The Relevance of Section 21 (R.A. No. 9165) in Prosecuting Sections 5

and 11

By:BENJAMIN R. SAMSON

(Prosecutor, Department of Justice)

PDEA as Lead Agency• The Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency (PDEA) is the

lead agency in the country’s campaign against illegal drugs (Section 86)

• Mandated, among others, to implement or cause the efficient and effective implementation of the national drug control strategy formulated by the Dangerous Drugs Board thereby carrying out a national drug campaign program which shall include drug law enforcement, control and prevention campaign with the assistance of concerned government agencies [Section 84(a)]

PDEA…

• The Internal Rules and Regulations implementing the aforesaid provision is silent as to the consequences of the failure of the law enforcers to seek the authority of the PDEA prior to conducting the buy-bust operation

Sections 5 and 11

• Section 5 punishes the sale, trading, administration, dispensation, delivery, distribution and transportation of dangerous drugs and/or controlled precursors and essential chemicals

• Section 11 penalizes possession of dangerous drugs

Sec. 5…

• For the crime of illegal sale of drugs to be committed, the identities of the buyer and the seller, the object and the consideration and the delivery of the thing sold and the payment therefor must be established (People v. Aure, G.R. No. 185163, 17 January 2011)

Sec. 11…

• In the prosecution of illegal possession of dangerous drugs, it must be shown that: (1.) the accused is in possession of an item or an object identified to be a prohibited or regulated drug; (2.) such possession is not prohibited by law; and (3.) the accused freely and consciously possessed said drug (People v. Villahermosa, G.R. No. 186465, 01 June 2011)

Corpus Delicti and Section 21

• Essential in proving the elements of Sections 5 and 11 is the burden on the part of the prosecution to establish beyond reasonable doubt the existence of the drug, the corpus delicti of the crime

• Section 21 provides the procedures to be followed by law enforcement officers

Corpus Delicti…• The apprehending team having initial 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/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 copy thereof (Section 21)

Chain of Custody

• Means the duly recorded authorized movements and custody of seized drugs or controlled chemicals or plant sources of dangerous drugs or laboratory equipment of each stage, from the time of seizure/confiscation to receipt in the forensic laboratory to safekeeping to presentation in court

Chain of Custody…

• Non-compliance with [these] requirements under justifiable grounds, as long as the integrity and the evidentiary value of the seized items are properly preserved by the apprehending officer/team, shall not render void and invalid such seizures of and custody over said items (People v. Almodiel, G.R. No. 200951, 05 September 2012)

Chain of Custody…

• Failure of the law enforcers to comply strictly with Section 21 was not fatal. It did not render the arrest of the accused illegal nor the evidence adduced against him inadmissible. The law excuses non-compliance under justifiable grounds (People v. Sta. Maria, G.R. No. 171019, 23 February 2007)

Chain of Custody…

• What is of utmost importance is the preservation of the integrity and evidentiary value of the seized items, as the same would be utilized in the determination of the guilt or innocence of the accused (Marquez v. People, G.R. No. 197207, 13 March 2013)

Presumption of Regularity in the Performance of Duties

• Absent any showing of bad faith, it is presumed that the official acts of an officer of the law are presumed to be legal and made in accordance with law. It is for the courts to decide whether there is basis to sustain the presumption or disregard the same

Presumption of Regularity…

• In cases involving violations of the Dangerous Drugs Act, credence is given to prosecution witnesses who are police officers, for they a presumed to have performed their duties in a regular manner, unless there is evidence to the contrary suggesting ill motive on the part of the police officers or deviation from the regular performance of their duties (People v. Tion, G.R. No. 172092, December 16, 2009)