OSG to SC: Recall order on submission of reports on drug war

Government lawyers have asked the Supreme Court (SC) to recall its order for authorities to submit reports pertaining to the war on illegal drugs, saying the documents are irrelevant to the pending case assailing the constitutionality of the controversial campaign.

The government was earlier asked by the SC to provide within 60 days a list of persons killed in legitimate police operations from July 1, 2016 to Nov. 30, 2017; list of deaths under investigation from July 1, 2016 to Nov. 30, 2017; list of Chinese and Fil-Chinese drug lords who have been neutralized; and list of drugs involved whether shabu, cocaine, marijuana, opioids, etc.; and comparative tables on index crimes.

The SC also asked for statistics of internal cleansing within the police force; drug watchlist in affected areas; reports and documents regarding alleged drug war victims Aileen Almora, Rowena Aparri, and Jefferson Soriano; pre- and post-operation reports in all the incidents cited in the petition filed by the group of Sister Ma. Juanita Daño; number of buy-bust incidents in San Andres Bukid, Manila from July 1, 2016 to Nov. 30, 2017; list of warrants and warrantless arrests in high value target police operations; and list of cases under investigation under the Internal Affairs Service of the Philippine National Police.

But after reviewing the "relevant laws and jurisprudence," the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) said it was "compelled" to file the motion for reconsideration to the Court's December 5, 2017 directive.

"By requiring the respondents to submit the aforementioned information and documents, the Court has ventured into unwarranted factual inquiries," the motion stated.

The OSG said the SC cannot go "beyond determining the textual commitment" of PNP Command Memorandum Circular (CMC) No. 16 – 2016 or Oplan Double Barrel and Department of Interior and Local Government Memorandum Circular 2017-112, which establishes a system of anonymous reporting of suspected criminals.

"Besides, the Court is not a trier of facts. In resolving constitutional issues, it is not allowed to receive and weigh evidence, which it will necessarily perform upon receiving the information and documents required of the respondents. Tersely put, the petitions raise a facial challenge to the issuances that will not demand the production and evaluation of evidence," the OSG said.

The OSG said submitting these documents will compromise ongoing police anti-drug operations and put at risk the lives of informants.

“This risk is more pronounced in cases of unsuspecting [HVTs] who, when alerted of their inclusion in the drug watchlist, would be more capable of identifying the persons responsible for their inclusion in the list.

“Like all constitutional guarantees, the right to information, with its companion right of access to official records, is not absolute. While providing guaranty for that right, the Constitution also provides that the people’s right to know is limited to ‘matters of public concern’ and is further subject to such limitations as may be provided by law,” the motion stated.

The OSG said the documents involve information and other sensitive matters that could spell the success or failure of follow-up operations of policemen and other law enforcement bodies, and endanger the lives of individuals who are on the list and those already under custody.

The government added the submission would not only compromise ongoing police anti-drug operations but also put at risk the lives of informants who provide such information.

Complying with the directive might also set a dangerous precedent in other and future writ of amparo petitions since it "would open the floodgates for the filing of groundless petitions that aim at nothing other than engaging in fishing expedition," according to the OSG.

“Moreover, amparo petitions may be utilized and manipulated by drug syndicates themselves to discover the amount of confidential information that the government has against them,” the motion read.

The government clarified that it has no intention of "disregarding or defying" the SC order, saying it filed an appeal in order to "strengthen the rule of law and prevent abuse of judicial processes.

"By recalling the order, the Court will not have to evaluate the evidence presented by the respondents; it will be unduly forced to sift through facts that are not even relevant to the resolution of the constitutionality of the assailed issuances," the motion stated.

The Almora petition alleged that the PNP CMC No. 16 – 2016 gave the policemen authority to kill drug suspects and that the  DILG Memorandum Circular 2017-112 violates the right to due process of law and to be presumed innocent.

The Daño petition, on the other hand, pertains to concerns of several members of a religious order and residents of San Andres Bukid in Manila who asked the SC to issue a writ of amparo in order to protect them from the alleged harassment of the members of the Manila Police District.

Responding on behalf of the DILG, PNP and the Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency (PDEA), the OSG said the petitions must be dismissed because these were marred by “speculations, unfounded information, and unsubstantiated arguments.”

"A revisit of the petitions and the affidavits attached to them will reveal that the petitioners’ allegations are unsupported by competent eyewitness accounts or corroborative evidence," the OSG said in its comment filed with the SC.

"The petitions are hinged mainly on hearsay and on the assumption that the men in plainclothes lurking near the crime scenes were police officers. Considering that the petitioners’ allegations are not adequately supported by substantial evidence, their claim that the anti-drug operations conducted by the respondents are illegal has no leg to stand on," it added. 

It also characterized the collection of information regarding drug personalities as a legal government activity that “taps into the citizenry’s sense of social responsibility to protect their respective neighborhoods.”

The OSG also raised procedural issues such as the petitioners’ lack of standing in filing the petitions and lack of proper verification and certification against forum shopping. — RSJ, GMA News