MINUCHER vs. CA (Criminal Law Review 1)

G.R. No. 142396             February 11, 2003

KHOSROW MINUCHER, petitioner,

vs.

HON. COURT OF APPEALS and ARTHUR SCALZO, respondents.

FACTS:

An information for violation of the Dangerous Drugs Act was filed against petitioner Khosrow Minucher with the RTC. The criminal charge followed a "buy-bust operation" concluded by the Philippine police narcotic agent in the house of Minucher where a quantity of heroin, a prohibited drug, was said to have been seized. The narcotic agents were accompanied by private respondent Arthur Scalzo who would, in due time, become one of the principal witnesses for the prosecution. On January 1988, Presiding Judge Migrino rendered a decision acquitting the accused. 

Minucher then filed Civil Case before the RTC for damages on account of what he claimed to have been trumped-up charges of drug trafficking made by Arthur Scalzo.

Scalzo subsequently filed a motion to dismiss the complaint on the ground that, being a special agent of the United States Drug Enforcement Administration, he was entitled to diplomatic immunity. He attached to his motion Diplomatic Note of the United States Embassy addressed to DOJ of the Philippines and a Certification of Vice Consul Donna Woodward, certifying that the note is a true and faithful copy of its original. Trial court denied the motion to dismiss.

ISSUE:

Whether or not Arthur Scalzo is entitled to diplomatic immunity.

RULING:

YES. 

The job description of Scalzo has tasked him to conduct surveillance on suspected drug suppliers and, after having ascertained the target, to inform local law enforcers who would then be expected to make the arrest.

In conducting surveillance activities on Minucher, later acting as the poseur-buyer during the buy-bust operation, and then becoming a principal witness in the criminal case against Minucher,

Scalzo hardly can be said to have acted beyond the scope of his official function or duties.

A foreign agent, operating within a territory, can be cloaked with immunity from suit as long as it can be established that he is acting within the directives of the sending state.