From Mirror Column of Sunday Post
Dura est lex sed lex so runs the Latin saying, if we still remember it. In context, it means that the law is tough but that is the law. That was what the Alabang Boys had found out but it seem that the progress of the case is going in their favor despite the circumstances. When the state prosecutors handling the case recommended the dropping of the case despite the evidence presented rumors flew thick and fast that large amounts of money changed hands. This may or may not be true.
To the layman following the case, he will be inclined to think that bribery had happened. The case had been filed with ample evidence to convict. But it is not so simple as that. A case filed in court sits on a legal minefield. It must satisfy the procedural and substantial elements of a case. This particular case was filed as a result of a buy – bust operation. That is; to make a case, an undercover agent offered to buy prohibited drugs from a suspected dealer. A sale was transacted, marked money and drugs exchanged hands. While the exchange was going on, the agent of the law apprehended the seller. The marked money and drugs were taken as evidence.
The looks of it, this would seem to be an open and shut case, that means the accused seller has no way to wiggle out. However, the government prosecutors to whom this case was submitted found technicalities, which would free the suspects. One of them was that the apprehending officer is a member of the Armed Forces of the Philippines, a marine officer to be exact. The law, they say, stipulates that an arresting officer must be a member of the Philippine National Police. The arrest was technically invalid.
On the other hand, the prosecutor may argue that a member of any government agency may be deputized as a member of a police task force. Upon deputization the agent may now have powers equal to any police agent so he could perform his assigned duties properly. Let the lawyer of the opposition try to destroy his stand. However, since the prosecutor decided not to file the case he was accused of being influenced. Now his bank accounts are scrutinized. This is a case dammed when you do dammed when you don't.
The most telling argument the government prosecutor had cited was a Supreme Court decision that the case cannot be pursued because the arresting officers did not conduct an inventory of evidence where the warrant was served. The arresting officials brought the car with incriminating evidence to their headquarters for the cataloguing of its contents. To counter that, the lawyers of the Philippine Drug Enforcement agency personnel arresting the Alabang boys contend that if the same decision is to be fully read, it further states that in case of warrant less arrest like a buy – bust operation, the evidence may be inventoried in the nearest police station or any appropriate place..
No conscientious prosecutor would like to handle a losing case. His office requires a conviction of any case he is to handle. Therefore, he would like to keep his bases covered, holes plugged and angles figured out. He would not like surprises sprang on him in the hearing. Here in this Alabang Boys case, he sees a loophole, which he think cannot be satisfactorily plugged so he recommends that the case may not be filed. So he says. It seems that he is acting for the Alabang boys instead of against them.
According to substantive law, there was a violation of a law, and because not only of the existence but also a preponderance of evidence, a case may be filed.. However, according to procedural law, the case may not be filed since a violation was committed in the apprehension. Again rumors and unsubstantiated accusations flew that there were large amount of money that changed hands to influence the case How the case will end depends on the lawyers. A corrupt lawyer may weaken a strong case by deliberately creating technical difficulties. As we had said before, it is not the truth that is on trial but the interpretation of the truth.
No comments:
Post a Comment