CA affirms Maute member's conviction for explosives

The Department of Justice (DoJ) scored another win against terrorism, securing the conviction of a notorious Maute member for unlawful possession of an explosive/incendiary device.

The Court of Appeals (CA) affirmed in full the decision of the Taguig City Regional Trial Court (RTC) Branch 266, which found accused-appellant Nasifa Pundug guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of violating PD 1866, as amended by RA 9516, concerning the unlawful manufacture, sale, acquisition, disposition, importation, or possession of explosive or incendiary devices.

The CA also upheld the sentence of Reclusion Perpetua imposed on her.

The facts of the case indicate that on 22 August 2016, the accused was apprehended while in possession of a blasting cap during a random checkpoint conducted by members of Charlie Company, 51st Infantry Battalion, Philippine Army in Lanao del Sur. The report also noted that the accused was traveling in a Tamaraw FX with seven other individuals who were alleged to be members of the Maute terrorist group.

'Denial and alibi cannot prevail over the positive identification of the assailants by witnesses unless substantiated by clear and convincing evidence.'

All the people on board were apprehended, including Pundug, where other illegal contrabands were also confiscated such as an 81-millimeter mortar ammunition, a pipe bomb and other suspecting items.

The accused pleaded not guilty to the charges against her, denying ownership of the blasting cap and added that it was merely planted considering it did not have a serial number or any marking after it was seized.

The accused tried to support her alibi by using the "chain of custody rule" or a protocol mandated by law to check the veracity of evidence obtained in illegal drug cases.

But the CA ruled that the contention of the accused was bereft of merit, underscoring that "in the case at hand, the chain of custody rule does not apply to an undetonated grenade (an object made unique) for it is not amorphous and its form is relatively resistant to change. A witness of the prosecution need only identify the hand grenade, a structural object based on personal knowledge that the same article is what it purports to be," part of the decision read.

The Court stated, "Denial and alibi cannot prevail over the positive identification of the assailants by witnesses unless substantiated by clear and convincing evidence."

In upholding the conviction, the Court further noted that Pundug's alibi was self-serving and lacked sufficient credibility.

The Court also recognized the presumption of regularity in the military's confiscation of the blasting cap, scoring that such contrabands are sensitive from markings where even a camera flash would be enough to detonate it.

"This court ruling is another testament of the State's zealousness in administering the law, proving yet again that evil shall never triumph over justice," Justice Secretary Jesus Crispin "Boying" C. Remulla said.

Remulla commended Senior Deputy State Prosecutor (SDSP) Peter L. Ong for successfully obtaining the conviction of Pundug.

“Pundug’s conviction is a big boost in the government’s fight against terrorism,” the Secretary added.