ZAMBOANGA CITY — A deadly pre-dawn law enforcement operation in Barangay Sinunuc has escalated into a high-stakes legal and accountability battle, as criminal charges were formally filed against multiple members of the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) following the deaths of three civilians—including a 12-year-old boy—and the wounding of another.
The April 23 operation, carried out jointly by police and military units to serve warrants of arrest against a murder suspect, has drawn sharp public scrutiny after it veered into a fatal confrontation inside a residential community in Alas-as Drive.
From Arrest Operation to Deadly Encounter
Authorities said the mission targeted Saddam Siddik, who faces multiple murder charges with no bail recommended under warrants issued by Regional Trial Courts in Basilan. The operation, however, ended in bloodshed.
Killed were Salam Aradais Alfad, 12; Jerry Indan Alfad, 52, a Lupong Tagapamayapa member; and Rayyan Hassan Alfad, 22—all residents of the area. An 18-year-old, Mislie Aradais Alfad, was wounded.
Initial police statements maintained the operation was legitimate, but acknowledged that an armed confrontation occurred. Yet the inclusion of civilians—particularly a minor—among the fatalities has intensified questions over the conduct and proportionality of force used.
AFP Personnel Named in Criminal Complaints
On April 29, authorities elevated the case to the Office of the City Prosecutor, formally charging several AFP personnel.
Facing Multiple Murder and Frustrated Multiple Murder complaints are:
- CPL. Vergil S. Jurada (Infantry, Philippine Army, Task Force Zamboanga)
- PVT. Lorens Jhon G. Arayani (Infantry, Philippine Army, Task Force Zamboanga)
Meanwhile, Criminal Negligence charges were filed against senior officers:
- COL. Danilo G. Ambe, GSC, Philippine Army
- MAJOR Voltair Herrera
Also implicated in the complaint are:
- PFC. Joey B. Apostol
- CPL. Alejandro S. Maisog
- PVT. Jomar D. Macasling
- PFC. Wagner Abalos Llanasas Jr.
- CPL. Jesmar B. Mendoza
- PVT. Ian Jade B. Tabilona
- CPL. Abdurajil A. Asula
- CPL. Harold Kenn L. Castre
The complaints were received by Assistant City Prosecutor Atty. Jhoann D. Gomez under Evaluation No. E-INV-260-00071.
Evidence-Based Filing, Says Police
Police Regional Office-9 (PRO-9) spokesperson Police Major Shela Mae Chang emphasized that the filing of charges was anchored on “strong and corroborated evidence,” including sworn affidavits, eyewitness testimonies, and forensic findings.
She noted that paraffin and ballistic examinations further linked those charged to the incident.
However, Chang clarified that the investigation remains ongoing, with the Philippine National Police (PNP) and the Criminal Investigation and Detection Group (CIDG) continuing deeper case-building efforts.
Key Question: Where Are the Police in the Charge Sheet?
Despite the joint nature of the operation, public attention has zeroed in on a critical issue: why only AFP personnel were charged, when police units were also present at the scene.
Authorities maintain that charges were filed strictly based on available evidence, but stressed that the probe is not yet complete and may expand to include other პასუხისმგ parties.
A Special Investigation Task Group (SITG) continues to gather additional evidence to determine whether more individuals—regardless of rank or unit—should be held accountable.
Community Outrage, Calls for Justice
The incident has triggered outrage among residents and the victims’ families, who have repeatedly disputed the official narrative and described the operation as excessive and deeply flawed.
Local officials echoed the call for accountability, stressing that while law enforcement operations are necessary, errors that result in civilian deaths—especially of non-target individuals—must be fully explained.
“Whatever the circumstances, incidents like this traumatize the community and demand transparency,” a city official said, urging authorities to leave “no stone unturned.”
Unresolved Issues and Legal Hurdles
While charges have been filed, critical questions remain:
- Whether the use of force complied with operational protocols
- The validity and handling of alleged recovered evidence, including firearms and explosives
- The potential liability of commanding officers under the doctrine of command responsibility
- Whether parallel administrative or military court proceedings will follow
Legal observers note that the strength of forensic evidence—such as autopsy reports, ballistic matching, and chain of custody—will be crucial in determining whether the case holds in court.
Justice on Trial
For the families of the victims, the legal process now underway is only the beginning.
The case has become a litmus test not only for accountability within the security sector but also for the credibility of investigative institutions tasked with delivering justice.
As the SITG presses forward, the demand from the public is clear: a complete, impartial, and uncompromising pursuit of the truth—no matter where it leads, and no matter who it implicates.