SC says arresting officers mishandled evidence; orders release of drug suspect

THE Supreme Court has reminded anti-illegal drug operatives that keeping the integrity of items confiscated from an accused is vital in the successful prosecution of drug cases.

In a 12-page resolution made public on January 19, the Court’s First Division issued the reminder after it reversed and set aside the decision made by the Court of Appeals (CA) upholding the conviction of Chiu Chien Chun, a Chinese national suspected of being a member of a Chinese drug syndicate operating in the country. The Regional Trial Court of Pasay City made the ruling on July 3, 2017, convicting the accused for illegal possession of almost 10 kilos of shabu amounting to P50 million.

The SC acquitted Chiu, also known as “Qui Jian Jun,” of the charges and ordered his immediate release from jail.

Chiu was arrested during a buybust operation on December 12, 2015 at the corner of Diokno Street and Coral Way, Mall of Asia, Pasay City by operatives of the Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency-special Enforcement Service (PDEA-SES) and Philippine National Police-antiillegal Drug Group (PNP-AIDG).

During the trial, Chiu insisted that he was arrested without a warrant and there was no buy-bust that took place on December 12, 2015.

He said he went to SM Mall of Asia to meet his friend, Michael Lee, when, suddenly, a vehicle collided with his car.

A man then came out from the other vehicle pointing a gun at him while another one began rummaging through his car.

Afterwards, the man with the gun boarded on the driver’s seat of Chiu’s car while he was led by the other man to the back passenger seat.

However, the Pasay RTC did not give weight to Chiu’s claim that he was framed-up by operatives.

Thus, Chiu was sentenced to life imprisonment and made to pay a fine amounting to P2,000,000.

The CA affirmed the Pasay RTC’S ruling on September 20, 2018 and held that his warrantless arrest and the search of his vehicle came about as a result of a sanctioned entrapment.

Arresting officers linked to drug trade

FOLLOWING the denial of appeal, Chiu elevated his case before the SC where he reiterated that no buy-bust operation took place against him.

In his supplemental brief, Chiu told the Court that the operation led by then PDEA-SES Director Ismael Fajardo Jr. and Police Inspector Lorenzo Bacia of the PNP-AIDG should not be given credence because President Duterte included them among police officers involved in illegal drug trade in the country.

It can be recalled that Fajardo and Bacia were included in Duterte’s list of the top officials of

PDEA and PNP that were involved in illegal drug trade.

PDEA Director General Aaron Aquino fired Fajardo from his post on September 14, 2018.

He claimed the two were known to recycle illegal drugs and use the same for their illegal activities.

The petitioner added that the gym bag allegedly containing illegal drugs found in his car could have been recycled from other drug criminal cases.

Chiu also asked the Court for his acquittal because the chain of custody was not observed in the handling of the items allegedly seized from his car.

SC says operatives mishandled evidence

IN granting the petition of accused-appellant Chiu, the Court held that it was able to establish that the buybust team “poorly mishandled” the evidence as there were several lapses in their conduct of the seizure and custody of the items.

The SC said instead of opening the gym bag at the place of the arrest as required under the rules, the buybust team proceeded to the PDEA headquarters in Quezon City with the gym bag and the seized items.

“We emphasize that the initial links in the chain of custody begin with the seizure and immediate marking of the items. This step is vital as it forestalls switching, planting or contamination of evidence,” the SC explained.

The SC added that the police officers did not immediately mark the evidence seized during the operations, and there was also no written account on who kept guard of the gym bag while it was in transit to PDEA together with Chiu.

“What is critical in drug cases is not the bare conduct of inventory, marking, and photographing. Instead, it is the certainty that the items allegedly taken from the accused retain their integrity, even as they make their way from the accused to an officer effecting the seizure, to an investigating officer, to a forensic chemist, and ultimately, to courts where they are introduced as evidence,” the Court said.

“What is clearly established here is that the prosecution failed to convince us that planting, tampering, alteration, or substitution of substance in the initial link in the chain of custody is unlikely,” the SC added.