This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 MANILA 001792 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SENSITIVE 
 
STATE FOR EAP/PMBS, S/CT FOR CHANDLER, INR/EAP/SEA, 
INL/C/CP, AND INL/AAE FOR PRAHAR,KAPOYOS,AND MCKAY 
BANGKOK FOR ILEA 
DOJ FOR OPDAT 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: PTER PREL PGOV PINS KCRM KJUS ASEC RP
SUBJECT: STREAMLINING TERRORISM PROSECUTIONS IN THE 
PHILIPPINES 
 
¶1.  (U) This is an action request -- please see paras 7-8. 
 
¶2.  (SBU) Summary.  One of the key tasks facing the 
Philippines (GRP) in its struggle against terrorism is 
streamlining the currently excessive length and unwieldy 
number of defendants in terrorism trials.  The Mission's Law 
Enforcement Working Group believes that a minor adjustment of 
existing programs for prosecutors earmarked (but not yet 
spent) for FY 2003 and 2004 by the Bureau of International 
Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs (INL) could have a 
significant immediate -- as well as long-term -- impact. 
Training in caseload management and evidence rules could 
strengthen the rule of law and energize the GRP's ability to 
operate within the international counterterrorism legal 
framework.  Redirecting a planned (but not implemented) FY 
2003 "Prosecutorial Assessment for the Autonomous Region of 
Muslim Mindanao (ARMM)" to concentrate instead on GRP 
terrorism prosecutions could invigorate the GRP's 
counterterrorism polices and help the USG and other 
international donors target and mobilize future law 
enforcement assistance.  The estimated $80,000 cost of this 
minor adjustment of INL spending for the Philippines (4.25% 
of the total $2 million INL FY 2004 budget) would be minimal 
in relation to its potential favorable impact on the GWOT. 
End Summary. 
 
---------------------------------- 
JUDGES AND PROSECUTORS OVERWHELMED 
---------------------------------- 
 
¶3.  (SBU)  Terrorist arrests in the Philippines typically are 
highly publicized, but then suspects disappear into GRP jails 
and prisons for years.  When cases finally go to trial, 
proceedings often consist of dozens or sometimes hundreds of 
defendants, and frequently take years to conclude.  The slow 
pace of prosecution in the GRP's high-profile terrorism cases 
(as detailed in the "GRP Terrorism Prosecution Matrix" on the 
Mission's SIPRNET site) not only inhibits the GRP's full and 
effective cooperation with international efforts to catch and 
punish terrorists, but also reinforces perceptions (within 
and outside of the Philippines) of the weakness of the rule 
of law here. 
 
¶4.  (SBU) The GRP assigns high-profile/high-value terrorist 
cases to the Department of Justice's (PODJ) Anti-Terrorism 
and National Security Cases Task Force in Manila for 
prosecution.  The majority of terrorism trials meet for one 
four-hour session each week, with the rest meeting bi-weekly. 
 While PDOJ prosecutors pride themselves as always prepared 
for trial, delays on the part of defense counsel are common. 
Courts often permit private defense lawyers to withdraw 
mid-trial once the defendants can no longer pay attorney 
retainer fees, necessitating the search for a private 
attorney to work pro bono, or the assignment of a public 
defender; both choices result in additional delays while the 
new defense counsel reviews court documents.  Other delays 
come from venue changes.  Given the surprisingly common lack 
of understanding by judges and prosecutors of Philippine 
evidence codes, the proceedings often become snarled over the 
admissibility of documents or testimony. 
 
¶5.  (SBU)  The five prosecutors responsible for all pending 
terrorist cases in Manila are in court generally every day, 
with the exception of two Tuesdays a month.  Their trial 
caseload is far too large for them and the four judges 
hearing these cases.  An ever larger pretrial caseload 
compounds the problem.  Prosecutors are frustrated because 
the cases are unwieldy, given the large number of defendants 
combined with the slowness of the proceedings.  PDOJ 
prosecutors realize that they should try a smaller number of 
higher value defendants and work plea arrangements in which 
minor suspects plead guilty to lesser offenses.  Mission 
believes that these prosecutors would welcome outside experts 
to provide the technical assistance and training to advise on 
these changes. 
 
¶6.  (SBU) Several PDOJ prosecutors have already attended 
courses at the International Law Enforcement Academies (ILEA) 
in Bangkok and Roswell, NM.  PDOJ prosecutors have also 
participated in INL-sponsored conferences in Bangkok. 
Filipino judges and prosecutors have taken part in 
INR-sponsored symposia at the Southeast Asia Regional Center 
for Counterterrorism (SEARCCT) in Kuala Lumpur.  Despite the 
low pay and the inherent risks of their jobs, they are 
capable and hard working, but need outside assistance to 
provide the impetus (and the bureaucratic cover) for reform. 
Based on our close and productive cooperation with our GRP 
counterparts, we believe that it is possible to improve 
performance within the existing judicial framework to speed 
up the overall process and ensure more effective terrorism 
prosecutions. 
 
-------------- 
ACTION REQUEST 
-------------- 
 
¶7.  (SBU) Mission requests the immediate release of $60,000 
in INL FY 2004 funds earmarked (but not yet spent) for the 
Administration of Justice to allow the Mission (in 
coordination with INL/AAE and the U.S. Department of Justice) 
to conduct the following: 
 
¶I.  A one-week course for all terrorism prosecutors on 
caseload management to a) prioritize cases; b) plead cases 
out; c) charge cases; d) organize cases; and, e) evaluate 
cases.  This would include dividing large numbers of 
defendants (for the four Manila cases with more than 10 
defendants) into smaller, more manageable groups, then 
quickly taking to trial only the most culpable defendants (no 
more than 10 to 15) first.  Later, after the convictions of 
the first batch, prosecutors could attempt to offer plea 
agreements to lesser defendants. 
 
II.  A one-week course in evidence for prosecutors and 
judges.  While Philippine and U.S. evidence codes are 
similar, lawyers and judges here lack strong knowledge on how 
and why the evidence codes work and how to apply them in 
court.  In-depth training on understanding why evidence is 
admissible or inadmissible is essential. 
 
III. Provide USG technical assistance to the Supreme Court to 
develop ethical standards for the conduct of defense 
attorneys in terrorism cases. 
 
¶8.  (SBU) Mission notes that the FY 03 "Prosecutorial 
Assessment for the Autonomous Region of Muslim Mindanao 
(ARMM)" budgeted at $25,000 has not yet been implemented. 
Mission proposes the reconfiguration of the ARMM assessment 
into an "Anti-Terrorism Prosecutions Assessment" that would 
allow resident U.S. Department of Justice Attache and an 
OPDAT-selected technical expert to conduct a thorough 
assessment of the GRP's anti-terrorism prosecutorial 
functions and, with GRP input, develop an action plan to 
reduce the current case backlog as well as a strategic plan 
for future prosecutions.  The assessment would also evaluate 
the technical needs of the GRP's Department of Justice's 
Anti-Terrorism & National Security Cases Task Force and local 
ARMM prosecutors to identify a modest package of computer 
hardware and software as possible grant aid for remaining INL 
FY 2004 funds or for solicitation from other USG and donor 
nation law-enforcement/security assistance funding streams. 
 
 
Visit Embassy Manila's Classified SIPRNET website: 
http://www.state.sgov.gov/p/eap/manila/index. cfm 
 
You can also access this site through the State Department's 
Classified SIPRNET website: 
http://www.state.sgov.gov/ 
Ricciardone