University of Cebu

College of Law
Banilad, Cebu City

COURT VISIT
People of the Philippines vs Eudenis Alimasag Bargamento (SB) and Arnel Rigodos Bacaro (SB)
for violation of RA 10591 (Comprehensive Firearms & Ammunitions Regulations Act)

Submitted by:
Emelie Marie T. Diez
JD-I

Submitted to:
Atty. Judiel M. Pareja
Constitutional Law I Professor

I.

ABSTRACT

This paper seeks to lay down the issues that have been the core during the hearing on the case
entitled People of the Philippines vs Eudenis Alimasag Bargamento (SB) and Arnel Rigodos Bacaro (SB).
The said case revolved around violations of RA 10591 or otherwise known as the Comprehensive
Firearms & Ammunitions Regulations Act). Accused herein were caught to have possessed prohibited
weapons and ammunitions during a checkpoint conducted at Carcar, Cebu City. This paper also
endeavors to lay down what happened during the presentation of evidence during the hearing proper.
Lastly, the paper presents various observations as to the current status quo of our judicial system from
the point of view of the author, with some points of suggestions and recommendations for its future
improvement.

II.

SYNOPSIS

On October 28, 2014 at about 9:30 oclock in the evening, a checkpoint at Brgy. Liburon, Carcar,
Cebu City was conducted by a team of police officers. At around 10:30 oclock in the evening on the same
day while conducting the same checkpoint, the team noticed one (1) unit multicab color white
approaching. However, as the team subsequently plugged down for verification and for checking of
drivers license, the vehicle was about to U-turn away from said checkpoint. The team immediately
blocked the drivers way in which the driver stopped, his driven multicab bearing herein plate number JCE
975.
Believed to be under the influence of intoxicating liquor, one of the accused attempted to bribe the
officers with two (2) pieces of Five Hundred Pesos. However, PO1 Roland Napierre confiscated the cash
money and eventually resulted to arrest Arnel Rigodos Bacaro for bribery.
Subsequently, the team further checked the front seat as well as the floor of the multicab using
flashlights. The team soon noticed a maong bag on the floor of the multicab, which zipper was opened,
and on which they plainly saw a handle of an unknown caliber of firearm inside said maong bag.
Said police officers consequently asked for documents relative to said high powered firearms
from the accused, but the latter failed to present any. Thus this prompted the police checkpoint squad to
take into effect their arrest and informed them of Miranda rights under the constitution.
Afterwards, therein said police officers immediately informed their team leader PO1 Andres Alpas
regarding said incident. Thus Alpas, as team leader, decided to abort their checkpoint and brought the
accused as well as the evidences recovered to Carcar City Police Station for proper documentation and
disposition.

III.

REACTION

The case was centered primarily on the violation of the Comprehensive Firearms & Ammunitions
Regulations Act although there was also alleged bribery by one of the accused that was involved. The
firearms were presented by one of the police officers as evidence who stood as witness during the
hearing of the case. Most of the firearms were loaded.
I do not fully comprehend as to the primordial reason why despite the enforcement of RA10591
there are still overt violations of this law. Said law even announces that it is the policy of the State to
maintain peace and order and protect the people against violence. In either way, such violation could
stem from the face of a problematic law or it could be a problem of proper enforcement as well. The law
actually seeks to regulate the ownership, possession, carrying, manufacture, dealing in and importation of
firearms, ammunition, or parts thereof, in order to provide legal support to law enforcement agencies in
their campaign against crime, stop the proliferation of illegal firearms or weapons and the illegal
manufacture of firearms or weapons, ammunition and parts thereof. Ironically, instead of stopping the
proliferation of illegally-acquired weapons, what happened was the other way around.
The complaint was initially filed on May of 2014.However it is obviously noticeable that a lapse of
more than a year has passed yet the case was still not ripe for its eventual resolution. I do not blame the
persona of the judge though. When I looked at the daily calendar of cases, I can only shake my head in
disbelief that there can be about at least thirty (30) cases that are scheduled for hearing in a day. Just
calling the cases in the calendar already takes about one and a half hours. Thus it can be deduced that
even if the courts are prompt enough to start the hearing as early as 8:30 a.m., there can never be
enough time to cater all of them including the hearing of the various testimonies of the witnesses. So
oftentimes the judge is constrained to give the parties in each case a mere ten minutes which is definitely
not enough to present and finish the testimony of even just one witness. This piecemeal style of hearing
cases makes trials last for a year and way beyond, just like what happened to the case at bar. The
clogged dockets of the courts are partially to be blamed for the eventual delay of justice. Indeed, justice
delayed, is justice denied.
Another interesting angle to look at, as what Ive noticed from the several hours that I sat in the
courtroom, would be the overemphasis on due process of law which also contributes to the delay of the
already slow-moving cases in courts. Due process indeed guarantees to every litigant the chance to be
heard and accordingly, when an action is commenced in court, the other party is given a right to give his
side. More so, Ive noticed that extensions and postponements are readily and often indiscriminately
granted. This boils down to the fact that with the multifarious cases bombarded within just a day, a judge
could only be thankful for an extension and postponement because they give the courts a chance to
breathe. With this recurrent problem of clogged court dockets, delays, and overemphasis on due
process, the primordial duty of the courts as well as of its officers to contribute to the speedy disposition
of cases has been long defeated.
As a possible solution, the judiciary could well look into putting additional courts not only in urban
centers but also in far flung areas so there could be a meaningful distribution of cases to be decided and

resolved. Moreover, so as not to over-extend our exacerbated and often overemphasized love for due
process, the courts should be less liberal in granting extensions and postponements to counsels. Judges
should also budget their time, to allow for decision-making between trials.

IV.

CONCLUSION

It cannot be doubted that the slow pace in the administration of justice is one of the enduring
problems in our judicial system. This problem seems to be part and parcel of any state embracing a
democratic system of government where every citizen has the right to due process of law which
oftentimes is so slow as to be the precise cause of delayed justice.
However, it must be taken into full consideration that due process need not be ironically
synonymous with delayed justice. Both concepts should come together since by nature they are not
antagonistic with each other. The Bill of Rights even mandates for the speedy disposition of cases in
judicial and administrative proceedings. Thus, a single case of illegal possession of unlicensed firearms,
as well as any other case, should not take more than a year to be decided upon. It is because when
justice is delayed, it is already denied.
Of course justice here means the constant and perpetual disposition to render to everyman his
due; the conformity of our actions and our will to the law (Bouvieres Law Dictionary) which is usually
rendered by our courts. Studies show that there are a colossal number of cases now pending in courts
especially in the urban centers where at most 75 million of the population is concentrated. Many courts in
these cities have a thousand or more cases in their dockets. And through the years, they keep on piling
up higher and higher instead of dwindling down. This should be a wake-up call to our seemingly
hibernating judicial system to address the recurrent issues at hand. More courts should be added both in
the urban centers and far-flung areas. Utmost effort should also be exerted to prevent postponements
and extensions in hearing cases. A case that takes years to be decided and resolved upon is a very bad
sign of an unhealthy justice system. And we dont want that.