CEBU, Philippines – The Court of Appeals (CA) affirmed the decision of the Regional Trial Court (RTC) Branch 266 in Taguig City that found Nasifa Pundug, the wife of Islamic State (ISIS) leader Abu Dar, guilty of possessing an explosive device.
On August 22, 2016, Pundug was arrested at a checkpoint in Lanao Del Sur for possession of a blasting cap—a small device combined with a fuse to detonate an explosive device.
The terrorist leader’s wife was seen riding a Tamaraw FX with seven other individuals suspected to be members of the Maute terrorist group when arrested. Authorities confiscated illegal contraband which included an 81-mm mortar ammunition and a pipe bomb among others.
However, according to military reports, Pundug escaped the Marawi City Jail just a few months before the siege happened in May 2017. She was arrested again on July 16, 2018, at a safehouse in Purok Maunlad, Barangay Apopong, in General Santos City.
On May 18, 2020, the Taguig City RTC Branch 266 ruled that Pundug was guilty beyond reasonable doubt for the illegal possession of explosives.
According to a CA decision promulgated June 10, Pundug pleaded not guilty during her arraignment, claiming that the blasting cap was planted on her.
She argued that the device did not have a serial number or proper marking during and after her arrest, there was no photograph of the said blasting cap, and that it was not presented during their previous trial.
“According to Nasifa, all these circumstance gave rise to doubts as to the blasting cap’s existence and identification, which should have been duly established by the prosecution as this is the corpus delicti of the crime charged against her,” the CA decision read.
The CA did not agree.
It argued that the prosecution’s witness was able to sufficiently explain that the lack of identification marks and photographs of the blasting cap was due to its “explosive” nature.
“The non-presentation of the subject blasting cap during trial was obviously due to the logistical impossibility or complications brought about by its sensitive and dangerous nature,” the court decision read.
In this case, the court argued, the prosecution’s witness only needs to identify the hand grenade is the same contraband that came from the accused.
“In this jurisdiction, denial and alibi cannot prevail over the positive identification of the assailants by the witness. Unless substantiated by clear and convincing proof, such defense is negative, self-serving, and undeserving of any weight in law,” the court concluded.
In April 2019, the military confirmed the killing of Abu Dar during an encounter with troops of the 49th Infantry Battalion on March 14, 2019 in Tubaran town, Lanao Del Sur. – Rappler.com