Supreme Court E-Library
Information At Your Fingertips


  View printer friendly version

(NAR) VOL. 1 NO.2 / APRIL - JUNE 1990

[ DDB BOARD REGULATION NO. 4, s. 1979, June 04, 1979 ]

REQUIRING CLAIMS FOR REWARD TO BE SUPPORTED BY EVIDENCE THAT ESCHEAT PROCEEDINGS HAVE BEEN INSTITUTED BY APPREHENDING TEAM AGAINST OWNER OF PRIVATE LAND FROM WHICH ARE SEIZED INDIAN HEMP. OPIUM POPPY, OR OTHER PLANTS FROM WHICH PROHIBITED DRUGS MAY BE MANUFACTURED



Pursuant to Sec. 36(a), Article VIII of R.A. 6425, as amended, all claims for reward under Sec. 36(o), Article VIII in relation to Sec. 9, Article II of said law shall not be favorably considered unless supported by evidence to the effect that escheat proceedings have been instituted or caused to be instituted by the apprehending team against the owner of the private land from which are seized Indian Hemp, opium poppy, or any other plants from which prohibited drugs may be manufactured.

SECTION 1.       For purposes of this Regulation, a private land shall be any parcel of land of whatever size which is owned by a private person or entity from which are seized Indian Hemp, opium poppy, or any other plants from which any prohibited drug may be manufactured.

SECTION 2.       This Regulation shall take effect immediately.

Adopted: 4 June 1979

(SGD.) CLEMENTE S. GATMAITAN, M.D., M.P.H.
Chairman

 

© Supreme Court E-Library 2019
This website was designed and developed, and is maintained, by the E-Library Technical Staff in collaboration with the Management Information Systems Office.