The justice system in the Philippines is fundamentally broken. That is simply an undeniable fact. The problem is multifaceted and involves both law enforcement officers and the courts. Recently the Supreme Court scolded law enforcement officers not only for not following proper procedure but also for being ignorant of those procedures.
 |
| https://www.philstar.com/headlines/2023/07/04/2278583/acquittal-ruling-sc-scolds-law-enforcers-and-prosecutors-fumbling-drug-law-rules |
In acquitting two accused in a P1-billion shabu case, the Supreme Court reprimanded law enforcers and the prosecution for failing to handle evidence and trial against five Chinese nationals and one Filipino who had been tagged as members an alleged drug syndicate.
The SC en banc, in a decision penned February 21 but made public only recently, acquitted Filipino Robert Uy and Willie Gan — a Chinese national — on drug charges over prosecutors' failure to prove their guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
This was after the SC found that law enforcers and the prosecution disregarded the strict requirements of Section 21 of the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act, which holds that three insulating witnesses are required in the inventory of drug cases. The high court has also laid down guidelines on the custody of drugs seized.
The SC said that acquitting Uy and Gan is “truly regrettable” as it stressed that law enforcers and the prosecution “must exercise more prudence and care in their compliance with the requirements of Section 21 of RA No. 9165.”
“The instant case reveals the law enforcement agents' complete ignorance of the requirements of Section 21 of R.A. No. 9165,” it said, adding that: “The utter disregard for the law demonstrated by these actors is reprehensible,” the court also said, while referring to police officers and the prosecution.
The SC pointed out that Section 21 of RA 9165 requires three insulating witnesses during physical inventory and photograph of seized items: A representative from the media and from the justice department, and any elected public official.
Following this law to the letter is very important as it protects the integrity of the evidence.
The high court went on to “address a potential concern involving the effect of failure to comply with the strict requirements of Sec. 21.” It reiterated the guidelines set down in People v. Romy Lim where it said the investigating prosecutor can refer the case to preliminary investigation in instances of non-observance of Sec. 21 requirements.
The court also said it “harbors serious concerns over the identity, integrity and evidentiary value of seized items,” as it pointed out that “there are material gaps in the chain of custody of the seized items.”
It's all part of the process of building up an air tight case against criminals. Recently the PNP raided a POGO den and rescued 2,200 people from human trafficking. That sounds good but the DOJ says the PNP did it all wrong and have effectively tainted the case against the accused.
 |
| https://news.abs-cbn.com/news/07/10/23/doj-hits-pnp-anti-trafficking-raid-suspects-released-for-further-probe |
The Department of Justice (DOJ) has flagged a human trafficking raid conducted by the Philippine National Police (PNP) in Las Piñas last month that “rescued” some 2,000 alleged trafficking victims.
Justice Secretary Jesus Crispin “Boying” Remulla faulted the PNP Anti-Cybercrime Group (ACG) for failing to coordinate with the DOJ’s Inter-Agency Council Against Trafficking (IACAT) and for pushing through with the raid despite supposed lack of evidence.
(There were no specific grounds for the arrest, no specific complainants. They went there just to fish. That's what we have been saying for a long time. We previously agreed to build a case even before we do that. We will not agree with planting evidence on anyone.)
The 5 suspects, who were all Chinese, have been “released for further preliminary investigation,” which means that they will still be allowed to file their counteraffidavits and present their side before any criminal charge is lodged in court.
Of the more than 2,000 individuals “rescued,” around 1,100 are still in the Las Piñas POGO facility.
Remulla said the Filipinos were allowed to go home while foreigners without visas were already sent home.
Foreigners with visas, however, will still have to go through visa cancellation proceedings before they can go back to their countries.
Remulla blamed a culture of “arrests” within the PNP for what happened.
(Before, police would just keep arresting even without a case. If there is no case, they plant evidence. They can no longer do that. We will not allow that. That's why they're having problems.)
The Justice secretary said they are trying to address this culture by implementing new procedures under a new DOJ department circular which mandates prosecutors to take an active role in gathering evidence and building the case.
Human trafficking is one of the cases where coordination between prosecutors and law enforcers is required under the circular.
(The DOJ and PNP-ACG agreed to build a case before we do raids, everyone we arrest should have evidence against them. This was not followed. They pushed through with that, so many are pending without complete evidence. That's why we will talk again about this.)
In a press conference Monday, Sen. Raffy Tulfo also criticized the PNP, as well as immigration officers, Philippine Amusement and Gaming Corporation (Pagcor) and labor agencies for its alleged failure in addressing issues related to POGOs following the Las Piñas raid.
Tulfo also blasted the move by authorities to allow the Filipino POGO workers "rescued" to leave the premises in Las Piñas City without properly investigating whether they are really victims or complicit to the crime.
You know there is a problem when the DOJ Secretary accuses the PNP of planting evidence and says it's part of their culture to do so. In their defense the PNP says there were complaints and that is why they were able to obtain a warrant.
In an interview, the PNP denied the claim that the PNP ACG did not liaise with the IACAT.
“On the part of the PNP anti-cyber crime group, according to them, they have done the necessary coordination with Inter-Agency Council Against Trafficking (IACAT). And in fact, prosecutors were present during the initial stages of the implementation of search warrant and this inter agency council against trafficking the head of that council is the Department of Justice,” PNP spokesperson Col. Jean Fajardo told ANC’s Dateline Philippines.
She also insisted there were complainants and there were other companies operating inside the compound.
“There were complainants actually that who came forward and provided information that were the basis why the PNP ACG applied for search warrants. The mere fact that these search warrants were issued by the concerned regional trial court would only prove that there was indeed probable cause of human trafficking,” she added.
Who is telling the truth? DOJ Secretary Remulla or the PNP? Whatever the case when the PNP has both the Supreme Court and the DOJ scolding them for not properly building up cases and securing evidence you know there is a problem. Since this is part of PNP culture as Remulla admits it is certain this problem will not go away and criminals will continue to walk free for insufficient evidence. Such is what happened to Kerwin Epsinosa back in June.
 |
| https://newsinfo.inquirer.net/1781622/kerwin-espinosa-acquitted-by-makati-court-in-illegal-drug-trading-case-due-to-insufficient-evidence |
Rolan “Kerwin” Espinosa was acquitted of another drug charge by the Makati City Regional Trial Court.
In a 21-page ruling, Makati RTC Branch 65 granted the demurrer to evidence filed by Espinosa and former driver-bodyguard Marcelo Adorco.
A demurrer to evidence is a motion to dismiss on the ground of insufficiency of evidence where a defendant cites that the evidence produced by the prosecution is insufficient to make out a case, whether true or not.
Once granted, the case will be dismissed, and it is tantamount to an acquittal. If denied, the trial will continue with the presentation of evidence by the accused.
Espinosa and Adorco were accused of conspiracy to sell 80 kilograms of shabu on two instances–Feb. 16, 2013, and June 7, 2015.
Among the evidence presented by the prosecution are the testimonies of three police officers who testified for the prosecution.
Of the three, two testified, getting the testimony of Adorco. The other police officer was tasked to evaluate the evidence at hand and filed the case at the Department of Justice (DOJ), which led to its dismissal prompting the policeman to take another statement from Adorco.
Also included as evidence for the prosecution are Espinosa’s Judicial and Supplemental affidavit.
The court said testimonies of the police officers “have no probative value since they have no personal knowledge of the facts constituting the offense charged.”
The court said testimonies of the police officers were merely based on what Adorco has said, making it hearsay “and may not be received as proof of the truth of what he has learned.
Adorco’s sworn statements, which were the basis of the police testimonies, the court said, also have no value because he was not presented in court to identify and affirm his affidavits in court. He was also not cross-examined based on what he said in the affidavits.
The court also noted that Adorco also had no counsel when the police questioned him.
The court added that for Adorco’s supplemental affidavit, while a lawyer was present, no proof was presented that the lawyer did not confer with her client to determine if he was coerced or given advice that he had the right not to sign the affidavit.
The court said records showed that the lawyer was not chosen by Adorco but provided, and fees are paid for by the police, “thus putting into serious doubt her independence.”
The court added that there was also no record that witnesses were present when Adorco freely signed his third and fourth affidavits.
In Espinosa’s affidavit, the court said, “other than presenting the transcript of stenographic notes of the Senate hearing when Espinosa testified, the prosecution failed to show that such confession was made voluntarily.”
“As the prosecution failed to adduce evidence sufficient to overcome the burden of proving the guilt of both accused beyond a reasonable doubt, then the Demurrer to evidence ought to be granted,” the court said.
You need a lot more than mere testimony to convict someone. However, if that is all they had then the PNP should have made it unavailable and followed proper procedure. They did not. This problem of not following procedure is just as bad as cops who extort the public. As DOJ Secretary Remulla noted it's part of PNP culture. And he should be thankful for that culture because those kind of lapses are what got his son acquitted of drug charges.
 |
| https://newsinfo.inquirer.net/1713580/lapses-in-drug-case-lead-to-remulla-son-acquittal |
A Las Piñas City court on Friday acquitted Juanito Jose Remulla III of illegal drug possession, ruling that prosecutors were unable to prove that the son of Justice Secretary Jesus Crispin Remulla knew he was going to receive a package of illegal drugs and intended to keep them, and that there were lapses in the chain of custody of the evidence against him.
“When a court cannot be assured that the drugs presented as evidence are exactly what the prosecution purports them to be, a conviction will not be forthcoming,” said Ricardo Moldez II, the Las Piñas City Regional Trial Court Branch 197 acting presiding judge in his 34-page ruling.
“When there are glaring lapses or irregularities on the part of the law enforcers, the presumption of regularity usually accorded to [them] is effectively destroyed or immediately negated,” the ruling said.
It also quoted a Supreme Court decision upholding the constitutional protection of the right of an accused to be presumed innocent “against any manner of high-handedness from the authorities, however praiseworthy their intentions.”
“Those who are supposed to enforce the law are not justified in disregarding the right of the individual in the name of order. Order is too high a price for the loss of liberty,” the trial court said.
“[There is] no clear evidence that [the] accused had freely, consciously and with full knowledge possessed the alleged seized illegal drugs,” the court said.
Of course when the buffoonery of the PNP benefits his family Remulla is silent on the matter.
No comments:
Post a Comment