Pubdate: Thu, 20 Jan 2005 Source: People's Journal (Philippines) Copyright: 2005 People's Journal Contact: http://www.journal.com.ph/contactus.asp Website: http://www.journal.com.ph/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/3381 Author: Alfred Dalizon Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/meth.htm (Methamphetamine) Cited: Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency http://www.pdea.gov.ph WHY GOV'T IS LOSING DRUG WAR: LOUSY PROSECUTORS + ROGUE DRUG ENFORCEMENT AGENTS GOVERNMENT prosecutors should explain why major drug cases were dismissed last year even at the preliminary investigation stage, Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency chair Undersecretary Anselmo S. Avenido Jr. said yesterday. "We've not been remiss in our duties but there are instances wherein major cases for violation of Republic Act 9165 or the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002 are being dismissed during preliminary investigation," he said. "Di pa nga nakakapunta sa korte eh dinidismiss na yung mga kaso kaya talo kami dito. What we want here is a full-blown trial where we can fully present our side," Avenido said. The PDEA chief explained that a case of violation of RA 9165 is immediately filed before a government prosecutor's office for appropriate action shortly after a successful anti-drug operation is concluded. "Once the case is filed, the PDEA no longer has any say on the matter except to monitor the progress of the case, thus, we should not be blamed for losing drug cases because we operate by the book and all our actions are legal," he said. Section 92 of RA 9165 imposes heavy punishment on any government officer or employee who causes the delay and bungling of the prosecution of drug cases. The law says that "any government officer or employee tasked with the prosecution of drug-related cases who, through patent laxity, inexcusable neglect, unreasonable delay, or deliberately, causes the unsuccessful prosecution and/or dismissal of the said drug cases, shall suffer the penalty of imprisonment ranging from 12 years and one day to 20 years without prejudice to his/her prosecution under the pertinent provisions of the Revised Penal Code." Avenido said he had thoroughly explained the PDEA's predicament to Cebu Rep. Antonio Cuenco, vice-chair of the House oversight committee on dangerous drugs. He said that Cuenco wants an explanation on why cases filed against owners of the sites of shabu laboratories smashed by the PDEA and the Philippine National Police last year were dismissed. "He (Cuenco) wants the inclusion of the owners of these shabu labs and warehouses in the criminal charges. We have filed charges against the owners of these secret drug establishments and want them to explain their side during a full-blown trial," Avenido said. Avenido said what they want is for Department of Justice prosecutors to consider the charges being filed against the owners and avoid dismissing the cases outright as soon as the accused have presented "contracts of lease" between them and the drug lords. "Their common defense is the presentation of contracts of lease kaya do'n pa lang sa fiscal, dinidismiss na ang kaso at di na nakakarating sa korte. Yan ang problema natin," he said. Avenido said prosecutors even wanted to dismiss the case they filed against the owners of an establishment that yielded a major shabu lab in Mandaue City in Cebu last year but they managed to ask top DoJ officials to reconsider the decision. Cuenco earlier noted that only one of the 21 raids of shabu laboratories and storage facilities in 2004 resulted in the actual filing of criminal charges. Avenido, however, said that what Cuenco meant to say was that only one of the cases filed against the owners of the raided establishments prospered in court. Avenido said Cuenco is fuming over the fact that the charges against the owners of these laboratories and warehouses were dismissed when they are clearly liable as accomplices at the very least. Cuenco urged the DoJ to "immediately probe this matter and probe their ranks. These slipshod prosecutors and rogue drug enforcement agents deserve not only outright dismissal and forfeiture of benefits and perpetual disqualification from government service," he said. The People's Journal earlier reported that last year, anti-narcotics authorities won more than 1,200 convictions but lost nearly 600 others mainly due to errors by law enforcement agents including illegal arrests and raids. Records from the PDEA showed that from Jan. 1 to Dec. 31, 2004, a total of 1,213 cases of violation of RA 9165 were won by the government resulting in 1,281 drug offenders jailed. Avenido said 37 of the accused were sentenced to death while 60 others were meted out life imprisonment. Avenido said that at least 11 major drug cases they monitored since 2002 have ended in the conviction of 24 big-time drug smugglers and manufacturers, 21 of them Chinese nationals. But PDEA records also showed that due to legal technicality, a total of 271 cases of violation of RA 9165 were dismissed during the period. More than 12,000 cases filed in the last two years are still pending in court. Officials said that most of the cases were dismissed because of illegal arrests of suspected drug pushers and seizure of evidence, lack of documentary evidence and failure to prove that suspected drug dealers actually owned the seized drugs. Many prosecution witnesses including those from the police also failed to attend court trials, bolstering the concern of top anti-narcotics officials that many government agents show diligence only in identifying and arresting drug suspects but fail to build strong cases against them. Deputy Director General Ricardo F. de Leon, commander of the PNP Anti-Illegal Drugs Special Operations Task Force, said that to stop the court losses, all anti-narcotics officers should make arrests in order to convict. He told PJ he now wants all AIDSOTF personnel to make arrests with the end in view of convicting the offender through proper submission of evidence, witnesses and testimony in court. - ---