SHOULD
CHRISTIANS BE JUDGMENTAL?
The Case of
Ja Hoon Ku
“Harboring a criminal” is a
criminal offense. It is against the law to “harbor a criminal.” What is “harboring
a criminal”? This is the definition given by a Law Dictionary:
“…the
term used when a person HIDES another person wanted by the law.” [Source: http://thelawdictionary.org/harboring-a-criminal/]
When a person HIDES another
person wanted by the law, that person committed the offense of ‘harboring a
criminal.” When it was reported that Ja Hoon Ku, a Korean national arrested on
16 January 2014, was allegedly released by Malacañan (the executive branch of
the Philippine government) and turned over to Iglesia Ni Cristo (Church Of Christ),
many immediately criticized the Church and accused of “harboring a criminal.”
“Ja
had already been arrested and was supposed to be deported to Korea, but he
was granted temporary freedom. Thanks to a Palace official who allegedly
signed an order to release him from detention. As stated in the
order, Ja will be free while he waits for the court’s decision on his
appeal regarding his deportation case. As if this was not
questionable enough, Ja was turned over to members of Iglesia ni Cristo. Many
Filipino citizens are not only criticizing the government for freeing the
Korean fugitive and preventing (or delaying) his deportation but some
are also vilifying the INC for harboring an accused wanted embezzler.”
[SOURCE: https://chrissantosra.wordpress.com/tag/ja-hook-ku/}
[SOURCE: https://chrissantosra.wordpress.com/tag/ja-hook-ku/}
Did the Church committed the
offense of “harboring a criminal” because of Ja Hoon Ku? Let us not be
judgmental, but let us first look at the facts.
WHO IS JA HOON KU AND WHAT REALLY HAPPENED?
Ja Hoon Ku is from South Korea
who went to the Philippines. He was one of the contractors when the Philippine
Arena was contructed during 2012-2014. During that time, he was invited to the
worship services of the Iglesia Ni Cristo. After examining the doctrines of
this Church, he decided to join the Church. Thus, he became a member of the
Iglesia Ni Cristo, not before the construction of the Philippine Arena, but
during the construction of the Philippine Arena.
On 16 January 2014, he was
arrested by Bureau of Immigration (BI) because of a letter of request sent to
them by the South Korean embassy:
“Records
showed the Korean Embassy wrote the BI to arrest and deport Ja for alleged
arbitrary spending of the reserve funds of Seoul-based Phildip Korea Co, Ltd.
Upon finding that Ja was a ‘risk to public interest,’ the BI charged him with
violating Section 69 of Republic Act 2711 or the Revised Administrative Code as
his visa had already expired.” [SOURCE: http://globalnation.inquirer.net/100715/sc-stops-release-of-wanted-south-korean/]
Thus, let us make it clear
that Brother Ja Hoon Ku was not a convicted criminal in South Korea. The South
Korean Embassy wrote the Bureau of Immigration (BI) to arrest Ja “for ALLEGED
arbitrary spending of the reserve funds of Seoul-based Phildip Korea Co, Ltd.”
Thus, the case was filed against Ja when he was in the Philippines. However, the
BI arrested and charged him “with violating section 69 of RA 2711” or in other
words, he was arrested because his visa
had already expired.
The BI commissioner then
immediately issued a warrant for Ja’s immediate deportation to South Korea (Ja
was detained at the BI detention center in Bicutan, Taguig):
“BI
Commissioner Siegfred Mison then issued a warrant for his immediate deportation
to South Korea. Ja was arrested on January 16 and detained at the BI detention
center in Bicutan, Taguig City.”
[SOURCE: http://globalnation.inquirer.net/100715/sc-stops-release-of-wanted-south-korean/]
[SOURCE: http://globalnation.inquirer.net/100715/sc-stops-release-of-wanted-south-korean/]
Because of this, the following
day after his arrest on 16 January 2014, Ja asked the Manila court to issue a “writ
of amparo” and a temporary protection order against the BI:
“The
following day, Ja asked the Manila court to issue a writ of amparo and
temporary protection order against the BI…”
[SOURCE: http://globalnation.inquirer.net/100715/sc-stops-release-of-wanted-south-korean/]
[SOURCE: http://globalnation.inquirer.net/100715/sc-stops-release-of-wanted-south-korean/]
The “writ of amparo” is a
remedy for the protection of right to life, liberty and personal security:
“The
1987 Philippine Constitution, in Article VIII, Sec.5 (5) thereof, vests the
power to the Philippine Supreme Court to "promulgate rules concerning the
protection and enforcement of constitutional rights..." This served as the
legal basis for the formulation of the Philippine writ of amparo. Features of
the Philippine Writ of Amparo
“As
can be gleaned from the definition thereof, the writ is a remedy for the
protection of right to life, liberty and personal security. It is not available
as a remedy for the protection of property right although in some cases,
property right is so intertwined with right to liberty or security thus, the
remedy can still be used. The writ can be availed of by anybody but the Rule
provides for a strict order of preference, non-compliance therewith can be
fatal to the granting of the writ by the courts....”
[SOURCE: http://www.studymode.com/essays/Philippine-Writ-Of-Amparo-Definition-And-763231.html]
[SOURCE: http://www.studymode.com/essays/Philippine-Writ-Of-Amparo-Definition-And-763231.html]
Remember the real reason for
the arrest. It was reported that the real reason for the arrest was “the BI
charged him with violating Section 69 of Republic Act 2711 or the Revised
Administrative Code as his visa had
already expired.” Because of this, Ja was arrested and detained, and
threatened to be immediately be deported to South Korea. Thus, Ja asked the lower
court in Manila to issue a “writ of amparo” or he asked the lower court for “remedy
for the protection of right to life, liberty and personal security” against the
BI. The lower court decided in favor of Ja:
“The
following day, Ja asked the Manila court to issue a writ of amparo and
temporary protection order against the BI. Gallegos heard the
petition on the same day and ruled in the Korean’s favor.”
[SOURCE: http://globalnation.inquirer.net/100715/sc-stops-release-of-wanted-south-korean/]
[SOURCE: http://globalnation.inquirer.net/100715/sc-stops-release-of-wanted-south-korean/]
On January 28, the lower court
ordered the Bi to transfer the cutody of Ja Hoon Ku to Richard Gordon and the
Philippine National Red Cross:
“The
lower court last Jan. 28 ordered Ku’s release to the Philippine National Red
Cross (PRC) chair Richard Gordon and for the PNP to extend protection to Ku’s
family…”
[SOURCE: http://globalnation.inquirer.net/98476/sc-stops-transfer-of-korean-fugitive/]
[SOURCE: http://globalnation.inquirer.net/98476/sc-stops-transfer-of-korean-fugitive/]
Take note that the Manila
court ordered the BI that Ja be released to the PNRC chair Richard Gordon. PNRC
requested the lower court that the custody of Ja be transferred from BI to PNRC. If the
order was followed, thus PNRC will be the “caretaker” of Ja and his family as
they wait the decision of the court regarding his deportation case. If this
took place, does this mean that PNRC is ‘harboring a criminal”? No. If PNRC will be given Ja’s custody,
it doesn't follows that the PNRC is “HIDING a person convicted of a crime” or “HIDING a person
accused of a crime,” but a “caretaker” until the high court made a decision on
his deportation case.
On the following day, 29
January 2014, the lower court again ordered the BI to release Ja to Philippine
National Police (PNP). In response, the BI took the case to the high court,
which issued on February 4 a temporary restraining order (TRO):
“Last
Feb. 4, the high court already issued a restraining order against Gallegos and
ruled that Ja Hoon Ku should stay under the Bureau of Immigration’s custody.”
[SOURCE: http://globalnation.inquirer.net/100715/sc-stops-release-of-wanted-south-korean/]
[SOURCE: http://globalnation.inquirer.net/100715/sc-stops-release-of-wanted-south-korean/]
The high court issued a TRO to
lower court’s order “until further order”:
"The
Court issued a TRO enjoining the enforcement of the two orders of the RTC until
further orders. It also directed the BI to retain custody of the private
respondent Ja Hoon Ku," said SC Public Information Office chief and
spokesman Theodore Te in a media briefing.”
[SOURCE: www.gmanetwork.com/news/story/347113/news/metromanila/sc-stops-korean-national-s-transfer-to-pnp]
[SOURCE: www.gmanetwork.com/news/story/347113/news/metromanila/sc-stops-korean-national-s-transfer-to-pnp]
WHAT ABOUT MALACANAN?
The President of the
Philippines or the executive branch of the government has the “power to countermand
decisions of the Board of Commissioners of the BI upon dismissing Ja’s plea:
“After
being arrested by the immigration authorities, Ja was supposed to be exiled to
Korea.
“The
CA quoted Section 10 of the Administrative Code of 1987, Book III, stating the
president's power to countermand decisions of the Board of Commissioners of the
BI upon dismissing Ja’s plea.”
[SOURCE: http://m.philstar.com/headlines/show/2bd771eeeb8bd1a9fa05cff1a003127d]
[SOURCE: http://m.philstar.com/headlines/show/2bd771eeeb8bd1a9fa05cff1a003127d]
The INC detractors accusing
the Church of influencing Malacanan regarding Ja’s case. Take note that the
president has the power to countermand decisions of the Board of
Commissioners of the BI upon dismissing Ja’s plea. Did the INC influence
Malacanan to countermand the decision of BI regarding Ja’s case?
“Ja,
a former plant manager of Phildip Korea Co. Ltd., became a business partner of
San Jose Builders, Inc. in the Philippines. He was arrested by the Bureau of
Immigration (BI) but was later released prior to his deportation to his home
country. The report said Executive Secretary Paquito Ochoa issued an order to
grant Ja temporary liberty as he awaits the court's ruling on his appeal for
the deportation case. Ja, who converted to Iglesia ni Cristo rom being a Korean Christian
Church member, was reportedly entrusted to his co-INC members.”
[SOURCE: http://m.philstar.com/headlines/show/2bd771eeeb8bd1a9fa05cff1a003127d]
[SOURCE: http://m.philstar.com/headlines/show/2bd771eeeb8bd1a9fa05cff1a003127d]
The Church never influence the
Court nor Malacanan for Ja’s case. What the Church asked was to be the “caretaker”
of Ja Hoon Ku as he waits the final decision of the Supereme Court regarding his
deportation case.
“HARBORING A CRIMINAL”?
Remember that Manila RTC
branch 47 issued a “writ of amparo” for Ja Hoon Ku and ordering the BI to
transfer the custody of Ja to the Philippine National Red Cross? This did not
take place because of a TRO from the Supreme Court. But, this proves that there
is no irregularities, nor a criminal offense will be committed if Ja was
entrusted to a group like PNRC. Although Malacanan has the power to counterdemand
the decision of the BI regarding Ja’s case, the President has the power to
dismiss Ja’s case, but instead, Ja was temporarily entrusted to the INC and waited
the decision of the Supreme Court regarding Ja’s case:
“The
CA quoted Section 10 of the Administrative Code of 1987, Book III, stating the
president's power to countermand decisions of the Board of Commissioners of the
BI upon dismissing Ja’s plea.
“In
this case, the summary deportation order in question has become final and
executory, since it was not countermanded by the president within 30 days from
promulgation," the CA said.
“CA
said that the summary deportation order was issued on Jan. 16, 2014, while the
order denying petitioner's motion for reconsideration was issued on Jan. 23,
2014.
"There
was no order by the president countermanding or reversing said orders within
the 30-day period...”
[SOURCE: http://m.philstar.com/headlines/show/2bd771eeeb8bd1a9fa05cff1a003127d]
[SOURCE: http://m.philstar.com/headlines/show/2bd771eeeb8bd1a9fa05cff1a003127d]
Dud INC committed the offense of “harboring a
criminal” because of this? “Harboring a criminal” means “hiding another person wanted
by law.” First of all, the Church did not HIDE Ja Hoon Ku; and secondly, it was
the law (the government) who entrusted Ja to the Church. INC became the “caretaker”
of Ja Hoon Ku as he waits the final decision of the Supreme Court regarding his
case.
Thus, let us not be
judgmental. There are no irregularities or anomalies committed, and no law was
broken when Ja was temporarily entrusted to the INC as he waits the final
decision of the Supreme Court regarding his case.
PRISTINE TRUTH
YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE:
No comments:
Post a Comment
Know why more and more people worldwide convert to Iglesia Ni Cristo (Church Of Christ). Learn more about this Church and find out what makes it unique.