In order to sustain a conviction for the offense of illegal sale of dangerous drugs, the necessary elements are: (1) identity of the buyer and the seller, the object and the consideration; and (2) the delivery of the thing sold and the payment. It is essential that a transaction or sale be proved to have actually taken place coupled with the presentation in court of evidence of the corpus delicti. The corpus delicti in cases involving dangerous drugs is the presentation of dangerous drug itself and its offer as evidence.^[1]

 

It is essential that the identity of the seized drugs be established with moral certainty, and it must be proven with exactitude that the substance bought/recovered during the buy-bust operation is exactly the same substance offered in evidence before the court. This requirement is known as the chain of custody rule under R.A. No. 9165, created to safeguard against doubts concerning the identity of the seized drugs.^[2]

In order to obviate any unnecessary doubts on the identity of the dangerous drugs, the prosecution has to show an unbroken chain of custody of the items seized. It must be able to account for each link in the chain of custody of dangerous drug from the moment of seizure up to its presentation in court as evidence of the corpus delicti. The Dangerous Drugs Board (DDB) has expressly defined chain of custody involving dangerous drugs and other substances in the following terms in Section 1 (b) of DDB Regulation No. 1, Series of 2002:

1. “Chain of Custody” means the duly recorded authorized movements and custody of seized drugs or controlled chemicals or plant sources of dangerous drugs or laboratory equipment of each stage, from the time of seizure/confiscation to receipt in the forensic laboratory to safekeeping to presentation in court for destruction. Such record of movements and custody of seized item shall include the identity and signature of the person who held temporary custody of the seized item, the date and time when such transfer of custody were made in the course of safekeeping and use in court as evidence, and the final disposition.

Simply put, as part of the chain of custody procedure, the apprehending team is mandated, immediately after seizure and confiscation, to conduct a physical inventory and to photograph the seized items in the presence of the accused or the person from whom the items were seized, or his representative or counsel, as well as certain required witnesses, namely: (a) if prior to the amendment of RA 9165 by RA 10640, a representative from the media AND the Department of Justice (DOJ), AND any elected public official; or (b) if after the amendment of RA 9165 by RA 10640 an elected public official AND a representative of the National Prosecution Service OR the media. The presence of these witnesses safeguards the establishment of the chain of custody and removes any suspicion of switching, planting, or contamination of evidence.^[3]

As a mode of authenticating evidence, the chain of custody rule requires the presentation of the seized prohibited drugs as an exhibit be preceded by evidence sufficient to support a finding that the matter in question is what the proponent claims it to be. This would ideally cover the testimony about every link in the chain, from seizure of the prohibited drug up to the time it is offered in evidence, in such a way that everyone who touched the exhibit would describe how and from whom it was received, to include, as much as possible, a description of the condition in which it was delivered to the next in the chain.^[4]

From the foregoing, the following are the links that must be established in the chain of custody in a buy-bust situation:

First, the seizure and marking, if practicable, of the illegal drug recovered from the accused by the apprehending officer; Second, the turnover of the illegal drug seized by the apprehending officer to the investigating officer; Third, the turnover by the investigating officer of the illegal drug to the forensic chemist for laboratory examination; and Fourth, the turnover and submission of the marked illegal drug seized from the forensic chemist to the court.^[5]

While non-compliance with the prescribed procedural requirements will not automatically render the seizure and custody of the items void and invalid, this is true only when “(i) there is a justifiable ground for such non-compliance, and (ii) the integrity and evidentiary value of the seized items are properly preserved.” Thus, any divergence from the prescribed procedure must be justified and should not affect the integrity and evidentiary value of the confiscated contraband. Absent any of the said conditions, the non-compliance is an irregularity, and a red flag, that cast reasonable doubt on the identity of the corpus delicti.^[6]

Compliance with the guidelines on the preservation of the chain of custody of the dangerous drugs subject of a prosecution for the illegal sale of dangerous drugs must be clearly and convincingly established by the State. Any lapse in the chain of custody must be affirmatively explained by the Prosecution; otherwise, the chain of custody will be held to be broken and insufficient to support a conviction of the accused.^[7]

[1] People vs Casa, G.R. No. 254208, August 16, 2022

[2] Idem

[3] People vs Somira, G.R. No. 252152, June 23, 2021

[4] Idem

[5] Idem

[6] Idem

[7] G.R. No. 199271, October 19, 2016