By Gerome Dalipe IV
BACOLOD CITY – The Supreme Court (SC) has granted the privilege of the writ of amparo to the family of Henry V. Tayo, Jr., a detainee who went missing after being held at Bacolod City police station on suspicion of theft.
The SC ruled that the failure of law enforcement to conduct a proper and thorough investigation into enforced or involuntary disappearances constitutes a violation of an individual’s right to life, liberty, and security.
In a decision penned by Associate Justice Japar B. Dimaampao, the SC reversed an earlier Regional Trial Court (RTC) ruling that denied the writ of amparo petition filed by Tayo’s family.
The SC directed authorities to produce all relevant documents and materials regarding Tayo’s case and mandated an expedited and thorough investigation.
Tayo was detained at Bacolod City Police Station 8 after being accused of theft but reportedly disappeared after his release.
Police claimed that Tayo was handed over to five barangay tanods and Melleza Besana, one of the complainants, but his family has not seen him since.
The police presented a video showing Tayo signing the release logbook but failed to provide footage of him leaving the station, despite repeated requests from his family, the Commission on Human Rights (CHR), and the Public Attorney’s Office (PAO).
The Tayo family filed a petition for the writ of amparo, requesting a court order compelling the police to disclose information and evidence related to Tayo’s disappearance.
While the RTC initially issued the writ, it later denied the privilege, ruling that the family failed to prove police involvement or refusal to cooperate.
The SC overturned the RTC’s decision, stating that all elements of enforced disappearance were present.
Tayo was deprived of liberty by state actors, and the police failed to acknowledge his whereabouts or provide sufficient information about his fate.
Under the Rule on the Writ of Amparo (A.M. No. 07-9-12-SC), a petition for the writ is available to individuals whose right to life, liberty, or security is violated or threatened by unlawful acts or omissions of public officials, employees, or private individuals.
The rule is specifically intended to address extrajudicial killings and enforced disappearances.
The SC noted that public officials must exercise extraordinary diligence in responding to enforced disappearance cases, including conducting urgent and serious investigations and disclosing all relevant information.
“A disappearance has a doubly paralyzing impact: on the victim, who is removed from the protection of the law, frequently subjected to torture and in constant fear for their lives; and on their families, ignorant of the fate of their loved ones, alternating between hope and despair… It is the duty of all States, under any circumstances, to make investigations whenever there is reason to believe an enforced disappearance has taken place and, if confirmed, to prosecute the perpetrators,” the SC stated.
The SC found the police negligent in handling Tayo’s disappearance, citing their delay in securing critical evidence such as surveillance footage.
Despite multiple requests from the family, the police only summoned an IT specialist nearly a month after the disappearance, undermining efforts to locate Tayo.
The SC ordered the National Police Commission (NAPOLCOM), the Philippine National Police (PNP), and the Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG) to conduct a full investigation into the case and recommend appropriate criminal and administrative charges, if warranted. The case was remanded to the RTC for the implementation of the SC’s orders.
