Opposition senator Leila de Lima – who remains detained over what she has described as trumped-up drug charges against her – said the House bill providing legal presumptions on drug-related offenses is “unconstitutional.”

In a dispatch on Thursday, March 4, the senator opposed the lower chamber’s passage of House Bill (HB) No. 7814, which aims to give more teeth to the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002. It provides legal presumptions on who is considered an importer, financier, or protector of illegal drugs.

De Lima said that while HB No. 7814’s intentions are “generally good,” certain provisions are “patently offensive” to the Bill of Rights under the Constitution, which states that an accused is “presumed innocent until the contrary is proved.”

“Sa ilalim ng ating Saligang Batas, trabaho ng prosecution na magpakita ng ebidensya na gumawa ng krimen ang isang akusado. Hindi ang akusado ang kailangan magpatunay na siya ay inosente. Itong panukalang batas na isinusulong ng Kongreso ay labag sa ating Konstitusyon kaya hindi siya dapat maisabatas,” said De Lima. 

(Under our Constitution, it is the job of the prosecution to show evidence that the accused committed a crime. It’s not the accused who must prove that he or she is innocent. This bill being pushed in Congress violates our Constitution and should therefore not become law.)

The senator cited in particular Section 3 of HB No. 7814, which states that anyone spotted in the immediate vicinity of an area where illegal drugs are being sold, delivered, or distributed “is presumed to have been involved” in these illegal acts “unless proven otherwise.”

De Lima acknowledged that legal presumptions are “very useful” in civil cases, since they are a means to expedite trials by shifting the burden of proof from complainant to defendant under situations in which the allegations appear to be likely correct. But she said “mandatory presumptions have no place in criminal law.”

“The primordial presumption that governs all others when it comes to criminal law is the presumption of innocence. Anything contrary to that is unjust, invalid, and unconstitutional,” said De Lima. 

Other lawmakers who are against HB No. 7814 raised red flags over its provisions that allegedly presume the guilt of drug suspects upon apprehension.

But House committee on dangerous drugs chair Robert Ace Barbers, a primary author, said the bill does not presume guilt and does not go against the Constitution.

“Legal presumptions are not the same as presumption of guilt. Legal presumptions are used and allowed in our laws, embodied in judicial decisions and in international laws. Presumption of guilt…is illegal and has no place in modern society,” Barbers said in a statement.

He said the burden of proof that a drug suspect is guilty of a crime still rests on the prosecution, while the suspect has the burden to present evidence that the accusations against him or her are wrong.

“The presumed perpetrators of the illegal acts mentioned will have to be proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt as well before their guilt may be established. It is the commission of the prohibited act that is being presumed, not the guilt of the accused,” he added.

De Lima is one of the fiercest critics of President Rodrigo Duterte, who has long been criticized for waging his bloody war against drugs that has seen thousands of suspects killed in legitimate police operations and vigilante-style killings.

Last February 17, a Muntinlupa City court acquitted De Lima in one of her 3 conspiracy to commit drug trading charges. But the senator cannot be released yet since she still has two other pending cases. – Rappler.com