Partido Demokratiko Pilipino (PDP) deputy spokesman Atty. Ferdinand Topacio challenged on Friday the legal view of Presidential Communications Office Undersecretary Claire Castro, who earlier declared Senator Robinhood Padilla’s proposal for mandatory drug testing of public officials as unconstitutional.

In a sharply worded statement, Topacio argued that Castro’s interpretation of the landmark case Social Justice Society v. Dangerous Drugs Board was “defective and shallow,” stressing that the ruling did not prevent Congress from passing a law requiring incumbent government officials to undergo drug testing.

“What was declared unconstitutional in the said case was the mandatory testing of candidates for elective and appointive positions,” Topacio said.

He explained, “Before their election or appointment, these persons are private persons and therefore subject to laws on privacy. However, when one is either elected or appointed, one becomes a public official and therefore bound by different rules consistent with the Constitutional provision that public office is a public trust.”

Topacio pointed out that public officials are already bound by obligations and scrutiny that private citizens do not face, such as filing Statements of Assets, Liabilities, and Net Worth (SALNs), undergoing lifestyle checks, and following ethical codes.

Having argued and won six cases before the Supreme Court, the lawyer maintained that the ratio decidendi in the Social Justice Society ruling “does not apply” to legislation directed at those already in public office.

“In my considered opinion, the proposition remains legally feasible and defensible,” he said. “I believe it is Atty. Castro who has to restudy her law books before making statements to the public about the legislative process.”