The Department of Justice (DOJ) has secured the conviction of a notorious Maute member for unlawful possession of an explosive/incendiary device.
The Court of Appeals (CA) affirmed the decision of the Taguig City Regional Trial Court (RTC) Branch 266 finding accused-appellant Nasifa Pundug guilty beyond reasonable doubt of violation of PD 1866, as amended by RA 9516 or the Unlawful Manufacture, Sales, Acquisition, Disposition, Importation or Possession of an Explosive Device or Incendiary Device.
“This court ruling is another testament of the State’s zealousness in administering the law, proving yet again that evil shall never triumph over justice,” said Justice Secretary Jesus Crispin C. Remulla in a statement on Monday.
Remulla commended Senior Deputy State Prosecutor (SDSP) Peter L. Ong for successfully obtaining the conviction of Pundug.
“Pundug’s conviction is a big boost in the government’s fight against terrorism,” according to him.
In 2016, the accused was caught in possession of a blasting cap while members of the Charlie Company of the 51st Infantry Batallion, Philippine Army were conducting random checkpoints in Lanao Del Sur.
The accused was on board a Tamaraw FX along with seven other people alleged to be members of the Maute terrorist group.
Authorities apprehended all the people on board, including Pundug, where other illegal contrabands were also confiscated such as an 81-millimeter mortar ammunition, a pipe bomb and other suspected items
The accused pleaded not guilty to the charges against her, denying ownership of the blasting cap and added that it was merely planted considering it did not have a serial number or any marking after it was seized.
She tried to support her alibi by using the “chain of custody rule” or a protocol mandated by law to check the veracity of evidence obtained in illegal drug cases.
However, the CA ruled “the chain of custody rule does not apply to an undetonated grenade (an object made unique) for it is not amorphous and its form is relatively resistant to change.”
“A witness of the prosecution need only identify the hand grenade, a structural object based on personal knowledge that the same article is what it purports to be,” the CA said in its decision.
The court recognized the presumption of regularity in the military’s confiscation of the blasting cap, noting that such contrabands are sensitive from markings where even a camera flash would be enough to detonate it.
