SC clears six drug convicts

The Supreme Court has exonerated six persons previously convicted by both the trial courts and Court of Appeals of involvement in illegal drugs cases and ordered their release.

In separate decisions, the SC absolved the six accused after rulingthat the law enforcement agents who conducted the buy-bust operationsfailed to strictly follow the procedures laid down by the Republic Act No. 9165, or the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act, in the handling of the seized illegal drugs.

The high court held that failure by the authorities to follow strictly the chain of custody raised reasonable doubt on the integrity andidentity of the seized illegal drugs, thus, paving the way for the acquittal of those convicted.

In a related case, the Philippine National Police said Sunday it has mechanisms in place for thorough review of dismissed cases related to its illegal drugs operations.

PNP chief Gen. Guillermo Lorenzo Eleazar made the remark after local rapper Marlon "Loonie" Peroramas asked him to probe police officers involved in the drug operation that led to his arrest in 2019, claiming that the cops had planted evidence against him.

The rapper's case was recently dismissed by the Makati Regional Trial Court Branch 64 due to failure of police personnel to follow the chain of custody rule, according to the PNP.

The high tribunal directed the Bureau of Corrections to immediately release the six persons convicted for illegal drugs cases.

In their appeal, the accused argued that the prosecution failed to establish an unbroken chain of custody of the allegedly seized illegal drugs.

In the resolutions promulgated last April 28 but posted on the Supreme Court website only last June 22, the high court exonerated Angelo Aranas, who was arrested on July 20, 2016 in Malate, Manila and was charged with illegal sale and possession of shabu (methamphetamine hydrochloride).

On July 21, 2017, the trial court sentenced him to life imprisonment for selling shabu and a 12-to-20 years jail term for possession. CA affirmed the trial court’s conviction on Dec. 7, 2018.

Also cleared of an illegal drug case by the high court was Antonio Ancheta, who was arrested in San Fernando City in La Union on Aug. 17, 2015 and charged with selling shabu. He was convicted by the trial court on Nov. 17, 2016 and sentenced to life imprisonment, with the CA affirming the decision on Sept. 28, 2017.

The SC likewise absolved Ronald Orale and Renato Gutierrez, who were arrested in Paranaque City on Aug. 26, 2013 for selling and possessing shabu, respectively.

On Sept. 30, 2016, Orale was sentenced to life imprisonment while Gutierrez was meted out a jail term ranging from 12 to 17 years. Orale appealed to CA, while Gutierrez did not. The Court of Appeals, on Jan. 31, 2019, affirmed the trial court’s decision.

Nelly Ortizano was also acquitted of drug charges. She was arrested inside her house in Bacolod City on April 24, 2014 and charged with selling shabu to policemen. She was convicted by the trial court on Aug. 31, 2017 and sentenced to life imprisonment. The CA affirmed the conviction on Jan. 30, 2019.

The SC also ordered the release of Arnel Verbo after absolving him of a drug case. He was arrested on Sept. 28, 2014 in Gattaran, Cagayan, and convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment by the trial court on Nov. 17, 2016. The CA affirmed the conviction on Feb. 23, 2018. (See full story online at manilastandard.net)

In a long line of decisions and resolutions, the SC said that in cases involving dangerous drugs, “The prosecution has the burden to prove compliance with the chain of custody requirements under Section 21, Article II of RA 9165.”

They are: (1) the seized items must be inventoried and photographed immediately after seizure or confiscation; (2) the physical inventory and photographing must be done in the presence of (a) the accused or his/her representative or counsel, (b) an elected public official, ( c) a representative from the media, and (d) a representative from the Department of Justice (DOJ), all of whom shall be required to sign the copies of the inventory and be given a copy of the same; and (3) theseized drugs must be turned over to a forensic laboratory within 24 hours from confiscation for examination.

“Strict compliance with the foregoing requirements is necessary in protecting the integrity and identity of the corpus delicti (the body of the crime), without which the crime of the illegal sale and illegal possession of dangerous drugs cannot be proved beyond reasonable doubt,” the Supreme Court said.

In the case of Aranas, the SC said: “Only a media representative signed the inventory of evidence. Yet, the operatives failed to provide any justification showing that the integrity of the evidence had all along been preserved. Worse, there was no attempt on the part of the buy-bust team to comply with the law and its implementing rules.”

“In brief, the sachet presented in evidence against Ancheta remained unmarked from the time it was allegedly confiscated up to the team's arrival in the office. Doubts, therefore, linger as to the item's identity, integrity, and whereabouts during the period of transport, creating a critical gap in the chain of custody, which warrants Ancheta's acquittal,” the SC said.

In the case of Orale and Gutierrez, the SC said: “The prosecution in this case failed to sufficiently prove justifiable ground for non-compliance with the dictates of Section 21, Article II of RA No. 9165 and its IRR.”

“The absence of the required insulating witnesses puts serious doubt as to the integrity of the confiscated items. Admittedly, only a media representative witnessed the inventory. The prosecution gave no explanation why the presence of an elected public official and a DOJ representative was not secured.”

“The Court cannot tolerate the lax approach of law enforcers in handling the very corpus delicti of the crime. Hence, Nelly Ortizano y Arce must be acquitted of the charges against her given the prosecution's failure to prove an unbroken chain of custody,” the SC said.

In the case of Verbo, “the apprehending officers admittedly failed to strictly comply with the chain of custody procedure, i.e., they conducted the inventory without the presence of a representative from the NPS (National Prosecution Service) or the media,” the SC said.

“Given the nature of a buy-bust operation as a planned activity, the team could have secured or exerted efforts to secure the presence of the insulating witnesses before the conduct of the operation,” it stressed.

“In this case, however, the team admittedly coordinated with the required insulating witnesses only after the operation. Worse, the records are bereft of any indication that they took other measures and exerted sufficient efforts to ensure the presence of the witnesses during the inventory,” the court said.

The SC pointed out the need for the presence of the persons who should witness the post-operation measures is necessary to insulate the apprehension and incrimination proceedings from any taint of illegitimacy or irregularity.

“The insulating presence of such witnesses would have preserved an unbroken chain of custody considering that a buy-bust operation is susceptible to abuse, and the only way to prevent this is to ensure that the procedural safeguards provided by the law are strictly observed,” the SC said.

Meanwhile, Eleazar said of the PNP: “There are already existing policies to identify our strengths and immediately address our weaknesses in the performance of our mandate. We focus on all of these to ensure that these are followed accordingly.”

“All of these are part of our PNP reform aligned with the Intensified Cleanliness Policy. Not only all policemen will benefit, but the public,” he added.

The PNP Committee on Dismissed Drug Cases evaluates dismissed cases that include misconduct or irregularities that could have been committed by police officers involved, Eleazar said.

Should the committee find any irregularity, it will refer the case folder to the appropriate units concerned, he added.