2013

HARMONIZING AND
RECONCILING DRUG AND
AIDS LAWS
The main concern of this legal research is to review the current national policies of HIV and
AIDS and drug use . Topics to be discussed will focus more on what and how the government
action and intervention in partnership with other stakeholders played in curbing the spread of
HIV and AIDS. The most controversial intervention was the harm reduction program or the
needle exchange program for people who inject drug (PWID) or injecting drug users (IDU)
which is no longer a marginal approach in most of the countries in Asia, however, in the
Philippines, there is a legal barrier that may prevent the immediate use of this program in which
it gives rise to a question of whether there is a problem of implementation or an irreconcilable
fundamental legal framework of the conflicting provisions concerned. Ana Portia B. Carza,
Legal Research Subject, LLB Student, PUP College of Law]

Harmonizing & Reconciling some conflicting provisions of RA9165 and RA8504, are these
possible?-2013

Paper Outline

I.

Outline

II.

Abstract

ii

III.

Introduction

Definition of Terms

When does HIV start in the Philippines

Current Drivers of the Epidemic

Latest HIV/AIDS Registry
How to curb the spread of the epidemic

IV.

Legal Issue /s

The PNAC

Drug use related offences

Restricts harm reduction program

10

Policy Review

11

Cases Decided by Supreme Court

19

V.

Analysis Footnotes

30

VI.

Conclusion

34

VII.

Recommendation

34

VIII.

Bibliography

35

Harmonizing & Reconciling some conflicting provisions of RA9165 and RA8504, are these
possible?-2013

i.

Abstract

The main concern of this legal research is to review the current national policies of HIV and
AIDS and drug use . Topics to be discussed will focus more on what and how the
government action and intervention in partnership with other stakeholders played in
curbing the spread of HIV and AIDS. The most controversial intervention was the harm
reduction program or the needle exchange program for people who inject drug (PWID) or
injecting drug users (IDU) which is no longer a marginal approach in most of the countries
in Asia, however, in the Philippines, there is a legal barrier that may prevent the immediate
use of this program in which it gives rise to a question of whether there is a problem of
implementation or an irreconcilable fundamental legal framework of the conflicting
provisions concerned . In this legal research, an in-depth analysis of the conflicting legal
issues and provisions of the special laws involved (Section 12. Possession of Equipment,
Instrument, Apparatus and Other Paraphernalia for Dangerous Drugs. of R.A. 9165 and
Section 3. Definition of terms. (r) "Prophylactic" refers to any agent or device used to
prevent the transmission of a disease of R.A. 8504)

acts together is feasible to address

shall be done , if reconciling of their

these contradictions/dilemmas at the height of the

exponential increase of HIV infection through injecting drug use among People who inject
drugs.

Harmonizing & Reconciling some conflicting provisions of RA9165 and RA8504, are these
possible?-2013
Definition of Terms
a) As used in the Implementing Rules and Regulations of RA 8504.
1. Acquired Immunity Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS) A condition characterized by a
combination of signs and symptoms, caused by HIV contracted from another which
attacks and weakens the bodys immune system, making the afflicted individual
susceptible to other life-threatening infections.
2. AIDS Registry The official record of the number of of reported HIV positive and AIDS
cases and deaths confirmed by either the Bureau of Research and Laboratories (BRL) or
the Research Institute for Tropical Medicine (RITM), and reported to the National HIV
Sentinel Surveillance System (NHSS).
3. Health Worker a person engaged in health or health related work in hospitals, sanitaria,
health infirmaries, health centers, rural health units, barangay health stations, clinics and
other health related establishment.
4. Human Immunodeficiency Virus The virus which causes AIDS.
5. Injecting Drug (IDU)- Individuals who inject prohibited or regulated drugs.
6. Non-Government Organization (NGO) A private, non profit voluntary organization that
is committed to the task of socio-economic development and established primarily for
service.
7. Prophylactic A medical agent or device used to prevent the transmission of a disease. It
does not include antibiotics and vitamins.

b) As used in the Implementing Rules and Regulations of RA 9165

1. Practitioner any person who is a

licensed physician, dentist chemist, medical

technologist, nurse, midwife, veterinarian or pharmacist in the Philippines.

Harmonizing & Reconciling some conflicting provisions of RA9165 and RA8504, are these
possible?-2013
ii. Introduction
Almost thirty years ago when the Philippines recorded its first HIV and AIDS cases
(1984). The most predominant mode of transmission was the heterosexual contact (male to
female contact) until 2007, and in 2009, the shift geared towards homosexual transmission
which later described as Male having sex with Male or MSM to be more gender-sensitive as to
the former since the latter focuses more on the behaviour. HIV infection in the Philippines is
often described as "low and slow," referring to the low prevalence rate and slow rate of new
infections.[1] Despite the low prevalence of HIV transmission in the Philippines, recent cases
reported by the Department of Health and the World Health Organization indicate a "hidden and
growing" pace of spread in the country. Reported HIV infections stand at less than 0.1% of the
population [2]. However, trends in the last three years show a steep rise in new HIV infections,
with 380 recorded for January 2013 alone , the highest so far recorded. While the rates of HIV
infection are stabilizing in most parts of the world, the Philippines, one of seven countries
globally, has more than 25% increases in HIV incidence since 2001[3].
There are numerous factors suggesting that HIV is increasing and ready to emerge at
high rates, including: the lowest documented rates of condom use in Asia; increasing casual
sexual activity; returning overseas Filipino workers from high-prevalence settings; widespread
misconceptions about HIV/AIDS; and high needle-sharing rates among injecting drug users[4].

11

[1]TreatASia , available at http://www.amfar.org/articles/around_the_world/treatasia/older/hiv/aids_in_the_philippines__low_and_slow_/ ( last

accessed March 06, 2013)

[2] UNDP in the Philippines, HIV Programme, available at http://www.undp.org.ph/?link=21&id=11&act=press_release_listing.( last accessed March
07, 2013

[3] id.

[4] http://www.biomedcentral.com/1758-2652/13/16 last accessed March 06, 2013)

Harmonizing & Reconciling some conflicting provisions of RA9165 and RA8504, are these
possible?-2013
From being a dormant indicator among the cases of HIV infection people who inject
drugs or PWID, with an onset of eight (8) infections from the cumulative period of 1984-2009,
it dramatically soared to 147 in 2010, successively 110 in 2011, and 175 in 2012[5].
This high incidence of infections among PWID is a new development since there has been
no double digit entry of new infections from this group in the country, though this has been
identified as a vulnerable group by the Joint Programme on HIV/AIDS, however, HIV infection
among injecting drug users has been increasing in number over the past two decades and thus,
they are not considered as such anymore , as they evolved as one of the most-at-risk populations
to date. Vulnerable group are those people who are at high risks of exposure in getting infected
because of the situations they are in while most-at-risks population are those people who are
likely to become exposed and affected due to certain behaviors that may create and increase
through risky practices by freelance sex workers and men having sex with male[6].
The latest HIV/AIDS registry pegs the number of IDUs 175 in 2012. According to DOH
Assistant Secretary Eric Tayag, a recently Fifty-three percent of injecting drug users in Cebu
(2011) have tested positive for HIV. Assistant Secretary Eric Tayag said a recently conducted
survey on the rate of new and old infections showed 160 of 301 IDUs positive for the human
immunodeficiency virus.If this is applied to the estimated IDU population of 3,500 then there
are 1,760 (estimated HIV positives[7]).
2

[5] Philippine National HIV/AIDS Registry, 2010,2011,2012

[6] UNDP in the Philippines, HIV Programme, available at http://www.undp.org.ph/?link=21&id=11&act=press_release_listing.( last accessed March
07, 2013)

[7] Available at http://www.interaksyon.com/article/3793/more-than-half-of-cebus-injecting-drug-users-hiv-positive ( Last accessed Feb, 26,2013]

Harmonizing & Reconciling some conflicting provisions of RA9165 and RA8504, are these
possible?-2013
Tayag said they have coordinated with the local government of Cebu to figure out measures to
curb the alarming number of cases. In general, the IDU population has a median age of 16 years.
Most share used syringes, accept payment for sex, and feel at risk to HIV but have never been
tested before. He said the steep prices of prohibited drugs have pushed the IDU population to cut
back on purchasing new syringes. Since most of the drugs they inject are available in very small
doses, IDUs tend to inject themselves more than once to achieve a high[8].
Apparently , needle sharing is not a controlling factor of HIV transmission in the Philippines as a
whole, however, recent upsurge in the number of HIV infection among people who inject drugs
for the last three years is indicative that it will soon become a driver of the epidemic in a larger
context alongside with MSM, thus an urgent need to strategize and mobilize the concrete
response is imperative by espousing the harm reduction program one more time as the only
effective measure to prevent the transmission among the said group, looking from micro to
macro level which substantiates the link of infection among other most-at-risk populations due
to their mobility as the effects and nature of their economic, social and political interaction .
Would the concerned government personnel or agencies allow us to take off without our hand
toiled in the punitive sanctions of this Drug Law making feasible to reconcile the conflicting
provisions with one common goal of curbing and mitigating the spread of the infection?

[8] Available at http://www.interaksyon.com/article/3793/more-than-half-of-cebus-injecting-drug-users-hiv-positive ( Last accessed Feb, 26,2013]

Harmonizing & Reconciling some conflicting provisions of RA9165 and RA8504, are these
possible?-2013

iii. Legal Issue/s

The PNAC
The Philippine National Aids Council (PNAC) was created in December 1992 by
ExecutiveOrder No. 39. It is a multi-sect oral body composed of 13 government agencies
including the Department of Interior and Local Government or DILG. It is the central advisory,
planning and policy-making body for the comprehensive and integrated HIV/AIDS prevention
and control program in the Philippines. In 2007, it planned to develop Guidelines on the
Prevention, Care, Support and Treatment of HIV among IDUs (focus on harm reduction). It
aimed to facilitate alignment of all relevant policies on the prevention of drug abuse and the
prevention and control of HIV/AIDS and make the necessary recommendations to appropriate
bodies, agencies and institutions based on empirical data and analysis[9].
The Fourth AIDS Medium Term Plan 2005-2010: intensified prevention interventions for
IDUs: IDUs are provided with focused STI/HIV/AIDS preventive education and skills and
services. It further aims to explore policy support for harm reduction program-needle
exchange, in addition to sustaining existing harm reduction programs in identified high risk
areas; advocacy among local officials to support harm reduction programs; identify and
capacitate NGOs to implement the program, training of program implementers and service
providers/outreach workers, dialogues with local police and government and other concerned
agencies; procurement or making available needles and syringes for exchange[10].

[9]Available at
http://www.unodc.org/documents/eastasiaandpacific/2010/03/harmreduction/UNRTF_report_2009_update_of_harm_reduction_in_Asia_FINAL.pdf (
last accessed Feb 26, 2013)
[10] id.

Harmonizing & Reconciling some conflicting provisions of RA9165 and RA8504, are these
possible?-2013
Harm reduction refers to policies, programmes, and practices that focus on minimising
the health risks involved with drug use, like the risk of drug overdose and transmission of bloodborne diseases like HIV and hepatitis. The defining features of harm reduction are the focus on
preventing harm associated with drug use to people who use drugs, not ending drug use, and
acceptance of the individual who uses or has used drugs . Harm reduction has been controversial
in drug policy because it makes no assumption that abstinence is the only, or even the best, way
to reduce the individual and social harms of drug use[11].
Drug use related offences:
The principal statute for drug control in Philippines is the Comprehensive Dangerous
Drugs Act of 2002. Consumption of drugs is illegal and results in confinement in rehabilitation
for at least six months. A second conviction results in imprisonment for six to twelve years. Use of
drugs is an aggravating circumstance in the commission of any criminal offence. Possession of as
little as 500 grams of marijuana and ten grams of opium is punishable with life imprisonment to
death. Carrying drugs of any quantity in an assembly or in the company of two or more persons
attracts separate penalties. If a drug user is charged with consumption and possession, then
penalties for the latter offence prevail. Conviction for a drug related offence results in suspension
of civil rights including the right to franchise[12].
5

[11] Burris, S., and Chiu, J., (2011), Punitive Drug Law and the Risk Environment for Injecting Drug
Users: Understanding the Connections. Working paper prepared for the Third Meeting of the Technical
Advisory Group of the Global Commission on HIV and the Law, 7-9 July 2011.

[12] A Preview of Law and Policy in South and South East Asia Drugs, Treatment and Harm Reduction

Harmonizing & Reconciling some conflicting provisions of RA9165 and RA8504, are these
possible?-2013

Treatment:
Treatment and rehabilitation entail detention at a centre for six months to one year or in some
cases, placement under the care of a certified physician as prescribed by law. Enrolment in
medical care may be at the instance of the user, his/her family or mandated compulsorily by the
Dangerous Drugs Board. Voluntary submission and discharge may result in waiver of penalty
but failure to complete treatment a second time leads to prosecution for illicit drug use.
Mandatory drug testing is imposed on distinct classes of persons including students and military
recruits[13].

Harm Reduction:

Possession of drug paraphernalia including injecting equipment is unlawful and

constitutes prima facie evidence of illicit use. Delivery of paraphernalia to inject prohibited drugs
is also an offence. Giving sterile needles to a drug user may additionally be seen as assisting
another person to use drugs within the meaning of administration [14].
The Philippine AIDS Prevention and Control Act of 1998 or in lay mans term HIV Law of RA
8504 supplemented by Rules and Regulations seeks to eradicate conditions that aggravate HIV
transmission including drug abuse with a qualifier that such efforts do not aim to undermine
other prevention activities by driving communities underground. The Act supports HIV
prevention through provision of information but does not include specific tools or services[15].
6

[13] A

Preview of Law and Policy in South and South East Asia Drugs, Treatment and Harm Reduction

[14] id
[15] id

Harmonizing & Reconciling some conflicting provisions of RA9165 and RA8504, are these
possible?-2013
The strategy for AIDS control is set out in the Fourth AIDS medium term plan for
2005 to 2010 which acknowledges risky injecting practices among a small segment of drug
using population[16].
The document makes note of unclear results of initial harm reduction measures among
populations at high risk. It commits to reaching IDUs with STI and HIV prevention
education, skills and services by exploring policy options for needle syringe exchange.
There is no mention of oral substitution though[17].
Restricts harm reduction programs:

The AIDS Law or R.A. 8504 does not contain explicit provisions relating to harm
reduction, however target modes of transmission, including drug use provision of needles and
syringes are prohibited. Republic Act 9165 Comprehensive Drug Act of 2002 provides that it is
illegal for anyone who is not a medical practitioner to be in possession of injection
paraphernalia The law mandates the following penalties for procession of proscribed drugs;
a person found positive for use subject to 6 months rehabilitation in a government centre (1st
offence), imprisonment for 6-12 years (2nd offence) and a fine ranging from 50,000 to 200,000
pesos (1,000 USD to 4,000 USD) [18]. Life imprisonment or death also imposed for possession of
large quantities of illegal drugs. Drug users and those providing services to them are vulnerable
to arrest by police if they are apprehended with needles and syringes[19].
7

[16] A Preview of Law and Policy in South and South East Asia Drugs, Treatment and Harm Reduction

[17] id
[19] Comprehensive

Drug Act of 2002, 2

10

Harmonizing & Reconciling some conflicting provisions of RA9165 and RA8504, are these
possible?-2013
POLICY REVIEW
National Policies

R.A. 8504 and R.A. 9165 on harm reduction and NEP

The penalty of imprisonment shall be imposed upon any person, who shall possess or
have under his/her control any equipment, instrument, apparatus and other paraphernalia fit or
intended for smoking, consuming, administering, injecting, ingesting, or introducing any
dangerous drug into the body The possession of such equipment, instrument, apparatus and
other paraphernalia fit or intended for any of the purposes enumerated in the preceding
paragraph shall be prima facie evidence that the possessor has smoked, consumed, administered
to himself/herself, injected, ingested or used a dangerous drug and shall be presumed to have
violated Section 15 of this Act.[20]

Reviewing the Fundamental Framework of these two Policies

Are there provisions that connote favourably to harm reduction approach? Let us
review the respective Declarations of these special laws:
Republic Act No. 8504

February 13, 1998

Section 2. Declaration of policies. Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS) is a

disease that recognizes no territorial, social, political and economic boundaries for
which there is no known cure. The gravity of the AIDS threat demands strong State action
today, thus:[21]
8

[20] Comprehensive Drug Act of 2002, 12

[21] An Act Promulgating Policies And Prescribing Measures For The Prevention And Control Of Hiv/Aids In The Philippines, Instituting A Nationwide
Hiv/Aids Information And Educational Program, Establishing A Comprehensive Hiv/Aids Monitoring System, Strengthening The Philippine National
Aids Council, And For Other Purposes (Philippine AIDS Prevention and Control Act of 1998)Republic Act No. 8504, 2, (1998)

11

Harmonizing & Reconciling some conflicting provisions of RA9165 and RA8504, are these
possible?-2013
(a) The State shall promote public awareness about the causes, modes of transmission,
consequences, means of prevention and control of HIV/AIDS through a comprehensive
nationwide educational and information campaign organized and conducted by the State.
Such campaigns shall promote value formation and employ scientifically proven
approaches, focus on the family as a basic social unit, and be carried out in all schools
and training centers, workplaces, and communities. This program shall involve affected
individuals and groups, including people living with HIV/AIDS.[22]
(b) The State shall extend to every person suspected or known to be infected with
HIV/AIDS full protection of his/her human rights and civil liberties. Towards this
end:[23]

(1) compulsory HIV testing shall be considered unlawful unless otherwise

provided in this Act;
(2) the right to privacy of individuals with HIV shall be guaranteed;
(3) discrimination, in all its forms and subtleties, against individuals with HIV or
persons perceived or suspected of having HIV shall be considered inimical to
individual and national interest; and

(4) provision of basic health and social services for individuals with HIV shall be
assured.[24]

(c) The State shall promote utmost safety and universal precautions in practices and
procedures that carry the risk of HIV transmission.[25]
9

[23] Philippine AIDS Prevention and Control Act of 1998

[24] id

[25] id

12

Harmonizing & Reconciling some conflicting provisions of RA9165 and RA8504, are these
possible?-2013
(d) The State shall positively address and seek to eradicate conditions that aggravate the
spread of HIV infection, including but not limited to, poverty, gender inequality,
prostitution, marginalization, drug abuse and ignorance.[26]
(e) The State shall recognize the potential role of affected individuals in propagating vital
information and educational messages about HIV/AIDS and shall utilize their experience
to warn the public about the disease.[27]
REPUBLIC ACT NO. 9165

June 7, 2002

Section 2. Declaration of Policy.

It is the policy of the State to safeguard the integrity of its territory and the well-being of
its citizenry particularly the youth, from the harmful effects of dangerous drugs on their
physical and mental well-being, and to defend the same against acts or omissions
detrimental to their development and preservation. In view of the foregoing, the State
needs to enhance further the efficacy of the law against dangerous drugs, it being one of
today's more serious social ills.[28]

Toward this end, the government shall pursue an intensive and unrelenting campaign
against the trafficking and use of dangerous drugs and other similar substances through
an integrated system of planning, implementation and enforcement of anti-drug abuse
policies, programs, and projects. The government shall however aim to achieve a
balance in the national drug control program so that people with legitimate medical
needs are not prevented from being treated with adequate amounts of appropriate
medications, which include the use of dangerous drugs.[29]
10

10

[26] id
[27] id
[28] id

[29]id

13

Harmonizing & Reconciling some conflicting provisions of RA9165 and RA8504, are these
possible?-2013
It is further declared the policy of the State to provide effective mechanisms or measures
to re-integrate into society individuals who have fallen victims to drug abuse or
dangerous drug dependence through sustainable programs of treatment and
rehabilitation.[30]

HIV law was enacted in 1998, four years ahead of the Drug Law. And during this
time, the evolving situation was how to respond and address the issue/s based
from the current threats and risks of the rising epidemic through heterosexual
transmission and it never anticipated the complexities of the ever changing times
and emerging indicators like transmission through injecting drug use,

male

having sex with male or (MSM) , mother to child transmission, stakeholders

overlooked these group of population and core issues that might evolve then. In
fact, the prophylactic device was limited to condom use to prevent transmission
of the infection.[31]

As this new dormant indicator of people who inject drugs came to rise, thus, the
introduction of syringe as one- single prophylactic device surfaced in the realm of
HIV prevention that can only be materialized through needle exchange program,
which is prohibited and penalized in the Drug Law since AIDS and people who
inject drugs are never cited in the said Law.[32]
11

11

[30] HIV-AIDS Incidence Among Persons Who Inject Drugs: Feasibility of its Management through Harm Reduction in the Context Of Existing

Legal, Social, And Legal Environment

[30] id
[31] id

14

Harmonizing & Reconciling some conflicting provisions of RA9165 and RA8504, are these
possible?-2013
During the implementation of this needle exchange program, they employed this
specialized group of individuals called Peer Eds or peer educators. Peer education
typically involves training and supporting members of a given group to effect change
among members of the same group. Peer education is often used to effect changes in
knowledge, attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors at the individual level.

However, peer

education may also create change at the group or societal level by modifying norms and
stimulating collective action that contributes to changes in policies and programs.
Responding to the growing number of people living with HIV/AIDS (PLHA) in their
communities is one of the greatest challenges faced by peer education programs.
Worldwide, peer education is one of the most widely used strategies to address the
HIV/AIDS pandemic.[33]

Responding to the growing number of people living with HIV/AIDS (PLHA) in

their communities is one of the greatest challenges faced by peer education programs.
However, legally speaking, these group of workers are not classified among those
practitioners defined by the Dangerous Drug Act, and, therefore, as such, they are
perpetrators

of the specific provision of the said law and should be punished

according to the penalties provided therein. The Needle Exchange Program also received
huge opposition from the church sector as this did not promote the very basic slogan of
fighting illegal drug use , instead encourage the use of the prohibited drug by giving a
clean syringe to a drug dependent clinging to the famous phrase choose the lesser evil.
Deliberately overlooking and ignoring the potential threat to the country. As the
exponential increase of infected people not only requires a bigger share from the
budgetary expenses of our Health Department, its impact to the economy should not be
shrugged off, people who have reached the last stage of the infection could no longer
12

12

[33] Peer Education and HIV/AIDS: Past Experience, Future Decisions

15

Harmonizing & Reconciling some conflicting provisions of RA9165 and RA8504, are these
possible?-2013
afford to perform tasks they usually do in their respective offices because of the
opportunistic infections

slowly debilitating their body reflexes and functions, the

catastrophic and financial effects of the disease do not only limit them the much needed
resources to sustain their day-to-day subsistence especially if the one infected is the only
bread winner in the family. It brings an enormous setback in the family financially,
socially and morally.

The policy gap on drug use between HIV and Drug Law is fundamentally an act
on a characteristic of standard where the former law rests on the public health
aspect that drugs is a threat to public health; while the latter rests on the punitive
aspect that drugs is a crime against the law.
The instrumentality tools promoted are more on treatment, regulatory, educational
(which is most potent mean in the prevention aspect) approaches.[34]

Paradigmatic contrasts between RA 9165 and RA 8504 [35]

13

13

[34] HIV-AIDS Incidence Among Persons Who Inject Drugs: Feasibility of its Management through Harm Reduction in the Context Of Existing

Legal, Social, And Legal Environment

[35] id

16

Harmonizing & Reconciling some conflicting provisions of RA9165 and RA8504, are these
possible?-2013
The promotion of public health is a fundamental obligation of the State. The health of
the people is a primordial governmental concern. The following provisions relating to
health are found in the Philippine Constitution:
ARTICLE II[35]
DECLARATION OF PRINCIPLES AND STATE POLICIES

Section 15. The State shall protect and promote the right to health of the people and
instil health consciousness among them.

ARTICLE III [36]

BILL OF RIGHTS

Section 6. The liberty of abode and of changing the same within the limits prescribed by
law shall not be impaired except upon lawful order of the court. Neither shall the right to
travel be impaired except in the interest of national security, public safety, or public
health, as may be provided by law.

ARTICLE XIII [37]

SOCIAL JUSTICE AND HUMAN RIGHTS
HEALTH

Section 11. The State shall adopt an integrated and comprehensive approach to health
development which shall endeavour to make essential goods, health and other social
services available to all the people at affordable cost. There shall be priority for the
needs of the under-privileged, sick, elderly, disabled, women, and children. The State
shall endeavour to provide free medical care to paupers.
14

[36] PHIL. CONST. art .XIII, 12

[ 37} id
14

17

Harmonizing & Reconciling some conflicting provisions of RA9165 and RA8504, are these
possible?-2013
Section 12. The State shall establish and maintain an effective food and drug regulatory
system and undertake appropriate health, manpower development, and research,
responsive to the country's health needs and problems.[38]

Section 13. The State shall establish a special agency for disabled person for their
rehabilitation, self-development, and self-reliance, and their integration into the
mainstream of society.[39]

IDUs and PDEA

One such problematic area with regards RA8504 is the dearth in specific provisions that
touch on enforcement of needle-exchange programs towards harm-reduction in favor of
injecting drug users (IDUs). One author laments:

The law contains no explicit provisions relating to harm reduction. However, it

does provide that the State shall positively address and seek to eradicate
conditions that aggravate the spread of HIV infection, including but not limited
to poverty, gender inequality, prostitution, marginalisation, drug use and
ignorance. It further states that in seeking to eradicate these conditions, there is
no intent to undermine other HIV/AIDS prevention activities. A review of the
AIDS law conducted in 2005, while containing many recommendations for
supplementary implementing regulations, was silent on harm reduction
interventions or the prevention of HIV among IDUs. [40]
15

The silence or vagueness of RA8504 with regards to measures that foster or promote
harm-reduction efforts in favor of IDUs has created a potential conflict with existing
drug-enforcement laws.[41]
15

[39] PHIL. CONST. art .XIII, 12

[40] PHIL. CONST. art .XIII, 13
[41] Jurisprudential Development in the AIDS Law

18

Harmonizing & Reconciling some conflicting provisions of RA9165 and RA8504, are these
possible?-2013

Further to the discussion of the harm- reduction program, the HAARP document states:

Several provisions (Section 7, 11, 12 and 14) in the Comprehensive Dangerous

Drugs Act 2002 make the possession of equipment, instrument, apparatus, and
other paraphernalia illegal, or provide for harsh penalties if a person is
arrested in possession of equipment containing the residue of illegal drugs. These
provisions have particular relevance to the vulnerability of peer outreach
workers and their clients to arrest by police.[42]

Cases Decided by the Supreme Court :

Two most recent cases rendered decisions by the Supreme Court about the violation of
Section 11, 12 & 15 of RA 9615 will be presented and will be the basis of my analysis in
the next chapter of this research. People vs. Mariano was a case of a buy-bust operation
while the case of Margarita vs. People was supposed to be an entrapment and the person
being pursued by the police, in the course of chase, led the police in the house of the
accused while having a pot session.

1. People vs. Mariano and Doringo, G.R. No. 191193 November 14, 2012[43]
Assailed in this appeal is the Decision1 of the Court of Appeals dated 9 November 2009
in CA-G.R. CR-H.C. No. 03343 affirming the 5 March 2008 Decision2 of the Regional
Trial Court of Sorsogon City, Branch 65, finding appellants Godofredo Mariano Y
Feliciano (Godofredo) guilty of the crimes of illegal sale of shabu and illegal possession
of drug paraphernalia, and Allan Doringo y Gunan3 (Allan) guilty of the illegal sale of
shabu.
16

16

[42] Jurisprudential Development in the AIDS Law

[43] People vs. Mariano and Doringo, G.R. No. 191193 November 14, 2012

19

Harmonizing & Reconciling some conflicting provisions of RA9165 and RA8504, are these
possible?-2013
On the one hand, Godofredo was charged with the offenses of violation of Sections 5 and
12, Article II of Republic Act No. 9165 in two (2) separate Information, which read:
Criminal Case No. 04-706
That on or about the 17th day of October, 2004, at around 10:45 oclock in the morning,
at Zone 2, Municipality of Bulan, Province of Sorsogon, Philippines, and within the
jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused, without any authority of
law, did then and there, wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously sell, deliver, dispose,
distribute and/or give away for value two (2) transparent plastic sachets containing
methamphetamine hydrochloride locally known as "Shabu", a prohibited drugs (sic),
containing 0.5680 gram to a poseur-buyer in exchange of One Thousand Peso Bill.4[44]
Criminal Case No. 04-707
That on or about the 17th day of October, 2004, at around 10:45 oclock in the morning,
at Zone 2, Municipality of Bulan, Province of Sorsogon, Philippines, and within the
jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused, did then and there,
wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously, have in his possession, custody and control one (1)
aluminum foil, one (1) aluminum tooter and one (1) lighter which are used and intended
to be used for smoking, consuming, administering, injecting, ingesting, or introducing
any dangerous drug into the body, without any authority of law.5[45]
Allan, on the other hand, was charged with violation of Section 5, Article II of Republic
Act No. 9165. The accusatory portion of the Information reads:

17

17

[44] People vs. Mariano and Doringo,

G.R. No. 191193 November 14, 2012

[45] id

20

Harmonizing & Reconciling some conflicting provisions of RA9165 and RA8504, are these
possible?-2013
That on or about the 17th day of October, 2004, at around 10:45 oclock in the morning,
at Zone 2, Municipality of Bulan, Province of Sorsogon, Philippines, and within the
jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused, without any authority of
law, did then and there, wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously, sell, deliver, dispose,
distribute and/or give away for value two (2) transparent plastic sachets containing
methamphetamine hydrochloride locally known as "Shabu", a prohibited drugs (sic),
containing 0.1996 gram to a poseur-buyer in exchange of Six Hundred Peso Bill.6[46]
The result of the laboratory examination confirmed the presence of methamphetamine
hydrochloride on the white crystalline substances inside the four (4) plastic sachets
confiscated from appellants. The marked money was presented in evidence. Thus, the
delivery of the illicit drug to PO1 Olleres and PO3 Razo and the receipt by appellants of
the marked money successfully consummated the buy-bust transaction.[47]
On 5 March 2008, the RTC rendered judgment finding appellants guilty.[48]
The dispositive portion reads:
WHEREFORE, premises considered, accused Godofredo Mariano y Feliciano and Allan
Doringo y Guban, having been found GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of Violation of
Sections 5 and 12, Article II of RA 9165 (Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002),
respectively, are hereby sentenced as follows: WHEREFORE, premises considered,
accused Godofredo Mariano y Feliciano and Allan Doringo y Guban, having been found
GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of Violation of Sections 5 and 12, Article II of RA
9165 (Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002), respectively, are hereby sentenced
as follows:
18

18

[46] id
[47] id
[48] id

21

Harmonizing & Reconciling some conflicting provisions of RA9165 and RA8504, are these
possible?-2013
a) In Criminal Case No. 04-706 (Violation of Section 5, Article II, RA 9165) accused
Godofredo Mariano y Feliciano is sentenced to suffer the indivisible penalty of LIFE
IMPRISONMENT and a fine of Five Hundred Thousand Pesos (Php500,000.00);
b) In Criminal Case No. 04-707 (Violation of Section 12, Article II, RA 9165) accused
Godofredo Mariano y Feliciano is sentenced to suffer the indeterminate penalty of Six (6)
months and one (1) day to four years and a fine of Ten Thousand Pesos (Php10,000.00);
c) In Criminal Case No. 04-708 (Violation of Section 5, Article II, RA 9165) accused
Allan Doringo y Guban is sentenced to suffer the indivisible penalty of LIFE
IMPRISONMENT and a fine of Five Hundred Thousand Pesos (Php500,000.00).
19

The dangerous drugs as well as the drug paraphernalia subject matter of the three (3)

instant cases are hereby ordered confiscated and forfeited in favor of the government
(Sec. 20, RA 9165) to be disposed in accordance with the provisions of Section 21 of the
same Act.
a) In Criminal Case No. 04-706 (Violation of Section 5, Article II, RA 9165) accused
Godofredo Mariano y Feliciano is sentenced to suffer the indivisible penalty of LIFE
IMPRISONMENT and a fine of Five Hundred Thousand Pesos (Php500,000.00);
b) In Criminal Case No. 04-707 (Violation of Section 12, Article II, RA 9165) accused
Godofredo Mariano y Feliciano is sentenced to suffer the indeterminate penalty of Six (6)
months and one (1) day to four years and a fine of Ten Thousand Pesos (Php10,000.00);
c) In Criminal Case No. 04-708 (Violation of Section 5, Article II, RA 9165) accused
Allan Doringo y Guban is sentenced to suffer the indivisible penalty of LIFE
IMPRISONMENT and a fine of Five Hundred Thousand Pesos (Php500,000.00).
On appeal, the Court of Appeals on 9 November 2009 issued the challenged Decision
denying the appeal and affirming appellants conviction.

19

id

22

Harmonizing & Reconciling some conflicting provisions of RA9165 and RA8504, are these
possible?-2013
Failing to secure a favorable decision, appellants filed a notice of appeal before this
Court.

18

Appellants maintain that the trial court erred in admitting the seized dangerous drugs
and drug paraphernalia as evidences against them. They assail the validity of their
warrantless arrest .
The result of the laboratory examination confirmed the presence of methamphetamine
hydrochloride on the white crystalline substances inside the four (4) plastic sachets
confiscated from appellants. The marked money was presented in evidence. Thus, the
delivery of the illicit drug to PO1 Olleres and PO3 Razo and the receipt by appellants of
the marked money successfully consummated the buy-bust transaction.
Godofredo was further charged and convicted of illegal possession of drug
paraphernalia. The elements of illegal possession of equipment, instrument, apparatus
and other paraphernalia for dangerous drugs under Section 12, Article II, Republic Act
No. 9165 are: (1) possession or control by the accused of any equipment, apparatus or
other paraphernalia fit or intended for smoking, consuming, administering, injecting,
ingesting, or introducing any dangerous drug into the body; and (2) such possession is
not authorized by law.24
Appellants insistence on the illegality of their warrantless arrest equally lacks merit.
Section 5, Rule 113 of the Rules of Court allows a warrantless arrest under any of the
following circumstances:
Sec 5. Arrest without warrant, when lawful A peace officer or a private person may,
without a warrant, arrest a person:
20

20

23

Harmonizing & Reconciling some conflicting provisions of RA9165 and RA8504, are these
possible?-2013
(a) When, in his presence, the person to be arrested has committed, is actually
committing, or is attempting to commit an offense;
(b) When an offense has just been committed and he has probable cause to believe based
on personal knowledge of facts or circumstances that the person to be arrested has
committed it; and
(c) When the person to be arrested is a prisoner who has escaped from a penal
establishment or place where he is serving final judgment or is temporarily confined
while his case is pending, or has escaped while being transferred from one confinement
to another.
In the instant case, the warrantless arrest was effected under the first mode or aptly
termed as in flagrante delicto. PO1 Olleres and PO3 Razo personally witnessed and were
in fact participants to the buy-bust operation. After laboratory examination, the white
crystalline substances placed inside the four (4) separate plastic sachets were found
positive for methamphetamine hydrochloride or shabu, a dangerous drug. Under these
circumstances, it is beyond doubt that appellants were arrested in flagrante delicto while
committing a crime, in full view of the arresting team.
The Supreme Court affirmed the Decision dated 5 March 2008 of the Regional Trial
Court for the three above-mentioned cases.
21

21

24

Harmonizing & Reconciling some conflicting provisions of RA9165 and RA8504, are these
possible?-2013

2. Ambre vs People , G.R. No. 191532 August 15, 2012[49]

This is a petition for review on certiorari seeking to reverse and set aside the
November 26, 2009 Decision 1 and the March 9, 2010 Resolution2 of the Court of
Appeals (CA) in CA-G.R. CR No. 31957, which affirmed the September
1, 2008 Decision3 of the Regional Trial Court, Branch 123, Caloocan City, (RTC) in
Criminal Case No .. C-73029, finding petitioner Margarita Ambre y
Cayuni (Ambre) guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of violation of Section 15,
Article II of Republic Act (R.A.) No. 9165.
THE FACTS
Two separate Informations were filed against Ambre, and co-accused, Bernie
Castro (Castro) and Kaycee Mendoza (Mendoza), before the RTC charging them with
illegal possession of drug paraphernalia docketed as Criminal Case No. C-73028, and
illegal use of methylamphetamine hydrochloride, otherwise known as shabu, docketed as
Criminal Case No. C-73029. The Informations indicting the accused read:
Criminal Case No. C-73028
That on or about 20th day of April 2005 in Caloocan City, Metro Manila and within the
jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused, without being authorized
by law, did then and there wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously have in his possession,
custody and control one (1) unsealed transparent plastic sachet containing traces of
white crystalline substance, (METHYLAMPHETAMINE HYDROCHLORIDE), one (1)
rolled aluminum foil strip containing traces of white crystalline substance,
22

22

[49] Ambre vs People , G.R. No. 191532 August 15, 2012

25

Harmonizing & Reconciling some conflicting provisions of RA9165 and RA8504, are these
possible?-2013
(METHYLAMPHETAMINE HYDROCHLORIDE), one (1) folded aluminum foil strip
containing

traces

of

white

crystalline

substance,

METHYLAMPHETAMINE

HYDROCHLORIDE) and two (2) disposable plastic lighters, knowing the same are
paraphernalias instruments apparatus fit or intended for smoking, consuming,
administering, ingesting or introducing dangerous drug (METHYLAMPHETAMINE
HYDROCHLORIDE) into the body.
Contrary to law.4
Criminal Case No. C-73029
That on or about the 20th of April 2005 in Caloocan City, Metro Manila and within the
jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused, conspiring together and
mutually helping with one another, without being authorized by law, did then and there
willfully, unlawfully and feloniously use and sniff Methylamphetamine Hydrochloride
(Shabu), knowing the same to be a dangerous drug under the provisions of the abovecited law.
Contrary to law.5
When arraigned, Castro and Mendoza pleaded guilty to both charges. Consequently, they
were meted the penalty of imprisonment of six (6) months and one (1) day to one (1) year
and eight (8) months and a fine of P25,000.00 in Criminal Case No. C-73028. For their
conviction in Criminal Case No. C-73029, the RTC ordered their confinement at the
Center for the Ultimate Rehabilitation of Drug Dependents (CUREDD) for a period of
six (6) months.6Ambre, on the other hand, entered a plea of not guilty to the
charges.7 Trial on the merits ensued.
23

23

id

26

Harmonizing & Reconciling some conflicting provisions of RA9165 and RA8504, are these
possible?-2013
The Version of the Prosecution
From the testimonies of prosecution witnesses PO3 Fernando Moran (PO3 Moran), PO1
Ronald Allan Mateo (PO1 Mateo), PO2 Randulfo Hipolito (PO2 Hipolito), and P/Insp.
Jessie dela Rosa (P/Insp. dela Rosa), it appeared that on April 20, 2005, the Caloocan
Police Station Anti-Illegal Drug-Special Operation Unit conducted a buy-bust operation
pursuant to a tip from a police informant that a certain Abdulah Sultan (Sultan) and his
wife Ina Aderp(Aderp) were engaged in the selling of dangerous drugs at a residential
compound in Caloocan City; that the buy-bust operation resulted in the arrest of Aderp
and a certain Moctar Tagoranao (Tagoranao); that Sultan ran away from the scene of
the entrapment operation and PO3 Moran, PO2 Masi and PO1 Mateo, pursued him; that
in the course of the chase, Sultan led the said police officers to his
house; that inside the house, the police operatives found Ambre, Castro and Mendoza
having a pot session; that Ambre, in particular, was caught sniffing what was suspected
to be shabu in a rolled up aluminum foil; and that PO3 Moran ran after Sultan while
PO2 Masi and PO1 Mateo arrested Ambre, Castro and Mendoza for illegal use of shabu.
The items confiscated from the three were marked and, thereafter, submitted for
laboratory examination. Physical Science Report No. DT-041-05 to DT-043-05 stated
that the urine samples taken from Ambre and her coaccused were positive for the
presence of shabu while Physical Science Report No. D-149-05 showed that the items
seized from them were all found positive for traces of shabu.8
24

24

id

27

Harmonizing & Reconciling some conflicting provisions of RA9165 and RA8504, are these
possible?-2013
The Version of the Defense
Ambre vehemently denied the charges against her. Through the testimonies of Ambre,
Mendoza and Lily Rosete(Rosete), the defense claimed that on the afternoon of April 20,
2005, Ambre was inside the residential compound in Caloocan to buy malong; that her
mother asked Rosete to accompany her because Rosetes daughter-in-law, Nancy
Buban (Buban), was a resident of Phase 12, Caloocan City, an area inhabited by
Muslims; that when they failed to buy malong, Rosete and Buban left her inside the
residential compound to look for other vendors; that ten minutes later, the policemen
barged inside the compound and arrested her; that she was detained at the Caloocan
City Jail where she met Castro, Mendoza and Tagoranao; and that she was not brought
to the Philippine National Police (PNP) Crime Laboratory for drug testing.
Rosete further testified that after she had left Ambre inside the compound to find other
malong vendors, she returned fifteen minutes later and learned that the policemen had
arrested people inside the compound including Ambre.
Mendoza, who was convicted in Criminal Case No. C-73029, claimed that no pot session
took place on the afternoon of April 20, 2005. She averred that she and Ambre were
merely inside the residential compound, when policemen suddenly came in and pointed
guns at them.9

25

25

id

28

Harmonizing & Reconciling some conflicting provisions of RA9165 and RA8504, are these
possible?-2013
The Ruling of the Regional Trial Court
On September 1, 2008, the RTC rendered its decision declaring that the prosecution was
able to establish with certitude the guilt of Ambre for illegal use of methylamphetamine
hydrochloride or violation of Section 15, Article II of R.A. No. 9165. The RTC, however,
acquitted her of the crime of violation of Section 12, Article II of R.A. No. 9165 for
failure of the prosecution to prove with particularity the drug paraphernalia found in her
possession. The trial court adjudged:
WHEREFORE, premises considered, judgment is hereby rendered as follows:
1) In Crim. Case No. C- 73028, finding accused MARGARITA AMBRE Y CAYUNI not
guilty of the crime of Violation of Section 12, Article II, RA 9165;
2)In Crim. Case No. C-73029, finding accused MARGARITA AMBRE Y CAYUNI guilty
beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of Violation of Sec. 15, Art. II RA 9165 and hereby
sentences her to be confined and rehabilitated at the government rehabilitation center in
Bicutan, Taguig, Metro Manila for a period of six (6) months. The six (6) month period of
rehabilitation shall commence only from the time that she is brought inside the
rehabilitation center and its promulgation by this court for which the accused shall be
notified.
The shabu subject of these cases is hereby confiscated in favor of the government to be
disposed of in accordance with the rules governing the same.
26

Costs against the accused.

SO ORDERED.10
The case was elevated to the Court of Appeals , on November 26, 2009, the CA rendered
the assailed decision and the appeal is denied.

26

id

29

Harmonizing & Reconciling some conflicting provisions of RA9165 and RA8504, are these
possible?-2013
ANALYSIS

I just want to be direct to the point with my analysis. It is clear in Section 12 or

Dangerous Drug Act that possessing drug paraphernalia is a crime , however ,
not in the case of Ambre vs People , G.R. No. 191532 August 15, 2012, PO1 Mateo
positively identified Ambre sniffing suspected shabu from an aluminum foil being held by
Castro [50].
WHEREFORE, premises considered, judgment is hereby rendered as follows:
1) In Crim. Case No. C- 73028, finding accused MARGARITA AMBRE Y CAYUNI not
guilty of the crime of Violation of Section 12, Article II, RA 9165;
Criminal Case No. C-73028
That on or about 20th day of April 2005 in Caloocan City, Metro Manila and within the
jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused, without being authorized
by law, did then and there wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously have in his possession,
custody and control one (1) unsealed transparent plastic sachet containing traces of
white crystalline substance, (METHYLAMPHETAMINE HYDROCHLORIDE), one (1)
rolled aluminum foil strip containing traces of white crystalline substance.[51]
The accused is apprehended at the very moment he is committing or attempting to commit
or has just committed an offense in the presence of the arresting officer, in this case the
accused was not guilty of Section 12 of RA9615.[52] Clearly, to constitute a valid in
flagrante delicto arrest, two requisites must concur: (1) the person to be arrested must
execute an overt act indicating that he has just committed, is actually committing, or is
attempting to commit a crime; and ) such overt act is done in the presence or within the
view of the arresting officer.[54]
27

27

[50] Ambre vs People , G.R. No. 191532 August 15, 2012

[51] id

30

Harmonizing & Reconciling some conflicting provisions of RA9165 and RA8504, are these
possible?-2013
While the Case of People vs Mariano and Domigo, the conviction is:
The result of the laboratory examination confirmed the presence of
methamphetamine hydrochloride on the white crystalline substances inside the four (4)
plastic sachets confiscated from appellants. The marked money was presented in
evidence. Thus, the delivery of the illicit drug to PO1 Olleres and PO3 Razo and the
receipt by appellants of the marked money successfully consummated the buy-bust
transaction.[55]
Godofredo was further charged and convicted of illegal possession of drug
paraphernalia. The elements of illegal possession of equipment, instrument, apparatus
and other paraphernalia for dangerous drugs under Section 12, Article II, Republic Act
No. 9165 are: (1) possession or control by the accused of any equipment, apparatus or
other paraphernalia fit or intended for smoking, consuming, administering, injecting,
ingesting, or introducing any dangerous drug into the body; and (2) such possession is
not authorized by law.24[56]
In both cases of illegal sale and possession of dangerous drugs, the chain of custody
over the dangerous drugs must shown to establish the corpus delicti.[57]
28

[52] id

[54]

[55] People vs. Mariano and Doringo, G.R. No. 191193 November 14, 2012
[56] id
[57] Available at http://attymanueljlasernajr.blogspot.com/2012/09/august-2012-philippine-supreme-court_15.html Last accessed March20, 2013)

28

31

Harmonizing & Reconciling some conflicting provisions of RA9165 and RA8504, are these
possible?-2013

It will be the same flagrante delicto [58]application to these peer educators who
will be arrested in the act of giving clean syringes to HIV infected persons
because it is within the said legal requisites and they are not the practitioners
classified in the IRR of RA 9165,as such they are in the act of committing
crimes. The law may be strict in following flagrante delicto, but what I am trying
to point out is the circumstance or situation wherein they would be caught, no
corpus delicti that will be taken from them because they are not selling or in
possession of illegal drug.
Although the distributed syringes will be brought for drug test in the PNP
Crime laboratory, as pieces of evidence, absolutely no traces of illegal drug or
substance from these clean syringes could be found putting an end to the most
important link to the chain of custody. The intention of these people is to
minimize the spread of HIV through repeated use of these contaminated syringes
among and between these illegal drug dependent users.
The intention of these peer educators is good, but the conduct how to do
this intention is beyond the accepted social norm and legal order. It is a conduct
that constitutes unlawful act because the statute stipulated so by virtue of a law
(malum prohibitum), it is the very opposite of malum in se as the act/s within this
aspect is/are naturally evil[59]. Generally, syringe is a medical need of the
people but the use and administration of this prophylactic devise is dealt with
regulation , mere violation of it is within the premise of this punitive sanction.
29

There are an average of 12 Filipinos getting infected with HIV every

day, an average of 15 people every month are infected from contaminated needle
sharing, it translates to 1 person every two days, and the registry is as expressly
29

[58] id at page 32
[59] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malum_prohibitum

32

Harmonizing & Reconciling some conflicting provisions of RA9165 and RA8504, are these
possible?-2013

indicative of the strict compliance of this one provision of this Law, it might be blown
out into a proportion that could no longer be controlled and contained. Statutes are
prospective or forward looking, the same way how we address the epidemic. It should be
considered that the Dangerous Drug Law had undergone series of amendment (An Act
Instituting The Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002 Repealing Republic Act
No. 6425, Otherwise Known As The Dangerous Drugs Act Of 1972, As Amended,
Providing Funds Therefor, And For Other Purposes (Comprehensive Drug Act of 2002)
Republic Act No. 9165) [60] as decades went by because we are also and always looking
backward as the basis in framing laws given the effects of untoward events and
incidents which required curbing. Laws are manmade statutes and therefore subject to
human flaws. Laws are created and eventually modified in response to the complexities
of the ever-changing times. Even the illegal drug or substances continue to evolve from
the centuries known opium, marijuana, methamphetamine hydrochloride, furthermore,
today , there is a growing use and popularity of amphetamine type stimulants (ATS),
which will be added to the numbers /rosters of complexities that we will be addressing in
the near future.
30

The decisions of the Supreme Court in the chosen cases in this legal research

present legal parameters how an accused (Ambre vs People , G.R. No. 191532 August 15,
2012 ) of illegal possession of drug paraphernalia was absolved from this crime and the
other one (People vs. Mariano and Doringo, G.R. No. 191193 November 14, 2012) to be
guilty of the same. However, it still depends on how the case related or similar
circumstance to these crimes will be presented and defended by their lawyers and at same
time, be decided by the Courts.

30

[60] Comprehensive Drug Act of 2002

33

Harmonizing & Reconciling some conflicting provisions of RA9165 and RA8504, are these
possible?-2013

CONCLUSION
The research only proves that harmonizing and reconciling the
Dangerous Drug Act and HIV Law is not feasible because of the exclusivities of
their respective legal fundamental frameworks. The only option we can resort to
is refer back to our supreme law which is our Constitution, if we are, indeed,
serious in the fight against the spread of HIV in this kind of transmission.
RECOMMENDATION
A need to conduct series of Stakeholders Dialogue is necessary with the
goal of harmonizing and reconciling both laws for further amendment of each
law. As of this moment , HIV Law is undergoing amendment and being pursued
by PNAC as the consultative body, and the process is still on-going.

34

Harmonizing & Reconciling some conflicting provisions of RA9165 and RA8504, are these
possible?-2013

Bibliography
1. TreatASia , available at
http://www.amfar.org/articles/around_the_world/treatasia/older/hiv/aids_in_the_philipp
ines__low_and_slow_/ ( last accessed March 06, 2013)
2. UNDP in the Philippines, HIV Programme, available at
http://www.undp.org.ph/?link=21&id=11&act=press_release_listing.( last accessed
March 07, 2013
3. Available at http://www.biomedcentral.com/1758-2652/13/16 last accessed March 06,
2013) Philippine National HIV/AIDS Registry, 2010,2011,2012
4. Available at http://www.interaksyon.com/article/3793/more-than-half-of-cebus-injectingdrug-users-hiv-positive ( Last accessed Feb, 26,2013]
5. Available at
http://www.unodc.org/documents/eastasiaandpacific/2010/03/harmreduction/UNRTF_re
port_2009_update_of_harm_reduction_in_Asia_FINAL.pdf ( last accessed Feb 26, 2013)
6. Burris, S., and Chiu, J., (2011), Punitive Drug Law and the Risk Environment for
Injecting Drug Users: Understanding the Connections. Working paper prepared for the
Third Meeting of the Technical Advisory Group of the Global Commission on HIV and
the Law, 7-9 July 2011.
7. A Preview of Law and Policy in South and South East Asia Drugs, Treatment and Harm
Reduction
8. An Act Instituting The Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act Repealing Republic Act No.
6425, Otherwise Known As The Dangerous Drugs Act Of 1972, As Amended, Providing
Funds Therefor, And For Other Purposes (Comprehensive Drug Act of 2002) Republic
Act No. 9165 , 2, (2002)
9. An Act Promulgating Policies And Prescribing Measures For The Prevention And
Control Of Hiv/Aids In The Philippines, Instituting A Nationwide Hiv/Aids Information
And Educational Program, Establishing A Comprehensive Hiv/Aids Monitoring System,
Strengthening The Philippine National Aids Council, And For Other Purposes
(Philippine AIDS Prevention and Control Act of 1998)Republic Act No. 8504, 2, (1998)

35

Harmonizing & Reconciling some conflicting provisions of RA9165 and RA8504, are these
possible?-2013
10. HIV-AIDS Incidence Among Persons Who Inject Drugs: Feasibility of its Management
through Harm Reduction in the Context Of Existing Legal, Social, And Legal
Environment
11. Peer Education and HIV/AIDS: Past Experience, Future Decisions
12. Jurisprudential Development in the AIDS Law
13. People vs. Mariano and Doringo, G.R. No. 191193 November 14, 2012
14. Ambre vs People , G.R. No. 191532 August 15, 2012
15. Available at http://attymanueljlasernajr.blogspot.com/2012/09/august-2012-philippine-supremecourt_15.html Last accessed March20, 2013)

36