Chain of Custody Rule in Drug Cases

The law warrants the strict compliance on procedure in

handling pieces of evidence related to drug cases.

One of the most common defenses in the criminal prosecution of drug cases
under the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002 (R.A. No. 9165) is the
failure of the prosecution to establish the “chain of custody.” The law prescribes
a strict procedure for handling object evidence, particularly the custody of
confiscated dangerous drugs by law enforcement agencies and by the courts.
Non-compliance with the said procedure renders the evidence non-admissible,
resulting in the eventual acquittal of the accused if there is no other sufficient
evidence to convict him.

Suppose a person is arrested pursuant to an entrapment operation effected by

the police for the apprehension of drug traffickers. During the arrest, it is a
standard operating procedure for the law enforcement officer to confiscate the
illegal drugs obtained in the crime scene.

Section 21 of R.A. No. 9165 directs the apprehending team having initial custody
and control of the drugs to immediately undertake a physical inventory of the
confiscated drugs, and to take photographs of the same, in the presence of the
accused or the person/s from whom such items were confiscated and/or seized,
or his/her representative or counsel. The law also requires a representative from
the media and the Department of Justice (DOJ) and any elected public official
who shall be required to sign the copies of the inventory.

Within 24 hours upon confiscation of dangerous drugs, these must be submitted

to the PDEA Forensic Laboratory for a qualitative and quantitative examination.
The forensic laboratory examiner must then make a certification of the forensic
laboratory examination results. The said certification must be issued within 24
hours after the receipt of the subject item/s.

What if the confiscated drugs are so numerous as to render it impossible to

conduct an examination within 24 hours of confiscation? In this case, a partial
laboratory examination report shall be provisionally issued stating the quantities
of dangerous drugs still to be examined by the forensic laboratory. However, a
final certification must be issued on the completed forensic laboratory
examination within the next 24 hours. In other words, the law only allows an
extended period of 24 hours.

While the PDEA has custody of the confiscated drugs, the police agents shall file
the complaint with the prosecutor, who in turn files the criminal Information in
court. Seventy-two (72) hours after filing, the court must conduct an ocular
inspection of the confiscated, seized and/or surrendered dangerous drugs.
Within 24 hours thereafter, the PDEA shall then proceed with the destruction or
burning of the confiscated drugs, in the presence of the accused or the person/s
from whom such items were confiscated and/or seized, or his/her representative
or counsel, a representative from the media and the DOJ, civil society groups
and any elected public official.

The PDEA Board afterward shall issue a sworn certification as to the fact of
destruction or burning of the subject item/s together with the representative
sample/s in the custody of the PDEA. The sworn certification must be submitted
to the court having jurisdiction over the case. In all instances, the representative
sample/s shall be kept to a minimum quantity as determined by the Board.

During the trial, the prosecution has the burden of proving the chain of custody
— i.e., the prosecutor must prove that the sample of drugs being presented into
evidence forms part of the inventory of drugs at the time and place of
confiscation. Moreover, the prosecutor must prove that the said drugs which are
being presented into evidence are the same substances taken from the
possession of the accused.

If there are substantial gaps in the testimony of witnesses on the chain of

custody of the seized dangerous drugs, these raise doubts about the
authenticity of the evidence presented in court, and therefore the accused
cannot be convicted beyond reasonable doubt.
Respicio & Co. specializes in criminal law and defense of persons accused of
drug-related offenses.