G.R. No. 118736-37 July 23, 1997
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. TANG WAI LAN @ “TANG”, accused-appellant.

FACTS

Accused-appellant Tang Wai Lan was charged with transporting approximately 5.5 kilograms of methamphetamine hydrochloride (shabu) at the Ninoy Aquino International Airport on November 28, 1991. A co-accused, Chung Wai Chi Elaine, was charged in a separate but similarly worded information. The cases underwent a series of incidents, including the burning of records and transfers between court branches, before being decided by Branch 114 of the Regional Trial Court of Pasay City. The trial court convicted Tang Wai Lan, sentencing her to life imprisonment, a fine, and summary deportation, while acquitting Chung Wai Chi Elaine.
The prosecution evidence established that on November 28, 1991, Bureau of Customs Examiners Lilibeth Cataquiz-Bonifacio and Carolina Magay-Dofitas were conducting mandatory inspections at the airport. Accused-appellant Tang Wai Lan presented her travel documents and luggage, including a blue traveling bag, for inspection. Examiner Bonifacio noticed a false bottom in the bag, leading to a more thorough examination which revealed five plastic packages containing shabu. Simultaneously, Examiner Dofitas inspected a similar blue bag from co-accused Elaine, also finding five plastic packages of shabu. The substances from both bags were field-tested by customs agents and later confirmed to be methamphetamine hydrochloride by PNP forensic chemist Inspector Elizabeth Ayonon.
For her defense, Tang Wai Lan testified that she was in the ready-to-wear clothing business and was introduced to it by Cheung Yiu Keung and his friends. She claimed that on the flight to Manila, Cheung Yiu Keung asked her to load his two blue bags on her trolley. During customs inspection, the false bottoms were discovered. She denied knowledge of the bags’ illicit contents and asserted that Chung Wai Chi Elaine had nothing to do with the other luggage.

ISSUE

The main issues raised by the accused-appellant in her appeal were: 1) whether the laboratory tests conclusively proved the substance was shabu; 2) whether she had guilty knowledge of the shabu found in luggage not belonging to her; 3) whether the trial court erred in construing her declaration about her co-accused as a confession of her sole culpability; 4) whether the trial court erred in assigning responsibility to her for all ten packs of alleged shabu; and 5) whether the trial court erred in finding her guilty of the offense charged.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the judgment of the trial court, finding no merit in the assigned errors.
1. On the laboratory tests, the Court held that the substances were proven to be shabu beyond question. The testimony of Forensic Chemist Elizabeth Ayonon, who conducted an infrared test, was deemed reliable. The Court rejected the argument that tests should have been conducted on the entire quantity of drugs, stating that a sample taken from one package is presumed representative of its entire contents. The competence of Ayonon was adequately established, and her lack of a masteral or doctoral degree did not preclude her from testifying as an expert witness for a relatively simple test like the infrared test.
2. On the issue of knowledge and possession, the Court found that the prosecution adequately proved through the testimony of Customs Examiner Lilibeth Bonifacio that accused-appellant was the person who presented the blue traveling bag with a luggage tag bearing her name for customs inspection. The Court noted that her explanation—that the bag belonged to Cheung Yiu Keung—was too simple and convenient to instill belief, and was contrary to human experience, thus insufficient to overcome the prima facie evidence that she had knowledge of her possession of the prohibited drugs. The crime of transporting shabu, being mala prohibita, does not require proof of criminal intent or knowledge; it is complete upon showing that a person brought a regulated drug into the Philippines without legal authority.
The Court emphasized that laws on regulated drugs are designed to address extraordinary evils with extraordinary remedies, and the conviction was in accordance with these legislative measures.