Case closed

It’s good that crime solution will now be based on a guilty verdict handed down by the courts on the accused. And it’s even better that the conviction rate will now carry weight in promotions and assignments in the prosecution service, as President Aquino announced recently.

There are, however, obvious problems here. Courts can take years to resolve a case, and prosecutors are not the only ones whose performance can prolong a court trial. The presiding officer is the judge, who is under the administrative supervision of the Supreme Court.

P-Noy can of course encourage judges to get rid of their case backlogs by favoring efficient performers in promotions.

The other crucial player in the successful prosecution of a criminal case is the police officer – the one who makes the arrest or conducts a search, raid or seizure, and the one who conducts the initial investigation.

President Aquino should send a similar message to the Philippine National Police (PNP), which bases its crime solution achievement report on the number of cases forwarded to the prosecutor’s office.

Prosecutors can only do so much if a case has been bungled from the start by the police. And even if a case is backed by solid evidence, it can crumble in court if cops repeatedly fail to show up for hearings, indicating a loss of interest in the case.

The job of the PNP does not stop upon the formal indictment of a suspect. Police officers must appear in court throughout the trial. This could take several years; every court appearance can eat up half a working day.

There are several possible reasons for a cop’s seeming loss of interest in a case. One is sheer laziness, and he can’t be blamed entirely for this. Trials in this country can be tedious. I’ve wasted several hours in a court hearing simply to formally attest to the authenticity of a news item that appeared in this newspaper. That simple act can be postponed several times, with those summoned being notified of the postponement only when they are already in court.

I’ve also wasted several minutes being told by a judge that I should neither look at her directly nor turn my back to her when answering questions in court. I ended up talking to a nearby wall, and she seemed satisfied with that. I’m not surprised that it takes an average of six years to resolve simple cases in this country at the level of the trial court.

Cops don’t get any special allowance for these court appearances. If they face a countersuit by a defendant, for human rights violations for example even when the arrest is legitimate, they get no legal assistance from the PNP.

Another reason for losing interest in the case is corruption. A cop or his superior officer can declare a case “closed” upon the filing of the case in court. After receiving a payoff, the cop can stop showing up in court several times in an effort to have the case dismissed.

Bribery can start as soon as a cop appears at a crime scene. A case can be deliberately bungled at every step of an investigation, from the gathering of evidence to the arrest of a suspect, to ensure that the case will be dismissed in court.

This is why cases involving moneyed or influential suspects need close monitoring. Apart from VIP treatment given to moneyed suspects, cases against them could be deliberately designed for their eventual acquittal. By the time a judge throws out the case, the cop who deliberately botched the investigation would have been forgotten. He would be enjoying the nest egg that he earned from selling the case. He could even end up working for the VIP’s family.

* * *

A case can be bungled out of sheer incompetence or inadequate knowledge of the law.

Some cops are lawyers, but the average PNP member is not and can use legal advice at every step of an anti-crime operation and investigation.

The PNP can offer a regular refresher course on basic legal matters for all cops assigned to criminal investigation or who might be tasked to conduct a raid, arrest, search and seizure of evidence. That knowledge can be as potent as a well-aimed bullet in fighting crime.

Every major police command should have a legal team on hand 24/7 that can be consulted by any cop with questions about law enforcement procedures. The PNP has a legal office that should be expanded if it truly wants criminal cases closed.

A legal team can be consulted by cops prior to a court testimony, to ensure that the case cannot be punctured even by an accomplished defense lawyer. This walk-through can reduce the risk of bungling a testimony.

If cops and prosecutors present a tight case, it will leave no loopholes for the case to be dismissed on technical grounds by a corrupt judge. Joseph Estrada famously called such judges “hoodlums in robes” during his presidency, and the judiciary is not rid of them.

PNP members should also be trained in dealing with VIPs. In countries such as the United States, you don’t see cops treating VIP suspects with kid gloves, whether they are entertainment or sports stars, prominent public officials or business tycoons. In fact the bar for good behavior seems to be set higher for these prominent personalities.

In New York, no one is spared the “perp walk” – when arresting officers take an arrested suspect, usually in handcuffs, past a pack of journalists for a photo op. Wall Street swindlers went through it; so did disgraced International Monetary Fund director Dominique Strauss Khan.

The PNP leadership should start instilling a strong sense of respect and pride among cops for their uniform. In carrying out their duties, cops should not be intimidated by VIPs, especially in this country where too many prominent personalities have been implicated in organized crime and even murder.

Admittedly, this can be difficult when politicians and other VIPs keep demanding a say in the promotions and assignments of cops.

But with the backing of the President, this change in mindset can start now. It will be a significant blow against corruption and criminality, and it could help improve the conviction rate.