I saw on TFC channel the House inquiry on the Alabang Boys (Alabang drug-peddlers, according to non-lawyer congressman) and I could not help myself being entertained by what could be described more as a “House Comedy” rather than a “House Inquiry”.
But I admire the courage of the young prosecutor who dismissed the case and junked the evidence because it was the “fruit of a poisonous tree” and tried to wither away the condescending inquisition of the House.
The practice of conducting an inquiry to determine the justness of any resolution that may be churned out by the DOJ will be beneficial to the people because it strengthens the principle of transparency, and will make the DOJ on the lookout not only on the framework of its resolution but of prose, syntax and grammar too. But if we consider that the inquiry was conducted because the personalities involved happened to be the scions of the well-connected, the issue of transparency is diluted, the attempt to harass the DOJ becomes a letdown in the House inquiry.
The other letdowns are:
1. The disconnect of one congressman condescendingly breathing down on PDEA Chief Legal Officer that inasmuch as the Supreme Court has not laid down a fast and hard rule on “buy bust” operation there is none that exist as an operational routine in the PDEA. He was trying to connect the statement of the PDEA Chief Legal Officer about the pronouncement of the SC that inasmuch as the rule has not been laid by the SC, the agency is not free to adopt one to guide its operatives in the matter. This is nonsense.
2. Prosecutor and the House with lawyer-members in it are of the same view that “entrapment” and “buy-bust” are the same. They are not. Evidence obtained in entrapment is inadmissible while in “buy-bust” it is admissible. The difference is that in entrapment, the criminal activity was the product of police endeavor or coaxing for one to commit a crime and enticed him to perpetrate a crime; i.e, police officer chanced upon a reformed thief offered him an opportunity to steal again. In a “buy-bust”, the police posing a legit buyer tried to buy the contraband from the suspected felon who is ready and willing to sell the contraband. The evidence gathered in the “buy-bust” is admissible.
3. Warrant of arrest and search warrant is the rule but there are exceptions where warrantless arrest and seizure can be justified because the crime is being committed, about to be committed or the officer has a reasonable ground to arrest and apprehend someone because a felony being committed. Neither the House, nor the PDEA and the prosecutor explained the rule with clarity so the people can understand the import of what they were quarreling about inasmuch as they have decided to inquire on the matter in full view of the TV audience. Also, a warrantless seizure is allowed if it is an incident to a lawful arrest. The PDEA Chief Legal Officer has failed to elucidate on this issue to counter argue the position of the young prosecutor that those evidence against the “Alabang Boys” were not the “fruit of the poisonous tree” because they fall under those exceptions and therefore the dismissal of the case was erroneous.
4. The insistence of one House member that the findings of the PDEA Chief Legal Officer cannot be submitted to the House because it was gathered from the testimony of operatives who were not present and therefore the evidence is incompetent. The Congressman was confused about the concept of admissibility of evidence and the weight of the evidence. The narrative/findings of the PDEA lawyer is admissible as a “public record” or “business record” of what is ordinarily being performed at the PDEA (i.e. after gathering the testimonies of the operatives, the Chief Legal Officer can make a summary of the incident and the investigation-summary has some degree of reliability and therefore admissible though its weight is lesser than that of the affidavit/testimony of the operatives themselves.
5. Jovencito Zuno, the most senior prosecutor and most competent State Prosecutor I have come to know, who happened to be in the House could have clarified those loose ends and could have come out with a more dignified posture on the issue, but he chose not to, and that was my biggest letdown.
Contributing Writer: Jose C Camano
Popularity: 1% [?]
JCC,
Di ka rin nakatiis mag contribute ng blog dito sa FV.
kg,
walang magawa. . . considering that some of the contributions/regular fv writers do not see the bigger issues, methink will chip in my humble point of view. :)
I have a comment posted at “Alabang Boys – A Big Syndicate” . Should be a sequel of the above-post. :)
oo nga eh, nauna ko pa nga nabasa yung part 2.
Thanks for laying out some of the main technical issues, matters of definition and distinction, etc. However, one interesting point raised by Hon. Golez is “the Law of Common Sense.” At the point for example when your “courageous” public prosecutor was about to be cited for contempt, the context was his ability to violate that Law.
A House hearing is after all, not a proper trial in a Court of Law, where precisely the lack of all transparency is the cloak for all the crap that we saw involving Meralco and the Court of Appeals, and last year, bribery allegations within SCORP itself.
While it is true that many laymen do not realize there is a kind of mathematical precision to the Law, it would be wrong to suggest that the Law of Common Sense can be violated with impunity by fancy lawyer talk. It only means that the right kind of lawyer was not able to definitively expose the misdirection and self-justification–the logical fiddlesticks– of the prosecutor during the hearing, because admittedly there is a bit of grandstanding going on.
You do not mention by the way the portions of the hearing in which Zuno was directly contradicting the plain statements of his boss, Raul Gonzalez regarding these very matters.
It’s like talking to gang of thieves talking to the DOJ. You get the feeling they are all hiding and protecting something, mainly their own arses, gimmicks and graft. There is no honor among them, though there is plenty of “expertise,” very learned, very practiced.
DJB,
Not at all rooting for the Prosecutor, but I admired his courage in taking all the heat and the flak of what could be a done deal made by the higher-ups.
Please read also the supposed sequel, Alabang Connection Part 2 posted at “Alabang Boys – A Big Syndicate” . :)
Jcc,
It is entirely possible that Prosecutor is merely being a “team player”. Verano allegedly being his old prof at FEU Law School, and Blancaflor’s relationship with both, seems to suggest the SOP in the Old Boy’s Network was at play here.
But the one thing I know is that as the price of bribes goes up, so does the required authority for approval. That January 5 order from Raul Gonzales is CYA all the way and smacks of self-serving b.s.
What happens at DOJ is Raul Gonzalez’s responsibility. He should be made to answer for everything that was happening before January 5.
All these small fish he will easily allow to fry, while he swims surreptiously away with a grin and a grimace of relief on the back of some obviously self-justifying order?
DJB,
There is no love lost between you and DOJ R. Gonzales, it seems.
But from the looks of it, Sec. Gonzales would be forced to file the case and let the Alabang Boys make another rounds of “grease” for the judge?
I don’t know, the prosecutor and the judiciary have been so vilified and for good reason. But there are still few remaining prosecutors and judges that are distinguished and honorable.
BTW the practice of requiring the adverse counsel to write the decision/resolution is not new in Philippine legal practice. Have you any recollection of the case of a big telephone company whose lawyer had written the decision of the case for the Supreme Court that when exposed by the media, this Jurist had conveniently retired from the service?
So what is new about Atty. Verano’s being able to type on DOJ’s letterhead for the Order to be signed by his pal at the DOJ?
Haha. Right your are JCC. But even the Cynics must have their day. If that be today, it will pass and there is always tomorrow.
It has become my firm conviction that the govt is basically one Giant Stealing Machine. I bear especial umbrage for fractured souls like the present occupant of the Office of the SOJ — who has acted with much, much less than was expected of him when that Edsa Dos posse arrived–fresh from the Erap lynching.
Having tasted of constitutional flesh and blood, and having gotten away with it after getting SCORP the Curia’s blessing, the culture that grew up around Raul Gonzalez was that of the Circled Wagon…Save the Queen at all costs.
But sooner or later the game gets long in the tooth, and the Game Clock tick-tocks with ominous tones, and the rotten deals and stinks begin to leak out.
The Posse too has been caught with its hand in the till so often that Bribery could become the administration’s long-lasting and durable hallmark. Need I recite the Litany?
Why, it’s just like Tamany Hall! What a shameful record Gonzalez and his Mistress will leave with.
But their noses will bleed and if the Tiger bites their heads off, I’ll be there with the cold shoulder.
JCC,
You always ask this question: “So what else is new?”
Is this your way of urging we succumb to, and surrender to evil? Or to think that we cannot do better anyway, so why try?
Why must some outrage be “new” for us to be outraged by it? Or even just a lil piqued?
Look, the Ten Commandments describe ancient, primordial evils. “So what else is new?” sounds like a baseless plea for an Eleventh thou shalt not.
But I am impressed with the blase attitude towards practices and habits that would certainly outrage the Public, were they aware of them.
DJB,
The practice is not new, but the outrage should be the same. :)
re buy-bust and entrapment
perhaps the writer meant “instigation”, not entrapment, see People v Doria and Gaddao(G.R. No. 125299 January 22, 1999)
Ann Tugbang,
My mistake, “entrapment” in U.S. construct is illegal, but in RP the term is equivalent to “buy-bust”. But the U.S. interpretation is more in accord with constitutional precepts whether U.S. Cons or RP Constitution.
Here is a Wikipedia entry:
Entrapment is the act of a law enforcement agent inducing a person to commit an offence which the person would otherwise have been unlikely to commit.[1] In many jurisdictions, entrapment is a possible defense against criminal guilt.
Please don’t limit yourself with RP Jurisprudence as most of them are warped. :)
i am only interested on the benefits of sending drug pushers to jail and how PDEA manages its operations to catch more drug pushers using the three suspects. PDEA can watch the movie ” gangs of new york” where DENZEL washington ( drug lord )got caught. His jail time was shorter when he provided information of the other druglords in new jersey and other areas of new york. ( negotiating information and plea bargaining)
The benefits to our society and to the youth of this country will also depend on how PDEA manages its operations. It is best to send these boys to jail in exchange for information.
If our drug enforcement agency and its judges only know the business side of this mess and the revenue that can be generated thru exchange of information to catch the big fish ,this country will be better. The big fish can pay more bribes :) think about it.
you guys can talk about it like an ocho ocho mentality ( ouch). the bigger picture is to reduce crimes and illegal drug use that is not affecting our society especially the youth of this country.
jcc great blog and thank you.
correction:
that is NOW affecting our society especially the youth of this country.