Barbers: Presumption of innocence remains in House-approved dangerous drugs bill

Surigao del Norte Representative Robert "Ace" Barbers on Wednesday sought to allay the fears of some groups and individuals that certain legal presumptions in the measure seeking to strengthen and amend the anti-drug law will violate provisions in the 1987 Constitution.

House Bill 7814, which aims to provide for a legal presumption on who is considered an importer, financier, and protector or coddler of narcotics, was passed on third and final reading on Tuesday.

Barbers, chairperson of the Committee on Dangerous Drugs, said that in the bill, the constitutional right of the accused “to be presumed innocent until proven guilty” remains "undisturbed and totally respected."

“There is nothing to worry that our trial courts might inadvertently apply double presumption in actual cases because no less than our new rules on evidence (which took effect only last May 2020) have made it clear that a double presumption has no place in our jurisdiction. The pertinent provision is found in Rule 131 Section 6 of the new Rules of Evidence,” Barbers said.

“The presumption of innocence means that the burden of proof is always on the government to satisfy that [the] accused is guilty of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt. The burden to prove the guilt of the accused does not change as it remains with the State or the prosecution," he added.

Barbers said the presumptions in the proposed amendment arise only after the prosecution has presented proof beyond reasonable doubt of certain facts, upon which the presumption is based.

He further noted that the presumptions are not conclusive. Barbers also said the legal presumptions are being recognized in international law and laws of other nations.

"They are merely provided for disputable legal presumptions of facts or circumstances derived or inferred from facts proven during trial," Barbers said.

"At the end of the day, it is still the judge’s call to evaluate whether or not the prosecution has proved the charge beyond reasonable doubt in the light of all the admitted evidence on record of the case," he added.

ACT Teachers partylist Representative France Castro and Bayan Muna partylist Representative Carlos Isagani Zarate voted no on the measure, saying it may invalidate the presumption of innocence until proven guilty among the public.

More teeth

Barbers said the main reason why the bill was pushed in the lower chamber of Congress was because of the admission of the Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency that there has been no record of any person who has been arrested or charged in court as protector or coddler and financier of suspected drug lords beginning 2013 up to the present.

“The data provided to us by the PDEA was only from the period 2013 to 2021. But in reality, since Republic Act 9165 was passed or enacted into law in 2002, wala pa tayong naitala na na-aresto, na-kasuhan at na-convict ni isa mang drug protector/coddler o financier,” Barbers said.

Barbers added that the report from the anti-drug agency had indicated the dismal performance of anti-narcotics agents, especially in the prosecution of illegal drugs cases.

"There had been 5,860 dismissed cases involving 6,704 accused; and 12,440 drug cases involving 13,708 accused, all of whom were acquitted of the charges filed against them for various reasons," he said.

The lawmaker believed that it is necessary to add more teeth to the present anti-drugs law, particularly against protectors and financiers.

"Alam naman ng lahat na di maglalakas-loob ang isang drug manufacturer or distributor, lokal man a banyaga, kung wala silang protector/coddler o financier dito sa atin o kahit saan pa mang bansa,” he said. -NB, GMA News