Along with PDEA agents, the office of RTC Branch 8 of Judge Macaundas Hadjirasul prepares to burn P6.6 million worth of illegal drugs that were used as evidences in cases which got dismissed from 2010 to 2013. (CDN PHOTO/JUNJIE MENDOZA)
The law may be harsh but it is the law.
Authorities need to review their operational procedures and make sure they follow the law to the letter if they want to win the war against illegal drugs, judges presiding over special drug courts in Cebu City said.
They made the comment after they were informed of a study conducted by Cebu Daily News which shows that 63 percent of drug cases filed before the special anti-drug courts of the Cebu City Regional Trial Court ended up either in dismissal or acquittal.
Of the 1,388 drug cases disposed from January 2012 until the first quarter of 2014, 627 ended up in acquittal while 246 were dismissed.
The data means a total of 873 cases filed against people suspected of involvement in the illegal drug trade led to nothing.
Only 515 cases or 37 percent finished in convictions or instances when the accused pleaded “guilty” during arraignment.
Judges cited the failure of law enforcers to comply with section 21 of Republic Act 9165 or the Comprehensive Drugs Act of 2002, governing the “custody, inventory, and disposition of seized dangerous drugs and paraphernalia.”
Some factors were also seen to have contributed to the dismal prosecution of drug cases such as illegal arrests, searches, and seizures; as well as the failure of law enforcers to observe the rules on buy-bust operations.
Cavalier attitude
The huge number of dismissal and acquittal of drug cases should bring law enforcers back to the drawing board, said Judge Macaundas Hadjirasul who is assigned to one of the five special drugs courts in Cebu City.
“It’s time to think about the quality of (anti-drug) operations more than the quantity. Frivolous cases—those which are destined to the garbage can of dismissals and acquittals—waste not only the time of our courts, prosecutors, and law enforcers but also valuable state resources,” Hadjirasul told CDN.
“To me, what should alarm us more is the nonchalant, if not cavalier attitude among many law enforcers toward the rules on arrest, searches and seizures, entrapment, and preservation of evidence. Law enforcers should be paragons of obedience and fealty to the laws that we ourselves enforce against the citizenry,” he added.
Wrong message
The judge said the number of acquittal and dismissal of drug cases sends a wrong message to criminals that it is easy to escape punishment in the Philippines.
“Perhaps, we need to provide each of our law enforcers with ‘chain of custody cards’ containing the requirements in conducting arrests and preservation of narcotic evidence. We can require them to memorize those requirements and to carry the card with them at all times while on duty,” said Hadjirasul who was obviously dismayed with the huge number of drug cases junked by the court.
Under section 21, paragraph 1 of the Comprehensive Drugs Act of 2002, “the apprehending team having custody and control of the drugs shall, immediately after seizure and confiscation, physically inventory and photograph the same in the presence of the accused or the person/s from whom such items were confiscated and/or seized, or his or her representative or counsel, a representative from the media and the Department of Justice (DOJ), and any elected public official who shall be required to sign the copies of the inventory and be given a copy thereof.”
Law enforcers found this provision of the law as a major stumbling block that prevents the successful prosecution of drug cases.
They cited the unavailability of public officials, representatives of the DOJ, and the media during the inventory of seized drugs.
Last July 2014, President Aquino approved Republic Act 10640 or the “act to further strengthen the anti-drug campaign of the government” which amended section 21 of RA 9165.
The new law mandates that the inventory of the seized items be witnessed “by an elected public official with jurisdiction over the crime scene accompanied by any representative from the media or the National Prosecution Service.”
“Before the amendments were made, law enforcers were required to have as witnesses during inventory the accused, his or her representatives, an elected public official, a representative from the Department of Justice (DOJ), and a representative from the media,” said lawyer Mauro Licen, head of the Preventive Education Education and Community Involvement Service of the Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency in Central Visayas (PDEA-7).
“Now, the amendatory law requires us and other law enforcers to just have a public official, a representative from the DOJ or a representative from the media. It’s now either the DOJ or media,” he explained.
Licen admitted that they have had difficulties in complying with some provisions of the law on prosecuting drug cases.
“Of course, it’s painful on our part to know that several drug cases ended up in dismissal or acquittal. We invested time and resources to arrest those involved in illegal drug activities only to be freed by the court,” he told CDN.
“These persons are slipper and wily. And were putting our lives at risk every time we conduct operations. But I understand our judges. They just apply the law according to the evidence presented. While the law may be harsh, it is still the law,” he added.
Challenge
Despite the huge number of drug cases junked by the courts, Licen said PDEA and other law enforcers will not stop running after those involved in illegal drug activities.
“We take this as a challenge to make better our case build up, to improve our work. Although the law limits us, it doesn’t dissuade us from improving our work,” he said.
As part of their agreement, Licen said PDEA will focus on “high value and high impact targets” while the Philippine National Police will go after “street level pushers, peddlers, and users.”
“We, in PDEA, really have concerns about manpower. At present, PDEA-7 only has a little over 20 agents. We need more,” he said.
Licen admitted that the problem on illegal drugs is too difficult to overcome although law enforcers won’t stop trying to neutralize the problem.
“Is it possible to solve the problem on illegal drugs? I don’t think we can solve this overnight, not even in our lifetime. This problem is similar to prostitution. That is why we need to tap the community. We have to engage them,” he said.
Joey Herrera, executive director of the Cebu Provincial Anti-Drug Abuse Council (CPADAC), said they are presently adopting an approach to go down to the barangay level to stop the proliferation of drugs.
He said Cebu Gov. Hilario Davide III doubled CPADAC’s budget from P5 million this year to P10 million in 2015, urging them to intensify efforts against illegal drugs.
“We believe in the bottom-up program in fighting illegal drugs. We have to penetrate to the barangays first. In fact, it boils down to family,” Herrera said.
Based on a study of the Dangerous Drugs Board, he said, there are five reasons why one engages in illegal drugs: family problem, personal problem, curiosity, peer pressure, and lack of parents’ attention.
“Let’s try to strengthen our families. Parents have to practice being a parent. Giving allowances—small or big—to your children doesn’t define your being a parent. Do what you ought to do by transcending your drugroles as parents,” Herrera said.
Related Stories: