Supreme Court to investigate ‘influence’ of Pogos in judiciary
SUPREME COURT OF THE PHILIPPINES / STOCK
MANILA, Philippines — The Supreme Court will investigate allegations that the clout of Philippine Offshore Gaming Operators (Pogos) and their protectors has already reached the judiciary.
The high court’s move followed revelations from Senator Sherwin Gatchalian that Pogos may have already infiltrated the judiciary as a recent raid on an offshore gaming hub in Pampanga was not able to catch their expected number of gambling agents due to a supposed leak of the government operation.
According to the senator, the offshore gaming complex in Pampanga purportedly employed more than 1,000 workers. However, the government raid was only able to arrest “140 plus” individuals allegedly because the Pogo was tipped about the June 4 operation of the Presidential Anti-Organized Crime Commission (PAOCC).
READ: Gatchalian bares possible clout of Chinese criminals in PH judiciary
Government authorities were supposed to conduct another search of the Pogo complex, but a Bulacan court denied the request for a search warrant.
Article continues after this advertisementPAOCC spokesperson Dr. Winston Casio said over DZBB that the judge withdrew the search warrant due to technicality.
Article continues after this advertisement“The SC will investigate these allegations,” the high court’s spokesperson, Atty. Camille Ting, said in a message to reporters on Friday.
READ: ‘Leakage’ suspected after many escaped Pogo raid
The Supreme Court defined search warrant as “an order in writing, issued in the name of the People of the Philippine Islands, signed by a judge or a justice of the peace, and directed to a peace officer, commanding him to search for personal property and bring it before the court.”
The Rules of Court state that there must be probable cause before a search warrant is issued, and the probable cause must be determined personally by a judge.
The rules also require that the warrant be issued after the complainant and any witnesses that the complainant may produce are examined under oath or affirmation, and that the warrant particularly describes the place to be searched and the persons or things to be seized.
