Clearly the High Tribunal went over the case with a fine-toothed comb and found serious lapses in the way the police, prosecutors and judges handled it
The Supreme Court is often called the ‘court of last resort.’
That’s because its decisions are not subject to further review by any other court.
Its decisions in most cases may be generally hailed by the public as truly serving the ends of justice, but may raise eyebrows in others, particularly when it acquits those charged with serious crimes based on legal technicalities.
The High Tribunal did raise not a few quizzical looks when it recently exonerated six accused in a P1-billion drug case.
Charged in the case were five Chinese nationals and a Filipino. They were arrested by an Anti-Illegal Drug Special Task Force of the Philippine National Police during an entrapment operation in Binondo, Manila in November 2003.
The head of the police unit, a captain, said the Chinese allegedly attempted to bribe them with 10 kilos of shabu in exchange for their release.
To catch the big fish, he said they tailed the suspects’ vehicle set to deliver the drugs.
The Filipino suspect, Robert Uy, was nabbed after he drove the car carrying the shabu bribe on Nov. 10, 2003.
Police said they discovered over 230 kilos of shabu in a warehouse in Valenzuela where Uy allegedly picked up the contraband.
The Valenzuela City Regional Trial Court sentenced Uy to life in prison for trafficking and possession of drugs.
One of the Chinese suspects, Willie Gan, was meted out 12 years in prison and fined P300,000.
The court dismissed the charges filed against the other Chinese after granting a demurrer and for failure of the prosecution to prove that they participated in the bribe.
Uy sought the ruling’s reversal before the SC, which affirmed the 2014 decision of the Valenzuela RTC.
On appeal, the SC found irregularities in the case and exonerated Uy, saying the prosecution failed to establish that he possessed the drugs recovered from the warehouse.
The SC said Uy should be acquitted of both charges filed against him for failure of the prosecutors to establish corpus delicti or body of the crime due to lack of evidence to show the arresting police officers complied with the statutory requirements of Republic Act 9165 or the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act.
The police, according to the Supreme Court, also failed to follow the chain of custody rule.
The SC noted the prosecution did not offer any excuse for the absence of the DOJ representative during the anti-narcotics operation.
Even if Gan did not appeal his sentence, the SC extended Uy’s acquittal to him as the same evidence was used against him.
And here’s the rub.
The blame, the SC said, lies with the law enforcers and prosecutors.
“It is truly regrettable that the court must acquit accused-appellant in the instant case and extend such acquittal to Gan. The law enforcement agents and the prosecution must exercise more prudence in their compliance with the law,” the SC said.
The SC also ruled the Valenzuela RTC committed errors in handling the case.
“The law enforcement agents and the prosecution must exercise more prudence and care in their compliance with the requirements of Sec. 21 of R.A. 9165 (or the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002),” the Court said.
“Even more reprehensible is the error committed by the RTC in the penalty imposed upon Willie Gan and accused-appellant for violation of RA No. 9165,” the SC said, noting the law provides a penalty of life imprisonment to death and a fine ranging from P500,000 to P10 million where the shabu or other dangerous drugs possessed is 50 grams or more.
In reprimanding the police authorities, prosecutors and the RTC judge, and CA magistrates who handled the case of Uy, the SC said any failure on their part would likely result in an acquittal.
According to the Court, there were material gaps in the links of the chain of custody for the items seized on Nov. 10 and 11, 2003.
The Court noted that another officer apart from the seizing officer marked the carton box and five plastic bags that contained the drugs. It said there was also no inventory receipt provided.
“While photographs of the carton box and the five plastic bags of shabu were offered in evidence, it is unclear if these photographs were taken at the place of seizure or, if not applicable, at the nearest police station or at the nearest office of the apprehending officer or team,” the Court said.
The SC ruled the case revealed the “law enforcement agents’ complete ignorance of the requirements of Sec. 21 of R.A. 9165.”
“This ignorance extends to the prosecution because the records are woefully bereft of any attempt on its part to even invoke justifiable circumstances to excuse the failure of the law enforcement agents to even attempt to comply with the mandatory requirements of Sec. 21 of R.A. 9165. The utter disregard for the law demonstrated by these actors is reprehensible,” the Court said.
Following the Supreme Court decision, the Department of Justice said it would probe the prosecutors who bungled a P1-billion drug case in 2003 and implement measures to achieve higher conviction rates.
The agency said the blunder should be a reminder for state prosecutors to comply with the chain of custody rule to prevent acquittals of drug traffickers.
Clearly the High Tribunal went over the case with a fine-toothed comb and found serious lapses in the way the police, prosecutors and judges handled it.
It should serve as a timely reminder for them to do their jobs better in the future.
(Email: [email protected])