FAILURE TO SERVE ARREST WARRANTS

FAILURE TO SERVE ARREST WARRANTS A Breakdown of Accountability The failure of police to serve arrest warrants poses a grave threat to the justice system, undermining its integrity and potentially enabling impunity. The issue raises serious questions about accountability, systemic weaknesses, and whether the current protocols are adequate to prevent abuse or negligence. Protocols for Non-Compliance What happens when police fail to serve an arrest warrant? In theory, there are protocols in place: officers must report the failure to the court within a specific timeframe, detailing the reasons for their inability to act. This ensures judicial oversight and provides an opportunity to rectify the situation. But is this system consistently enforced, or is it merely procedural lip service? Accountability and Consequences Can cases of insubordination be filed against officers who fail to execute warrants? If so, who should take the lead in filing these cases? Internal affairs units within the police force, the Ombudsman, or the National Police Commission (NAPOLCOM) are potential avenues for oversight. However, their effectiveness often comes into question. Commanders and superiors, who are ultimately responsible for ensuring that warrants are served, should also be held accountable. The lack of accountability for unserved warrants undermines the justice system and creates loopholes ripe for exploitation. It is not far-fetched to suspect that some cases may be influenced by corruption, whether through bribes, intimidation, or involvement of crime syndicates. Judicial Oversight and Transparency Does the justice system itself share some of the blame? If warrants remain unserved for extended periods, courts should have mechanisms to monitor and report these delays. Perhaps the Supreme Court could establish a database or website where the public can view cases delayed due to unserved warrants. Transparency at this level would not only increase accountability but also empower citizens to demand action. Systemic Vulnerabilities The failure to serve warrants is more than an administrative issue; it erodes trust in the legal process. If law enforcers can ignore judicial orders without consequence, the system appears both weak and complicit. This leads to questions: Have any police officers in the Philippines ever faced charges for contempt or insubordination due to failure to serve warrants? Are there instances where court employees have been complicit in delaying or obstructing the process? Strengthening the System The inability or refusal to serve warrants should directly reflect on the performance evaluations of both police officers and their superiors. Strengthening accountability mechanisms—both within the police force and the judiciary—is essential. Additionally, revising laws to impose stricter penalties for negligence or defiance in warrant execution could deter misconduct. A Call for Reform The justice system’s credibility hinges on its ability to enforce its decisions. The failure to serve arrest warrants highlights systemic flaws that require immediate attention. Whether through tighter oversight, transparent reporting, or stronger penalties for non-compliance, reforms must address both the symptoms and the root causes of this problem. In the end, the rule of law is only as strong as the mechanisms that uphold it. Without accountability, the unserved warrant becomes a symbol of justice delayed—and justice denied. Ramon Ike V. Seneres, www.facebook.com/ike.seneres iseneres@yahoo.com, 09088877282, senseneres.blogspot.com 02-01-2025