Court of Appeals: Spray-painting unconstitutional

The Court of Appeals ordered Interior Secretary Alfredo Lim yesterday to stop his scarlet letter campaign, saying it is unconstitutional and that the end did not justify the means.

In a 25-page decision, Justice Bernardo Abesamis ruled that the shame drive, which involved the daubing of red paint on suspect drug dealers' homes, violated the Constitution's guarantee that persons accused of any crime shall be presumed innocent until proven guilty.

This developed as President Estrada insisted that he would still use a "mailed fist and not a limp wrist" in battling crimes, particularly drug trafficking.

Abesamis said that although he recognized Lim's "good intentions" of instilling fear among suspected drug traffickers, still there is a law that must prevail.

"Good intentions are not enough," he said. "The end does not justify the means. We still have to adhere to the rule of law -- always."

Lim first launched the scarlet letter campaign in 1997 when he was still mayor of Manila. He revived the drive in the city after being appointed head of the Department of the Interior and Local Government this year, using as basis a city ordinance passed during his term.

Officials of other cities and towns have said that they intend to implement the same campaign in their localities.

Civil rights groups initially asked the Supreme Court in 1997 to stop the campaign but their petition was tossed to the Pasig Regional Trial Court which ruled in Lim's favor.

They then took their case to the Court of Appeals, arguing that the drive had amounted to libel and an invasion of privacy. They even likened the campaign to the Nazi's Yellow Star drive against the Jews.

Abesamis granted the groups' petition and upheld their claims that the drive and the Manila ordinance which allowed it were illegal.

"It oversteps the bounds of police power, and amounts to invasion and encroachment of the rights of the people without due process," the judge stressed. "No law punishes before it condemns nor pronounces verdict before trial."

Abesamis pointed out that spraying red paint warnings such as "Keep away! This is a house of a drug pusher!" on houses of suspected drug lords had subjected innocent people to ridicule and shame since they were labeled as belonging to a family of drug traffickers.

"The other members of his (suspected drug lord) household will be tainted, smeared and stigmatized... The spray-painting is as though all the occupants are already guilty of the crime before trial and before conviction," he said.

And the judge observed that the campaign only singled out drug offenders while obviously leaving out those who committed other heinous crimes.

"While they (drug offenders) are subjected to the spray-paint shame campaign... murderers, rapists and kidnappers and illegal recruiters are not."

Lim, for his part, said the ruling was a "temporary setback" for the government's campaign against illegal drugs although he vowed to appeal the decision before the Supreme Court.

"It (the ruling) is not yet final and executory," he said.

Lim noted that the decision would surely make drug lords rejoice as they can now again operate with impunity.

The former mayor, however, said that in the meantime he would comply with the appellate court's ruling by directing Chief Superintendent Avelino Razon, head of the Manila police, to stop the campaign.

The appellate court's decision put into question another anti-drug campaign recently launched in Marikina. Officials of the city began early this week to regulate the entry of non-residents to two neighborhoods where suspected drug dealers live.

Meanwhile, the President defended Lim's campaign yesterday, saying that despite the Court of Appeals' ruling, his government would still pursue the fight against drug trafficking with a "mailed fist."

Mr. Estrada argued that Lim had not committed any human rights violation since owners of the houses he had sprayed red paint warnings on have not filed any complaint at all.

And he said he shares the opinion of the former policeman-turned-politician that the rights of potential victims of drugs are to be held higher than the rights of those involved in peddling the illegal substance.

"Which is the stronger and higher right? The right of these drug dealers to a clean wall or the right of our communities to be protected from the vicious effects of illegal drugs?" he asked.

"Between saving a wall and saving potential drug victims, which is important? Whatever measures to fight drugs, we will support it. Because drugs are really destroying our youth."

The drug problem has reached alarming levels in the country and authorities have said that about 6,000 of the country's 42,000 barangays and about 1.7 million of the 74 million Filipinos are affected. -- With Marichu Villanueva, Cecille Suerte Felipe, AP, DPA