IS THERE A LEGAL BASIS FOR REOPENING COLD CASES IN THE PHILIPPINES?

IS THERE A LEGAL BASIS FOR REOPENING COLD CASES IN THE PHILIPPINES?

Yes — there is a legal basis for reopening cold cases in the Philippines. And perhaps the more important question is not “Can we reopen them?” but “Why aren’t we doing it more often?”

Under Section 24, Rule 119 of the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure, a court may reopen proceedings before a conviction becomes final, especially “to avoid a miscarriage of justice.” In plain language, this means that if new evidence surfaces, or if something went wrong during the original investigation or trial, the courts — or law enforcement — can go back and take another look.

To be fair, the Philippine National Police (PNP) does have mechanisms for this. Cold cases — those unsolved crimes that have gone dormant — are technically under the jurisdiction of the Directorate for Investigation and Detective Management (DIDM) and the Criminal Investigation and Detection Group (CIDG). These units have the authority to reopen old cases, especially when new leads appear.

But here’s the problem: there is no dedicated Cold Case Division in the PNP. None at the headquarters, none in the regions, and certainly none in most local stations. Cold cases are handled on an “as time permits” basis — meaning, if investigators are not busy with current (“hot”) cases, they might revisit old ones.

Isn’t that a bit alarming?

All over the world, police forces maintain dedicated cold case units. The FBI in the United States has one. Scotland Yard in the UK has one. Even smaller police departments in other countries have task forces exclusively focused on old cases, equipped with digital forensics, behavioral analysts, and access to modern databases. Meanwhile, in the Philippines, these forgotten cases remain largely untouched — gathering dust in police archives or old filing cabinets.

Are our police officials so overwhelmed with “hot” cases that the cold ones are left to freeze indefinitely?

To be fair again, it’s not always a matter of neglect. Sometimes, it’s a lack of manpower, training, or budget. But what if we treated cold case investigation as an essential part of justice, not as an optional extra?

Take for instance what happened in October 2024, when the PNP announced it would reopen several high-profile cases from the Duterte administration’s “war on drugs,” including the assassination of Tanauan City Mayor Antonio Halili. This decision came after new information hinted at possible police involvement. Clearly, the PNP can reopen cases when it chooses to — but again, it’s not part of a permanent, structured effort.

I believe the solution is simple and practical: the PNP should create a Cold Case Division — one at the national level, and ideally, one per local government unit (LGU). These divisions could coordinate with local prosecutors, forensic units, and even community organizations.

To make it effective, each division could be required to resolve a target number of cases annually — let’s say at least 100 per year, depending on the population size and case load. Units that perform well could receive performance incentives, similar to how other public offices are rewarded for excellence.

It’s not as expensive as it sounds. The infrastructure already exists — we have digital databases, online connectivity, and forensic labs. What we need is a structured mandate, clear metrics, and the political will to support the effort.

Remember: in murder cases, there is no statute of limitations. This means the law allows us to reopen them anytime. If new DNA evidence appears, if a witness recants or confesses, or if a digital record surfaces after years — all these can trigger a case revival.

So why not institutionalize it?

A formal cold case system could even integrate blockchain-based documentation — ensuring evidence isn’t lost, altered, or tampered with. It could also connect to a future Violent Criminal Apprehension Program (like the ViCAP model I previously wrote about), creating a data-driven network that helps identify repeat offenders and patterns across regions.

On the community level, barangay-led case review panels could assist in surfacing overlooked evidence or identifying witnesses who were too afraid to speak before. Legal literacy modules could teach citizens their rights and how to assist in unresolved cases without endangering themselves.

All of these steps would restore faith in our justice system — not just for the victims, but for their families who have waited years, sometimes decades, for closure.

At the end of the day, reopening cold cases isn’t about digging up the past for its own sake. It’s about righting wrongs that have been left uncorrected. Justice, after all, has no expiration date.

And perhaps it’s time we remind ourselves — justice delayed should never be justice denied.

Ramon Ike V. Seneres, www.facebook.com/ike.seneres

iseneres@yahoo.com, senseneres.blogspot.com 04-25-2026