Push Admin

SC chastises cops, prosecutors, court for bungling P1-B drug case that led to acquittals of 5 Chinese, 1 Filipino

Article (news)

Mike Navallo, ABS-CBN News

MANILA — In a new ruling penned by Chief Justice Alexander Gesmundo, the Supreme Court has chastised law enforcers, prosecutors and even the regional trial court (RTC) for bungling the prosecution and trial of 5 Chinese and 1 Filipino alleged to be part of a drug syndicate. All 6 were eventually acquitted.The case stemmed from the arrest in November 2003 of Chinese nationals Jackie Ong (Ong Chi Seng), Chai Ong (Co Ching Ki), Tan Ty Siao, Go Siak Ping and Willie Gan, as well as Filipino Robert UY.They were charged with the illegal delivery of 9,384.7 grams of shabu and illegal possession of 119.080 kilograms of shabu and 111.2 kg of chloromethamphetamine hydrochloride in Valenzuela. Media reports at that time estimated the value of the drugs seized at P1 billion, citing the authorities.The police said they conducted an entrapment operation. Warned of a possible deportation, 4 Chinese allegedly offered to bribe cops with 10 kg of shabu. Uy, the sole Filipino among the accused, was arrested after he drove the car with the 10-kg shabu bribe on November 10, 2003. The other drugs were seized the next day in a warehouse in Valenzuela.The RTC acquitted 4 of the Chinese accused.But it sentenced Uy to life imprisonment for trafficking of shabu and up to 14 years and 8 months in prison for possession of dangerous drugs. Another companion, Willie Gan, was also sentenced to up to 14 years and 8 months in jail.Only Uy appealed the RTC ruling, with the appellate court raising his 14 year prison sentence to life imprisonment.On appeal, the Supreme Court found there were irregularities at the onset. SC said the prosecution failed to establish that Uy possessed the drugs recovered from the warehouse. “Accused-appellant [Uy] could not have had actual possession of the items seized from the warehouse because he was already in custody of the police officers when the search of the warehouse was conducted on November 11, 2003. It was simply impossible for accused-appellant to have had actual possession of said drugs since he was already in custody,” the court said.“Neither was there evidence that accused-appellant [Uy] had constructive possession over the warehouse and, in turn, its contents. It must be emphasized that the lessee of the warehouse was Willie Gan…Thus, the one who had dominion and control over the warehouse was Willie Gan, as the lessee thereof,” it added.The police, according to the high court, also failed to strictly follow the chain of custody rule under section 21 of the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act (RA 9165), which laid down the procedure for conducting the search and inventory of drugs recovered from a raid.For instance, the court pointed out, a different police officer seized the drugs while another one marked it. There was also no inventory receipt and they lacked insulating witnesses or witnesses required to be present during the inventory of confiscated drugs. At that time, 3 witnesses were required -- one from the media, a representative from the Department of Justice (DOJ) and an elected public official. (This requirement was reduced to just 2 witnesses in 2014.)The court noted there were no witnesses during Uy’s arrest while there was no DOJ representative during the search in the warehouse the next day.In its ruling, the Supreme Court emphasized the importance of observing the chain of custody rule.SC said the failure to comply with the strict requirements &quot;harbors serious concerns over the identity, integrity and evidentiary value of the seized items.&quot;“[C]ompliance with the requirements of Sec. 21 is mandatory and any failure to do so may only be excused upon (1) justifiable reasons; and (2) proof that the integrity and evidentiary value of the evidence were maintained,” it stressed.Simply put, the chain of custody rule ensures that the drugs seized are the same ones presented in court. But the Supreme Court observed “material gaps” in all the links of the chain of custody for the items seized in both operations.SC noted the turnover of the drugs seized were not properly documented -- from the apprehending officer to the investigating officer to the forensic chemist, then to the court.“Accordingly, due to the egregious deficiencies in the observance of the rule on the chain of custody of the items seized from both the November 10 and November 11 operations, the Court cannot conclude that the identity, integrity, and evidentiary value of the seized items were preserved,” it said.“Again, the large amount of dangerous drugs involved in the instant case does not excuse the failure to prove the identity, integrity, and evidentiary value of the seized items. There is reasonable doubt as to the corpus delicti. Accused-appellant [Uy] must be acquitted of both charges on the basis of reasonable doubt,” it continued.This prompted a strong rebuke from the high court.“The instant case reveals the law enforcement agents&#x27; complete ignorance of the requirements of Sec. 21 of R.A. No. 9165. The pieces of evidence submitted in the instant case, such as the photographs taken of the warehouse, demonstrate an utter lack of care in complying with the requirements of the law. Instead of taking a photograph of the items seized, the apprehending officers merely saw fit to take a photograph of the operatives securing the specimens recovered inside the warehouse and the operatives together with the items inside the warehouse. Further, there is nary any allegation that they even attempted to secure the required insulating witnesses for the November 10, 2003 incident,” it said.“This ignorance extends to the prosecution because the records are woefully bereft of any attempt on its part to even invoke justifiable circumstances to excuse the failure of the law enforcement agents to even attempt to comply with the mandatory requirements of Sec. 21 of R.A. No. 9165. The utter disregard for the law demonstrated by these actors is reprehensible,” it added.The Supreme Court also called out the RTC for the &quot;reprehensible error&quot; in the penalty imposed on Gan, Uy&#x27;s companion. It said RA 9165 is clear that the penalty should have been life imprisonment but instead RTC imposed a penalty of between 12 years and 1 day to 14 years and 8 months on Gan.But because of Uy’s acquittal, SC said the acquittal extends to Gan. “Truly, the acquittal in the instant case is ordained by the multiple errors, whether through negligence or misfeasance, committed by the prosecution, the defense, and the trial court,” it said.The high court said it is bewildered that the RTC acquitted some Chinese co-accused on the ground that the bribe was not proven as fact while convicting Uy, whose participation could only have arisen because of the bribe. It was Uy who drove the car which transported the 10kg shabu bribe.“The Court beseeches all actors in the administration of criminal justice in Our jurisdiction to effectively carry out their respective duties and responsibilities, keeping in mind that any failure on their part will likely result in acquittal. Such is the burden imposed on these actors, ordained by the evidentiary value required in criminal cases: proof beyond reasonable doubt,” it said.All 14 of CJ Gesmundo&#x27;s fellow-magistrates concurred in the ruling, with some of them rendering their own opinions.The ruling was dated February 21, 2023 but was only recently released to the public.In acquitting Uy and Gan, the high court also ordered their immediate release, almost 20 years since their arrest.Their arrest came long before a bloody drug war waged by former President Rodrigo Duterte and was decided by the Supreme Court after he stepped down from office.SC also furnished the heads of the DOJ, the Department of the Interior and Local Government, the Philippine National Police and the Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency with copies of the decision “for their information, guidance, and appropriate action.”

The Supreme Court has chastised law enforcers, prosecutors and even the regional trial court (RTC) for bungling the prosecution and trial of 5 Chinese and 1 Filipino alleged to be part of a drug syndicate. 

SC chastises cops, prosecutors, court for bungling P1-B drug case that led to acquittals of 5 Chinese, 1 Filipino

News

Entertainment

Lifestyle

Sports

Metro.Style

More

Traffic

Manila

Horoscope

News

SC chastises cops, prosecutors, court for bungling P1-B drug case that led to acquittals of 5 Chinese, 1 Filipino

Mike Navallo,

ABS-CBN News

Published Jul 03, 2023 11:19 PM PHT

Read More:

Supreme Court

illegal drugs

RA 9165

Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act

ABS-CBN is the leading media and entertainment company in the Philippines, offering quality content across TV, radio, digital, and film. Committed to public service and promoting Filipino values, ABS-CBN continues to inspire and connect audiences worldwide.

Corporate

Investors

Governance

International Distribution

Corporate

Governance

Investors

International Distribution

NPC Seal of Registration

Privacy Policy

AI Policy

Terms of Service

Advertise with Us

© 2025 ABS-CBN Corporation. All Rights Reserved.

NPC Seal of Registration

Privacy Policy

Terms of Service

AI Policy

Advertise with Us

© 2025 ABS-CBN Corporation. All Rights Reserved.

NPC Seal of Registration

Privacy Policy

Terms of Service

AI Policy

Advertise with Us

© 2025 ABS-CBN Corporation. All Rights Reserved.