Narco list culled from wiretaps illegal — Panfilo Lacson

MANILA, Philippines — Using wiretapped information from foreign sources linking Filipinos to crimes such as illegal drugs is a violation of Philippine laws and the state’s policy to protect its citizens, Sen. Panfilo Lacson said yesterday. 

“What if someone brings into the country marijuana, which he or she got or bought from a foreign country where possession and use of the same is legal? Will the person who brought in the marijuana not be violating the Dangerous Drugs Act?” Lacson, who headed the Philippine National Police from 1999 to 2001 and is the current chair of the Senate committee on public order and dangerous drugs, asked.

The senator contested Justice Secretary Menardo Guevarra’s pronouncement that if the wiretapped conversation came from a country where wiretapping is legal, it “may be passed on to the Philippine government and considered admissible in Philippine courts.”

Guevarra made the statement after presidential spokesman Salvador Panelo defended President Duterte’s plan to make public the so-called narco list, saying the information on those in the list came from wiretapping activities of foreign governments.

“Mr. Secretary, possession of wiretapped material is also an offense,” Lacson said in a post on his Twitter account on Thursday.

Under Republic Act 4200 or the Anti-Wiretapping Law, it is unlawful for any person not authorized by all the parties to any private communication or spoken word to secretly record such communication. 

Section 2 of the measure adds it is also unlawful “to knowingly possess” records or copies of any communication or spoken word secured via wiretapping.

Violators of the law, even those who aid or permit such wiretapping, face imprisonment of up to six years. Offenders who are public officials face perpetual absolute disqualification from public office.

Lacson also reiterated that Malacañang’s reported claim that its information on personalities involved in illegal drugs was based on wiretaps done by foreign governments does not make things right, except if those who conducted the wiretap were armed with judicial authorization.

He noted that under Article 3, Section 3 of the 1987 Constitution, the privacy of communication and correspondence “shall be inviolable except upon lawful order of the court, or when public safety or order requires otherwise as prescribed by law.”

“If we allow such wiretaps from foreign governments, is it now a government policy to condone invasion of privacy of its own nationals by other countries?” he asked.