuance of a subpoena. "A prosecutor can issue a subpoena during preliminary investigation compelling respondents to appear," he said.
"The prosecution can also inform the immigration service not to allow the departure of respondents until he or she complies with the subpoena," Carpio added.
Satisfied
Justice Diosdado Peralta openly said he was "satisfied" with Diaz's explanation. Contradicting Carpio, Peralta said: "A subpoena is not equal to a hold departure order."
But unlike Corona and Peralta, Associate Justice Ma. Lourdes Sereno seemed unconvinced with Diaz's arguments.
Corona and Peralta were among eight justices who earlier voted in favor of a temporary restraining order against the watch list orders. The TRO rendered the Arroyo couple free to travel abroad.
Sereno and Caprio, on the other hand, were among the five justices who dissented.
"Why are we going to make an exceptional case and not make a presumption that the Arroyo administration did not believe that?" Sereno asked Diaz.
Mistake
The associate justice noted that under the Arroyo administration, more than 6,000 people became subject of a watch list or a hold departure order by virtue of Department Circulars 17 and 18.
In response, Diaz admitted it was a "mistake" when government officials under the Arroyo administration enforced the plethora of watch list and hold departure orders issued at the time.
The watch list order issued against the Arroyo couple was based on DC 41, which superseded the previous DC 17 and 18. DC 41 was issued in May 2010, still during Mrs. Arroyo's tenure as chief executive.
The subject of Tuesday's oral arguments was the couple's separate petitions questioning the legality of the watch list order and DC 14, saying they were violative of their right to travel. The Arroyo camp also said they should not be placed on the watch list since no criminal cases have been filed against them at the time.
An electoral sabotage case, however, has since been filed against Mrs. Arroyo and two other government officials, former Maguindanao Gov. Andal Ampatuan Sr. and former Maguindanao provincial election supervisor Lintang Bedol.
Mr. Arroyo, meanwhile, was spared from the charges and was taken off the watch list Tuesday, along with seven other individuals, including former Justice Secretary Alberto Agra, who was Mrs. Arroyo's election lawyer in previous elections. - KBK, GMA News
source: gmanews.tv
During the latter part of the arguments, Corona posed a question to Anacleto Diaz, counsel for former President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, on what does he think is the right violated by the Department of Justice's (DOJ) Department Circular 41, which paved the way for the watch list order against the Arroyo couple.
Diaz took the stand to insist the watch list order violated Mrs. Arroyo’s right to travel, which they described as "absolute" and was enshrined under Section 6 Article III of the 1987 Philippine Constitution.
In response to Corona's question, Diaz said: "I place a person's right to life paramount to all other rights."
Corona uttered back: "Yes, right to life. That's a right guaranteed not only by the Philippine Constitution but also guaranteed by the United Nations Human Rights Commission."
Added Corona, who was one of the 12 current magistrates appointed by Mrs. Arroyo while she was president: "[A person has a right] to live life as life should be lived."
No basis
Diaz claimed there was no basis for the DOJ to issue DC 41, which he said was "violative of a person's right to travel. "Public officials should not be allowed to strike when and where they please. They should not be allowed to use unchanneled governmental power," he said.
Under the Constitution, a person's right to travel should not be impaired except in the interest of national security, public, health, and public safety.
Diaz said there is no law authorizing the DOJ to issue a watch list or a hold departure order to anyone being subjected to a preliminary investigation by the department.
"With the absence of any law, there is no basis for DC No. 41. It is clear that DC is clearly violative of a person’s right to travel," he said.
For his part, Justice Antonio Carpio likened the issuance of a watch list order to the issuance of a subpoena. "A prosecutor can issue a subpoena during preliminary investigation compelling respondents to appear," he said.
"The prosecution can also inform the immigration service not to allow the departure of respondents until he or she complies with the subpoena," Carpio added.
Satisfied
Justice Diosdado Peralta openly said he was "satisfied" with Diaz's explanation. Contradicting Carpio, Peralta said: "A subpoena is not equal to a hold departure order."
But unlike Corona and Peralta, Associate Justice Ma. Lourdes Sereno seemed unconvinced with Diaz's arguments.
Corona and Peralta were among eight justices who earlier voted in favor of a temporary restraining order against the watch list orders. The TRO rendered the Arroyo couple free to travel abroad.
Sereno and Caprio, on the other hand, were among the five justices who dissented.
"Why are we going to make an exceptional case and not make a presumption that the Arroyo administration did not believe that?" Sereno asked Diaz.
Mistake
The associate justice noted that under the Arroyo administration, more than 6,000 people became subject of a watch list or a hold departure order by virtue of Department Circulars 17 and 18.
In response, Diaz admitted it was a "mistake" when government officials under the Arroyo administration enforced the plethora of watch list and hold departure orders issued at the time.
The watch list order issued against the Arroyo couple was based on DC 41, which superseded the previous DC 17 and 18. DC 41 was issued in May 2010, still during Mrs. Arroyo's tenure as chief executive.
The subject of Tuesday's oral arguments was the couple's separate petitions questioning the legality of the watch list order and DC 14, saying they were violative of their right to travel. The Arroyo camp also said they should not be placed on the watch list since no criminal cases have been filed against them at the time.
An electoral sabotage case, however, has since been filed against Mrs. Arroyo and two other government officials, former Maguindanao Gov. Andal Ampatuan Sr. and former Maguindanao provincial election supervisor Lintang Bedol.
Mr. Arroyo, meanwhile, was spared from the charges and was taken off the watch list Tuesday, along with seven other individuals, including former Justice Secretary Alberto Agra, who was Mrs. Arroyo's election lawyer in previous elections. - KBK, GMA News
source: gmanews.tv
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)


