Searched and seized evidence in Maguindanao: Admissible or inadmissible?
On November 23, 2009, the lives of 57 innocent people were taken due to the political rivalry of two clans, Ampatuans and Mangudadatus, for a gubernatorial position. Due to this, two cases, rebellion case and multiple murder case, were filed against the Ampatuans and their allies, which cases are pe...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , |
|---|---|
| Format: | text |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Animo Repository
2011
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://animorepository.dlsu.edu.ph/etd_bachelors/17797 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Institution: | De La Salle University |
| Language: | English |
| Summary: | On November 23, 2009, the lives of 57 innocent people were taken due to the political rivalry of two clans, Ampatuans and Mangudadatus, for a gubernatorial position. Due to this, two cases, rebellion case and multiple murder case, were filed against the Ampatuans and their allies, which cases are pending and yet to be resolved in court. Hence, it is important to discuss the issue on the admissibility of evidence obtained by the military, during their search and seizure operation when the province of Maguindanao was placed under martial law.
This research aims to provide a detailed discussion on how materials would either be considered as admissible in court.
This research was done using the provisions laid down in the Constitution, which led to the discussion of the search and seizure clause, the exceptions to the rule on search and seizure, the exclusionary rule, and the fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine. Also, the researchers provided some claims that the State may raise with regard to the issue on the admissibility of evidence and attempted to refute these claims.
Basing of the facts and laws provided in the Constitution, it was found that the firearms and ammunition found in the possession of the Ampatuans are in fact inadmissible as evidence in court. |
|---|