The Lacson-style legal tactic of Napoles, now that RTC Makati has issued a warrant of arrest, is to go underground and disappear, file a motion thru her counsel to reconsider/set aside the RTC order finding the existence of probable cause (which became the basis for the issuance of the warrant), and litigate the said motion before RTC Makati and later even up to the SC, hoping, in the process, to secure a TRO/writ of preliminary injunction against RTC Makati from the higher courts, while her petition for certiorari is being heard therein.
Meanwhile, Napoles' problem is how and where to hide.
Her arbitrary detention case is non-bailable. (The DOJ which filed before RTC Makati the Information in the criminal case for arbitrary detention did not recommend bail).
He option is to voluntarily surrender, file a motion thru her counsel for admission to bail, litigate the said motion before RTC Makati, and hope for a favorable order granting her bail, probably within 1-2 yrs, in which case, she can thereafter post bail and be provisionally free while litigating the merits/demerits of her pending criminal case before the said trial court.
If her said motion for admission for bail is denied by RTC Makati, she can go up to the CA on a Rule 65 "special civil action for certiorari" and, if also denied in the appellate court, she could further go up to the SC on a Rule 45 "petition for review on certiorari".
Meanwhile, she has to stay in prison. The appellate process up to the SC can take 2-3 yrs.
Is she prepared to freely and bravely face the physical and emotional sufferings to be caused by the "voluntary surrender scenario"?
I don't think so.
She has been used to the comfortable life of a multi-millionaire whose ego and delusions equal those of a feudal warlord/traditional patronage politician.
Like Lacson, she would rather buy herself out of PH territorial jurisdiction and hide in a country where the PH has no mutual legal assistance treaty and/or extradition treaty.
For criminal trial lawyers, like me, the above-mentioned legal tactics that I have described above are not new or spectacular.
In fact, they are routine and mechanical legal tactics of big law firms representing the rich and the powerful, as on the case of Napoles.
