By Benjamin Cuaresma
MANILA — The Supreme Court (SC) has acquitted a Pangasinan resident previously convicted of illegal possession of a firearm, ruling that prosecutors failed to establish his guilt beyond reasonable doubt due to critical lapses in handling evidence.
In a 19-page decision released on June 18, the High Court overturned the conviction of Tony Baclig, emphasizing that the prosecution failed to preserve the integrity of the firearm allegedly seized from him following a motorcycle accident in Tayug, Pangasinan in 2016.
Writing for the Court, Associate Justice Henri Jean Paul Inting said the evidence presented by the prosecution was insufficient to sustain a conviction, citing breaks in the chain of custody of the seized firearm.
Motorcycle Crash Led to Arrest
Court records showed that Baclig, a retired member of the former Citizen Armed Force Geographical Unit (CAFGU), was involved in a motorcycle accident along a provincial road in Tayug shortly before midnight on Oct. 2, 2016.
Responding police officers assisted Baclig and, during their interaction, noticed a .45-caliber Taurus pistol inside his bag. Unable to present a valid firearm license or supporting documents, Baclig was arrested and later charged with illegal possession of a firearm.
High Court Finds Chain of Custody Defects
While the Supreme Court acknowledged that the firearm was lawfully seized, it found serious deficiencies in the manner the evidence was handled after confiscation.
The Court noted that police officers failed to immediately mark the firearm at the place where it was seized and did not provide any explanation for the omission.
According to the ruling, such failure created uncertainty regarding the identity and integrity of the evidence presented in court.
The magistrates also pointed out that authorities did not adequately document how the firearm and ammunition were secured, transported, examined, and stored after their confiscation.
The Court stressed that criminal convictions require proof beyond reasonable doubt, a standard that was not met in Baclig’s case due to the prosecution’s inability to establish an unbroken evidentiary chain.
Because of these unresolved gaps, the SC ruled that reasonable doubt existed regarding whether the firearm presented during trial was the same item allegedly recovered from Baclig.
As a result, the High Court reversed the lower court’s ruling and ordered Baclig’s acquittal, reaffirming the constitutional principle that doubts in criminal cases must be resolved in favor of the accused.
ia/xf
