SC acts on 鈥榙eath warrants,鈥� curbs Metro Manila court powers
NEW RULES The Supreme Court sets new rules to stop local courts from issuing search warrants outside their regions and to require body cameras for law enforcers to protect fundamental rights. —INQUIRER FILE PHOTO
MANILA, Philippines — Judges in Manila and Quezon City are no longer allowed to authorize search operations by law enforcers in the provinces under new rules issued by the Supreme Court following complaints of abuse and the killings of activists.
The high tribunal also required law enforcers to make video recordings of their implementation of court-issued warrants or face sanctions.
In Administrative Matter No. 21-06-08-SC issued on June 29 and made public on Friday night, the Supreme Court pruned the special power of local court judges to issue search warrants beyond their judicial regions.
Several human rights groups lamented that these judicial orders had become virtual “death warrants” for political activists and members of progressive groups that had been Red-tagged by the government.
In the most recent case, at least nine activists were killed on March 7 in simultaneous raids by police and soldiers who were implementing search warrants issued by the executive judges of the Manila and Quezon City Regional Trial Courts (RTCs) in the provinces of Rizal, Batangas and Cavite. The police said those killed were all suspected New People’s Army rebels who allegedly fought against the raiders.
Article continues after this advertisementThe high tribunal said the guidelines mandating the Philippine National Police and other law enforcers to use cameras in implementing search and arrest warrants were issued in view of “increasing reports of civilian deaths resulting from the execution of warrants issued by trial courts.”
Article continues after this advertisementAppreciative
The National Union of Peoples’ Lawyers (NUPL), one of the groups that pleaded for the high court’s intervention, lauded the magistrates’ action.
“We are grateful and appreciative of the responsive action of the Supreme Court on the matter,” NUPL president Edre Olalia told the Inquirer.
“Generally, it is grounded on abundant experience and appears to have taken into good account the clamor to address the situations that [resulted] in [human] rights violations,” he said.
Olalia said the rules included several of their recommendations to the court, such as requiring the submission of videos during inquest proceedings, limiting the power of judges to issue search warrants and prohibiting the multiple application for search warrants.
In its 17-page resolution approving the new rules, the court said body-worn cameras made it possible “to support law enforcement and to guarantee the protection of fundamental rights.”
Video recordings “can deter the excessive use of force by law enforcement officers in the execution of warrants and can aid trial courts in resolving issues that may become relevant in the criminal case, such as conflicting eyewitness accounts,” it said.
Special docket book
The resolution revoked Chapter V, Section 12 of A.M. No. 03-8-02-SC, which authorized the executive judges of the Manila and Quezon City RTCs to grant search warrants outside their territorial jurisdiction.
The Supreme Court required the lower courts to maintain a special docket book containing the names of judges who handled the applications for warrants, the details of the applications and the postoperation reports.
“The executive judges and vice executive judges concerned shall issue the warrants, if justified, which may be served in places outside the territorial jurisdiction, but within the judicial regions of these courts,” the tribunal said.
This means that from now on a search warrant issued by a Metro Manila judge may only be enforced within and not outside the National Capital Region.
In October 2019, a search warrant issued by the Quezon City RTC was served in Bacolod City in Negros Occidental at the offices of Bayan Muna, Gabriela and the National Federation of Sugar Workers resulting in the round up of 57 people, including 10 minors, who were allegedly participating in firearms and explosives training.
But in March this year, the Bacolod RTC dismissed the illegal possession of firearms and ammunition case against at least six of those arrested after it nullified the Quezon City court’s warrant.
A Mandaluyong court freed a journalist charged with illegal firearms possession after finding that the warrant issued by the same Quezon City court was also defective.
The Supreme Court required law enforcers to use at least one body camera and an “alternative recording device,” such as a mobile phone with camera, to make a digital recording of the implementation of search, arrest and seizure warrants.
In addition, the court directed the law enforcers to inform the subjects of judicial warrants that they were being recorded and to respect their privacy.
Contempt of court
“When death results from the execution of the search warrant, an incident report detailing the implementation of the search, the reasons why such death occurred, the result of related inquest proceedings … shall likewise be submitted,” the court said.
“Failure to observe the requirement of using body-worn cameras or alternative recording devices, without reasonable grounds, during the execution of the search warrant shall render the evidence obtained inadmissible for the prosecution of the offense for which the search warrant was applied,” it stressed.
The high court warned that a law enforcer who disregards the strict guidelines on the use of body-worn cameras would be held in contempt of court.
It recognized that state agents needed to turn the cameras off at certain times for their security, to protect the identities of witnesses and to ensure the success of operations.
In a statement on Saturday, PNP Chief Guillermo Eleazar thanked Chief Justice Alexander Gesmundo for supporting the effort to “further professionalize our organization and to strengthen a human rights-based approach” to conducting their operations.
Eleazar said the guidelines would become “an instrument to normalize transparency and accountability” for every member of the force and would help “erase doubts and speculations in the conduct of our operations,” especially against illegal drugs.
The PNP chief ordered the creation of a technical working group to study and incorporate the Supreme Court rules to its draft memorandum on the use of body-worn cameras.
Olalia said certain portions of the rules “may unwittingly provide gaps, loopholes and opportunities” for state agents to disregard the guidelines.
One possible flaw, he said, was the lack of specific liability on the part law enforcers should their body cameras fail to record their operations due to an alleged malfunction.
—With reports from Dexter Cabalza and Arianne Suarez of Inquirer Research
