SC acquits drug suspects over 'witness rule' mess

THE Supreme Court has acquitted two suspects in a drug case for law enforcers' failure to comply with the mandatory witness rule.

In a decision penned by Associate Justice Samuel Gaerlan, the Supreme Court's Third Division granted the appeal of Gerald Flores and Harrold Francisco, who challenged their conviction by the lower court for violation of the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002.

Flores and Francisco, along with Louie Truelen, were charged in 2016 for the sale of methamphetamine hydrochloride, or shabu, following a buy-bust operation conducted by the Quezon City Police District (QCPD).

The evidence for the prosecution included a Chain of Custody Form and an Inventory of Seized/Confiscated Item/Property Form accomplished by the arresting officers. At the bottom of the latter form appear the names and signatures of several witnesses.

The Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Quezon City, Branch 77 found the accused guilty, noting that the validity of the buy-bust operation was not affected by the fact that there was no preparatory coordination with the Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency (PDEA).

The RTC also held that the police officers' actions enjoyed the presumption of regularity in the absence of any indication of an ill motive or intent on the part of the police officers to illegally incriminate the accused.

The RTC ruling was affirmed by the Court of Appeals, prompting the accused to file a petition before the Supreme Court.

Truelen's criminal liability was extinguished in 2021 following his death while in detention.

In granting Flores and Francisco's appeal, the Court stressed the importance of complying with the mandatory insulating witness rule, which requires the apprehending team to conduct a physical inventory of the seized items, and the photographing of the same immediately after seizure and confiscation, to be done in the presence of the accused, his counsel or representative, a representative of the Department of Justice, the media, and an elected public official. These witnesses shall be required to sign the copies of the inventory and be given a copy.

The Court further held that the required witnesses should already be physically present at the