“Are we a full-fledged police state already? Is this part of dress rehearsals or trial balloons for martial law?” inquired the National Union of People’s Lawyers in a legal advisory dated September 15.
On Wednesday night, September 13, netizens alerted the public of Quezon City (QC) police entering bars along Katipunan Avenue and inspecting bags of patrons. The police reportedly told those whose bags they inspected that they are looking for guns and they are also looking for drugs. Posts over social media also admonished people to stay away from hang-out places in Katipunan Avenue as the police are “doing illegal searches in bags.” Bars searched in the Katipunan area were nearby schools Ateneo De Manila University and Miriam College, while a part of University of the Philippines Diliman also sits along the busy thoroughfare.
“These are patently illegal acts and openly unconstitutional. These are brazen violations of the right to privacy and the right against unreasonable searches and seizures,” declared NUPL.
Official QCPD reports said around 10 policemen from QC Police Station 9 or Anonas station conducted “Oplan Bakal” at three bars, Tortuga, Lan Kwai and Jeepney Bistro, on Esteban Abada in Barangay Loyola Heights around 11:15 p.m.
Conflicting police actions and statements?
Quezon City Police District (QCPD) district Chief Supt. Guillermo Eleazar said “Oplan Bakal” is similar to “Oplan Galugad and “Oplan SIta”, where Bakal is a search operation conducted in bars, Galugad in communities and Sita on motorbike riders.
Eleazar spoke the day after the inspections saying the inspection in bars was legal and also a part of the standard operations of the police. Eleazar said the QC police has been doing it for years and the recent operations in question was also done with the coordination of the barangay officials and with consent of the bar owners. Eleazar said sometimes upon the request of bar owners because there may be patrons conducting illegal activities inside their properties.
QC Police Station 9 commander Supt. Alex Alberto, meanwhile, said Loyola Heights Barangay Chairman Ceazar Marquez had complained that the three establishments searched on September 13 sells alcoholic drinks when their permit is only to sell food. Alberto, however, beyond the barangay chairman’s complaint, admitted to doing bag searches of the patrons for drugs and came up with nothing. But then, his superior Eleazar said the inspections in bars were not related with the government’s war on drugs.
Eleazar also said that the police could not force people to present their bags for inspections and that the owner’s of the bags must open their bag themselves. He also said this was “no different” from the bag inspections done by security guards in malls or office buildings. Bag inspections in malls, office buildings and train stations, however, are mandatory and people refusing bag inspection may be refused entry to these establishments. The bag inspections conducted by QC police are with those already inside the establishments.
NUPL President Atty. Edre Olalia said the QC police’s claim that the mandatory bag inspections are standard operations is “wrong and illegal and does not conform to elementary standards”.
“[Coordination, complaint or consent] with the barangay officials does not make it right. The barangay [official] would be liable, too, because it cannot consent for someone else. The right and its waiver is personal,” added Atty. Olalia.
Quick legal advisory
In its legal advisory in response to the ‘random but mandatory bag inspections’, NUPL said “there are only very specific instances where searches without warrants can be done and they must always be based on probable cause and not mere suspicion, speculation or fishing expedition.”
They listed “some very limited instances of valid searches even without warrants” that include only:
- search incidental to a lawful arrest (NUPL noted that the arrest must be lawful to start with)
- search of a moving vehicle which is the object to be seized
- search of illegal objects in plain view (without the searching officer doing anything to discover it)
- searches voluntarily allowed, permitted or consented by the person to be searched (but not because of fear, subtle coercion or passive acquiescence)
- searches in customs for contraband
- administrative searches upon entry like in places open to the public like malls
The NUPL also emphasized that “only an active judge can issue a search warrant.” Issuance of a search warrant cannot be done even by the highest officials in government like President or Speaker of the House, or not by the highest officials in the executive department, like the Justice Secretary, Armed Forces of the Philippines and Philippines National Police Chiefs, Cabinet Security Cluster, and Solicitor General among others.
The judge also had to have made a very thorough examination before a warrant can be issued. The specific description of the place to be searched and the things to be seized upon sworn application by the searching party, the QC police in this case, have to be spelled out in the warrant.
“Otherwise, all things seized illegally cannot be admitted as evidence as they are considered ‘fruits of a poisonous tree’ and the courts will treat them as legally non-existent,” opined NUPL.
Putting QC police to task
Just this week, the NUPL and its clients’ court petition to stop the random, involuntary, house-to-house drug tests in Payatas and Scout Tuazon communities compelled the QC police to stop these operations which the NUPL view as violations of constitutional rights. Eleazar said that the involved Police Stations 6 and 10 were only overzealous but had not meant to violate the public’s rights.
NUPL is pursuing the petition for prohibition and injunction they filed against the QC police so the random, involuntary, house-to-house drug tests may be stopped in general and not only in relation to their clients.
The NUPL said that the people would still have to be vigilant that the QC police will keep their word.
As to the random but mandatory bag inspections, NUPL vowed to put the police to task once more.
“If the police persists with these roving bands, we will bring them again to court that they will be too tied up defending their actions,” NUPL declared.
