ARBITRARY DETENTION

Benito Astorga, petitioner,Vs.People of the Philippines, respondent.412 SCRA 51

Facts: Benito Astorga is the mayor of Daram, Western Samar. A group of people from Regional Special Operations Group which includes Elpidio Simon, Moises dela Cruz, Wenefredo Maniscan, Renato Militante and Crisanto Pelias from the Department of Environment and Natural Resources were sent to conduct an investigation together with SPO3 Andres B. Cinco, Jr. and SPO1 Rufo Capoquian of the Philippine National Police as their escort, regarding possible illegal logging activities. On September 1, 1997, at around 4:30 to 5:00 oclock in the afternoon, the team found two boats measuring 18 meters in length and 5 meters in breadth. They found out that those boats belong to Mayor Astorga, when Mayor Astorga found out about this, he went to the place and had a heated altercation with the team that lead to Mayor Astorga calling for back ups, when he saw that they were outnumbered by the DENR team, ten armed men arrived.

Mayor Astorga asked the DENR team to come with him to his house to have dinner, and it was 2:00 oclock in the morning when they let them leave his house.

Mayor Astorga was charged with Arbitrary Detention for illegally detaining the DENR team, where he was found Guilty by the trial Court.

Issue: Whether or not Benito Astrorga was correctly charged with Arbitrary Detention.

Held: No, Benito Astorga was wrongfully charged of Arbitrary Detention. The DENR team failed to prove that they were illegally detained by Astorga against their will. When Astorga invited them to his home, had dinner and even drank wine with them, converse with them and even laughed with them, this creates reasonable doubt and clearly shows that fear did not exist in the minds of the DENR team, and that they were not detained against their consent. Adding to the fact that it was raining that day which prevented the DENR team to leave the island.One of the requisites of Arbitrary Detention is when the offended party is placed in confinement or there is restraint on his person or even if he could move freely, as long as he could not escape for fear of being apprehended again, which is not present in this case.