Nahuhuling droga kunan agad ng larawan on site – Korte Suprema

PINAALALAHANAN ng Supreme Court (SC) ang mga otoridad na dapat kaagad kuhanan ng larawan ang mga nasamsam na iligal na droga sa mismong lugar kung saan ito nahuli.

Sa isang resolution na ginawa noong June 14 at isinapubliko nitong Miyerkules (December 20), sinabi ng SC Special First Division “the inventory and taking of photographs generally must be conducted at the place of seizure.”

Dahil dito, pinawalang-sala ng SC sina Allan Almayda at Homero Quiogue sa paglabag sa Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002 na may kinalaman sa kanilang pagkaaresto noong Abril 19, 2012 sa Legazpi City kungsaan nakuhanan umano sila ng mga ahente ng Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency (PDEA) ng kabuuang .387 gramo ng shabu na nagkakahalaga ng P4,500.

“Here, it is undisputed that the physical inventory and photograph-taking of the seized items were conducted at the PDEA Office, and not at the place of arrest,” husga ng SC.

Pinuna ng SC ang PDEA agent na nagpanggap na buyer ay nag-testify sa trial ng regional trial court (RTC) na, pagkatapos ng anti-illegal drugs operation, “the team then returned to the PDEA office to conduct the inventory and photograph-taking in the presence of Barangay Chairwoman Azotillo, Barangay Kagawad Belbes, media representative Romero, and DOJ representative Aragon, and accused-appellants.”

Sinabi ng tribunal na ang PDEA agent “failed to give any justification why the inventory was not conducted at the place of arrest.”

Sinabi ng SC, dahil sa nangyari, “there was already a significant break such that there can be no assurance against switching, planting, or contamination even though the subsequent links were not similarly infirm.”
“In other words, there is no way by which the already compromised identity and integrity of the seized drug items can ever be cleansed of its incipient defect,” diin ng SC.

“Hence, accused-appellants must be acquitted as a matter of right,” husga ng SC.

Dahil sa procedural infirmities sa chain of custody, sinabi ng tribunal “the integrity and evidentiary value of the seized items cannot be said to have been preserved.”

“These procedural infirmities cast serious doubt on the identity and integrity of the corpus delicti,”diin ng SC.

Hindi lamang ang chain “did not link at all”, saad ng high court “it unjustly restrained appellant’s right to liberty.”

“If the chain of custody procedure had not been complied with, or no justifiable reason exists for its non-compliance, as in this case, then it is the Court’s duty to overturn the verdict of conviction,” diin ng kataas-taasang hukuman.