Summons readied on top PDEA execs, agents, prov'l prosecutors
An all-star cast of the region’s top officials and agents of the Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency (PDEA) and the Iloilo Provincial Prosecutors Office will be in one room in the afternoon of March 5th.
This, as at least eight members of the 14th Congress particularly the chairman of the House Committee on Dangerous Drugs will be in Iloilo for an all-afternoon kick-off probe of the province’s “Balasan Boys” controversy.
At the center of the legislative investigation – open to the public – are allegations of drug links and protection involving drug suspects in what has now been dubbed the case of “Balasan Boys.”
Intelligence sources told The News Today (TNT) that no less than PDEA big boss, General Dionisio Santiago will be present though it was not clear if he was part of those “invited’ cum summoned in said House probe.
The investigation in aid of legislation was pushed by Iloilo Fifth District Representative Neil Tupas Jr. In an interview with Febs Morales of Aksyon Radyo Iloilo, Tupas Jr. said at least P170,000 in congressional budget was allotted for the half-day probe.
Reportedly confirmed to attend the Iloilo hearing are Cebu Representative Antonio Cuenco, Muntinlupa Representative Roque Biazon, Cagayan Representative Manny Mamba, Cavite Representative PD Varzaga and Representative Roquito Ablan, Dangerous Drugs House Committee chairman.
It will be an interesting ‘get-together’ for the PDEA and the Office of the Provincial Prosecutors particularly two top prosecutors, Provincial Prosecutor Bernabe Dusaban and Ricaflor Obsequio. The duo has since been in the center of the “Balasan Boys” controversy that caused the end of Iloilo Provincial Government support to said office.
Iloilo Governor Niel Tupas Sr. accused the provincial prosecutors to be “friends of drug personalities.”
A challenge was then hurled at the governor to name names that generated a “in due time” response from the Tupas Sr. and eventually, this House probe by Tupas Jr.
Prosecutor Dusaban has since decried what he termed were “baseless” statements of Tupas through his top aide, Manuel Mejorada.
To note, it was Mejorada who was the bearer of the governor’s message in a strongly-worded letter practically against the entire Provincial Prosecutor’s Office.
The letter also informed Dusaban of the end in all Provincial Government financial aid stating that it cannot be of assistance to an office that serves as “stumbling block” in the governor’s anti-illegal drug drive.
The provincial prosecutor subsequently disclosed documents to disprove the claim of “drug cases mishandling.” This with particular references to the drug charge against one Noli Teope and a drug bust related to a raid in June 2008.
Dusaban released copies of the questioned Resolution docketed as I.S. Nos. 2008-114 to 116. Twin violations of Republic Act 9165, the Dangerous Drugs Act was cited particularly Sections 11 for possession of dangerous drugs and 12 for possession of paraphernalia. Also included in the complaint was illegal possession of ammunition with Teope as named respondent.
Section 12 was dismissed for insufficiency of evidence following the prosecutor’s finding that “(T)here was no drug paraphernalia or instruments recovered from the possession of the respondent.”
Yet clearly recommended thereafter was the filing of “two (2) attached separate informations for violation of Sec. 11, Art. 11 of RA 9165 and Violation of RA 8294 against respondent Noli Teope be approved for filing with RTC branch 66 stationed at Barotac Nuevo, Iloilo.”
Relatedly, TNT further obtained a drug-incident report submitted to the Department of Justice Central Office.
Records showed that in the period of January 2003 to December 31, 2008, a total of 209 drug cases were received by the Provincial Prosecutors for inquest proceedings or preliminary investigation. Cases dismissed were 23 while cases filed in Courts reached 193.
In 2008 alone, records showed 29 received with 28 cases pursued in Courts. One case though involved seven separate violations with the same incident against the same respondents.
“That per Resolution, other respondents were charged before the Courts while the case was dismissed as to his co-respondents,” the report went.