REVISTA
ANÁLISIS
Government. The Commission recommended a gradual
purge of opium addiction leading up to a policy of total
ban against opium. In 1908 the prohibitionist policy
came into complete operation and the shift from the
dual Spanish policy of regulation-cum-prohibition to
total prohibition was completed.
The subsequent laws did not depart from this
orientation in any significant way. The Revised Penal
Code of the Philippines which became operative in the
Philippines in 1930 contained five articles (Articles 190194) under Title V - “Crimes Relative to Opium and other
Prohibited Drugs.” These Articles imposed penalties
ranging from imprisonment to fine for the violation of
the drug-related provisions of the Articles.
The Dangerous Drugs Act of 1972 (RA 6425),
among the first laws to be enacted by the martial law
government of President Ferdinand Marcos, imposed
heavier penalties for drug offenses. Whereas the
heaviest punishment imposed by the Revised Penal Code
for drug offenses was imprisonment, RA 6425 imposed
the maximum penalty of death for the manufacture of
prohibited drugs. In December of the same year the
drug-trafficker, Lim Seng, was put to death by firing
squad, the first to be executed under the said law.
Even after the abolition of the death penalty law
in 1987, drug related crimes were punishable with life
imprisonment. After the restoration of the death penalty
in 1993, drug-related crimes were included in the list of
heinous crimes which were punishable by death.
The Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002,
continued to toe the prohibitionist line by incorporate
the “heinous crimes” provision of Republic Act 7659,
adopting its death penalty provision for certain drug
offenses and introducing amendments to the penalty
structure provided in the Dangerous Drugs act of 1972.
Describing the stricter penalty features of the new law,
Velasco & Saludo wrote:
RA 9165 spelled out a tougher and more stringent
law on drug trafficking. In the Dangerous Drugs Act of
1972, which the law repealed, someone had to have
at least 200 grams of illegal drugs before he could be
sent to jail. Now, possession of at least 10 grams of
prohibited drugs would lead to imprisonment. And
anyone caught with at least 50 grams of shabu, 500
grams of marijuana, 10 grams of opium, morphine,
heroin, cocaine, ecstasy and other dangerous drugs
would be punished with life imprisonment or death.
Before, the death penalty was imposed only on those
found with at least 200 grams of shabu. (Velasco &
Saludo, 2010, p. 117).
The hard-line approach is backed up by provisions
that institutionalized drug testing in the workplace and
in school and for certain transactions, such as obtaining
a license for driving or for gun possession.
However, the law did contain some provisions which
supported the goal of social “re-integration” rather
than punishment of the drug dependents. Foremost
among these is the provision that allowed for courtordered referral of drug offenders to treatment centers.
The program calls for the establishment of special
drug courts which are authorized to suspend or defer
sentencing of the drug offender and remand him/her,
instead, to a treatment center. Patterned after the socalled “Florida court movement”, this program aims to
divert drug offenders from the prison into the treatment
system.
On the whole, however, prohibition and regulation
remains as main features of the Philippine policy towards
the drug problem. Criminalization and enforcement
remain the two main pillars of the Philippine’s response
to the drug problem. The harm reduction model as an
alternative to prohibition and control remains largely
ignored in Philippine drug policies. In an interview, Tito
Sotto, the former head of the Philippine Dangerous
Drugs Board, was reported to have said during an
internal conference on drugs:
I will recommend to the President that the government
come out with a strong stand against the harm
reduction strategy… Due to its geographic expanse,
vast population and varying rules of law and economic
situations, Asia is experiencing the entire gamut of
drug problems… My fear is that adopting the harm
reduction scheme is the same as helping drug abusers
to commit crime. Last time I heard, drug abuse was still
a crime… The proper strategy is to prevent them from
using drugs and not to tolerate them.
Factors Sustaining Prohibitionist
Philippine Drug Policies
Orientation
of
Why have Philippine laws taken a largely prohibitionist
stance with respect to the drug issue? I have three
hypothetical explanations for this.
The first is the fact that our laws, in general, tend
to follow the American pattern. Our legal tradition
is largely traceable to American jurisprudence. This
133