THE Department of Justice (DoJ), in an order dated March 22 and released on Wednesday, has subpoenaed alleged drug lord Peter Go Lim, confessed drug trafficker Rolan “Kerwin” Espinosa, convicted drug lord Peter Co, and some 20 other co-accused in a drug complaint filed by the Philippine National Police (PNP) to appear at a hearing set on April 12.

Also tasked by Department Order No. 159 to take part in the hearing is the PNP’s Criminal Investigation and Detection Group (CIDG), which filed the complaint accusing the said respondents of violation of Republic Act 9165 (the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002).

The order signed by Justice Secretary Vitaliano N. Aguirre II also said this case has been assigned to a new panel of prosecutors, made up of Senior Assistant State Prosecutor Juan Pedro C. Navera, Assistant State Prosecutor Anna Noreen T. Devanadera, and Prosecution Attorney Herbert Calvin D. Abugan.

DoJ has been under fire after a previous panel had dismissed the charges against Espinosa and company. This led to a recommendation by the Presidential Anti-Corruption Commission (PACC) on Tuesday to have members of that panel, Assistant State Prosecutors Michael John M. Humarang and Aristotle M. Reyes, suspended.

In their statement on Wednesday, Messrs. Humarang and Reyes noted in part, “The subject case against the respondents is not yet final as it is still undergoing review and further preliminary investigation by the new panel of prosecutors, and as it is, there is still no definite finding on whether the respondents would be absolved of the charges.”

“Given that the case under consideration has not yet attained finality, the recommendation of the PACC is somehow still premature,” they also said.

The statement noted further: “During the preliminary investigation, the complainant was given all the opportunity to present its case. Under the present rules, we have no authority to procure evidence on complainant’s behalf. We stress that we cannot just rely on the inconsistent and contradictory statements of complainant’s lone witness. Additional and credible evidence should have been submitted by the complainant to strengthen its case and justify the filing of criminal charges against the respondents in court.”

For his part, Mr. Aguirre said: “The complaint is without basis because they (PACC) do not know the workings and procedure of the DoJ when conducting preliminary investigation.” — D.A.M. Enerio

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR