LANDAWI PARASAN BILAAN, ET AL., PETITIONER, VS. VICENTE N. CUSI, ETC., RESPONDENTS.

Landawi Parasan, Antik Felix and Eris Seroc were charged with
robbery with multiple homicide before the Court of First Instance of
Davao. These three accused were Bilaans who do not know English,
Spanish, Tagalog or the Visayan dialect for which reason efforts were
made an the part of the government to look for an interpreter in order
that the nature of the charge and of the proceedings could be
interpreted to them and in return they may explain their defense to the
court. These efforts apparently were of no avail until November 4, 1960
when the court was able to secure the services of Atty. Primo S.
Ocampo, a local practitioner, who understands and speaks the Bilaan
dialect. In spite of this shortcoming, however, it would appear from
the record that the arraignment and the hearing were commenced in the
absence of an interpreter with the result that when Atty. Ocampo came
to the case the prosecution had already finished the presentation of
its evidence. Among the pieces of evidence presented were the
affidavits or confessions allegedly made by the three accused wherein
their guilt was admitted. Counsel for the defense objected to their
admission on the ground of lack of proper identification.

On November 4, 1960, when the case was continued for the
presentation of the evidence for the defense, Atty. Primo S. Ocampo,
who was then appearing for the first time, began presenting the
evidence. He introduced as his first witness one Timonas Felix who
testified that he saw some policemen and members of the Philippine
constabulary beat the three accused in connection with the execution of
said confessions, the purpose apparently being to prove that said
confessions were involuntary. The fiscal objected to the presentation
of such testimony, and to any other evidence that may tend to prove
that the confessions had been extorted, on the ground that the defense
did not make any reservation to dispute the voluntariness of said
confessions. The objection was sustained over the opposition of Atty.
Ocampo. But counsel argued that no such reservation could have been
made because it was only after he assumed the defense of the accused
that he came to know that said confessions were involuntary. Since the
effort of Atty. Ocampo to have the ruling of the court reconsidered
proved futile, he interposed the present petition for certiorari.

The three accused herein are Bilaans who do not know English,
Spanish, Tagalog or the Visayan dialect so that there was need of an
interpreter in order the nature of the information as well as of the
court procedure may be explained and interpreted to them. While some
efforts were made by the government to look for an interpreter their
efforts only bore fruit after the prosecution had finished the
presentation of its evidence. And among the pieces of evidence
presented were the affidavits or supposed confessions of the accused.
It is true that at that time the accused were represented by counsel
who admittedly did not know the Bilaan dialect. It is however to be
assumed that not knowing the dialect of the accused he was not in a
position to adequately prepare their defense even if he had to appear
as counsel de officio. It is undoubtedly for this reason that when said
confessions were presented he only objected thereto on the ground of
lack of proper identification. Then came Atty. Primo S. Ocampo whose
assistance was required because of his knowledge of the Bilaan dialect,
and it was then that Ocampo, after conferring with the accused, came to
know for the first time that the confessions were not given
voluntarily. For all we know, they were made to swear to them even
without knowing fully their contents. And so, Ocampo, believing to be
his duty to present witnesses to prove that said confessions were not
given freely, deemed it proper to present evidence on the matter. But
his efforts were thwarted because of a technical objection of the
fiscal.

Considering that the three accused are ignorant, and when the
evidence for the prosecution was presented they did not have the
benefit of an interpreter, even if they were assisted by a counsel who
does not possess knowledge of the dialect, it is the sense of this
Court that Atty. Primo S. Ocampo, the new counsel, should be given an
opportunity to present evidence regarding the circumstances under which
the alleged confessions were made if we want that fairness and justice
be done to the accused. Anyway, no harm would be caused to the
prosecution, for whatever may be proven on that matter, it could be
disproved if it is not in accordance with the truth.

Wherefore, petition is granted. The order of the court a quo subject of the petition is hereby set aside. The case is remanded to the court a quo for further proceedings. No costs.

Bengzon, C. J., Padilla, Labrador, Concepcion, Barrera, Paredes, Dizon, Regala and Makalintal, JJ., concur.