1. In the case of VICENTE P. LADLAD, et. al. vs. SENIOR STATE PROSECUTOR EMMANUEL Y. VELASCO, G.R. Nos. 172070-72,
June 1, 2007;
LIZA L. MAZA, et. al. vs. RAUL M. GONZALEZ,
in his capacity as Secretary of the Department of Justice, G.R. Nos. 172074-76, June 1, 2007; CRISPIN B. BELTRAN vs. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,
et. al., G.R. No. 175013, June 1, 2007, the Supreme Court stressed the “basic and fundamental
objective of observing the interest of justice evenhandedly, without fear
or favor to any and all litigants alike, whether rich or poor, weak or strong,
powerless or mighty”.
“x x x.
The obvious involvement of political considerations in the actuations of respondent Secretary of Justice and respondent prosecutors brings to mind an observation we made in another equally politically charged case. We reiterate what we stated then, if only to emphasize the importance of maintaining the integrity of criminal prosecutions in general and preliminary investigations in particular, thus:
[W]e cannot emphasize too strongly that prosecutors should not allow, and should avoid, giving the impression that their noble office is being used or prostituted, wittingly or unwittingly, for political ends, or other purposes alien to, or subversive of, the basic and fundamental objective of observing the interest of justice evenhandedly, without fear or favor to any and all litigants alike, whether rich or poor, weak or strong, powerless or mighty. Only by strict adherence to the established procedure may be public’s perception of the impartiality of the prosecutor be enhanced.
X x x.”