Yanson feud back on stage

focus

By Modesto P. Sa-onoy

The focus of media on the pandemic has shifted to the developments on the Yanson family feud. One party came out with an alleged warrant of arrest against the four Yanson siblings – Roy, Emily, Ricardo Jr., and Ma. Lourdes.

The press release, long and as usual with lawyer’s language, is loaded with legalese so let us consider the new issues from a layman’s view.

There was a case filed by the three Yansons: the mother Olivia and her two siblings, Ginnette and Leo Rey. In the normal course of events, the issuance of a warrant is expected when there is a criminal case, of course depending upon the assessment of the court of the recommendations of the investigating prosecutor. That a warrant was allegedly issued means that the case now goes into hearing where the parties will argue.

But the lawyers of the four Yanson siblings questioned not so much the warrants themselves, but the process of their service and this will be a new ground for legal combat and lengthen the solution of the case.

In a long statement of media, the Yanson 4 lawyers raised several issues against the issuance and service of the alleged warrant. We expect the other side to respond, also in media. Once we get the reply, we will also present them here to be fair.

First, the Y4 lawyers claimed there is irregularity in the process, and they believed that there is intent to “harass them over the weekend to ensure they had no recourse for posting bail.”

Without recourse, the four will have to spend time in jail until the bail is posted, a measly sum of P36,000 each considering the financial capabilities of the accused. Which means that if the warrants were issued when the courts were opened, they could post bail, no sweat.

I have no information as of this time whether indeed the warrants were served, and they are in police custody. No matter let us take the process of service.

The second complaint of the lawyers of the Yanson 4 is why the warrants were served by the Criminal Investigation and Detection Group (CIDG) personnel in Bacolod. They described the use of the CIDG in Bacolod, as “mystifying” and of “suspicious circumstances upon which this unissued warrant found its way for “service” to the CIDG.”

It is “mystifying” because the lawyers could not understand “why the warrants suddenly found their way to the offices not of the Bacolod Police but of the CIDG whose officers were responsible for the violent takeover by the Yanson 2 of VTI’s Mansilingan offices in August 2019.”

The whodunit is that the CIDG of Bacolod was involved in this case and in fact “had been sued before the Ombudsman and Regional Trial Court in its aftermath.” So why is the CIDG serving the warrant?

The usual process is for the warrant to be served by the police that is not involved in the court case. This can easily be answered, like the police being busy in enforcing the quarantine, though not necessarily so.

The Y4 lawyer, Carlo Joaquin Narvasa said the “CIDG Bacolod personnel were used by the lawyers of Ginnette Dumancas and Leo Rey and their mother Olivia Yanson.” He must prove that the process was irregular or illegal, then, the involved CIDG personnel or whoever issued the order will be in hot water.

Third, the Y4 lawyer claimed that “at the hearing on the Yanson 4’s motion to suspend the proceedings and hold in abeyance the issuance of warrant, on May 29, not even the judge mentioned about the implementation of any warrant as it was put on hold last March and not implemented. The Y4 lawyer insinuates there was no warrant.

If true, and we have no reason to doubt, where did the alleged warrant of arrest come from? In fact, was there a warrant at all? This question arises because the Y4 lawyer claimed: (1) there was a motion to “suspend the issuance of a warrant”, and (2) the judge “did not mention” any warrant thus the lawyer assumed there was none.

Again, where did the warrant come from? If there was, why did the judge not inform the counsel of the accused? The hearing next month will be interesting.

But let us pursue tomorrow this “guessing” game that the Y4 lawyers had raised.