Wazzup Pilipinas!?
Recent events at Gateway Mall Araneta have shed light on alarming legal violations committed by the mall’s security personnel. What should have been a simple act of civic responsibility—returning a lost phone—escalated into an appalling case of harassment, coercion, and unlawful detention. The victim, Ross Flores Del Rosario, a board member of Bayanihan Para sa Kalikasan Movement, Inc. (BKM) and a prominent online journalist, was unjustly accused, mistreated, and subjected to a traumatic ordeal at the hands of security officers.
A Grave Miscarriage of Justice
The incident unfolded when Del Rosario attempted to surrender a phone he had found within the mall premises. Instead of following proper lost-and-found procedures, security personnel misrepresented the situation, instructing him to personally return the phone to its owner at the security office. However, upon his arrival, it became clear that there was no owner waiting—only a fabricated setup that led to his unwarranted detention.
Legal Violations Committed by Gateway Mall Security
1. Illegal Detention and Coercion (Articles 267 & 268, Revised Penal Code)
Security guards do not possess law enforcement powers, and they certainly do not have the legal right to detain individuals unless a crime is committed in their presence. By luring Del Rosario into a secluded security office and preventing him from leaving, the security personnel engaged in an act of unjust detention, a criminal offense punishable under Philippine law.
2. Use of Force, Verbal Abuse, and Harassment (Article 286, Revised Penal Code – Grave Coercion)
Reports indicate that Del Rosario was subjected to intimidation, excessive force, and verbal abuse by security personnel. Any use of coercion to compel an individual against their will—especially through physical intimidation—constitutes a grave offense.
3. Violation of Due Process and the Right to Be Heard (Section 14, Bill of Rights, 1987 Constitution)
Security guards acted as judge, jury, and executioner, disregarding Del Rosario’s right to explain his actions. The presumption of innocence is a fundamental principle under the Constitution, yet he was immediately treated as a suspect without any proper investigation.
4. Misuse of Authority (Republic Act No. 5487 – Private Security Agency Law)
Private security personnel are meant to protect life and property—not to act as law enforcers. The security guards overstepped their authority by fabricating accusations and coercing Del Rosario into a situation where he could be falsely implicated in a crime.
5. Failure to Follow Proper Lost-and-Found Procedures
Rather than adhering to standard lost-and-found protocols, security personnel mishandled the situation. The rightful approach would have been to log the found item and contact the legitimate owner through official channels, not to stage an entrapment against a well-meaning individual.
6. Unlawful Search and Seizure (Article III, Section 2, 1987 Constitution)
Del Rosario was forcibly frisked, and his bag was searched despite the phone already being in the possession of security personnel. This constitutes an illegal search, violating his constitutional right to privacy and protection against unreasonable searches and seizures.
A Setup for Entrapment and Abuse
Del Rosario was deceived into following security personnel to an isolated basement security office—an area with no windows or external oversight. This deliberate act of entrapment was designed to fabricate a false accusation against him. Once inside, he was subjected to physical assault under the guise of a “routine frisking.” The blatant abuse of power in this situation is not only unethical but criminal.
Bayanihan Para sa Kalikasan Movement’s Response
Recognizing the gravity of this situation, BKM has formally lodged a complaint against the security personnel involved. Their demands include:
An impartial investigation into the conduct of Gateway Mall security personnel.
A separate inquiry into the role of Starbucks security in the incident.
Accountability from Gateway Mall and Araneta Center management, including Mr. Eddie Magbanua, to ensure that justice is served.
Call for Legal and Administrative Action
In light of these violations, the following actions must be pursued to ensure accountability:
Filing of complaints with the PNP Supervisory Office for Security and Investigation Agencies (PNP-SOSIA) against the security agency.
A human rights complaint with the Commission on Human Rights (CHR) for the violations committed.
Formal legal action through the Philippine National Police (PNP) or National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) to address potential criminal liabilities of the security personnel.
Public awareness campaigns to ensure transparency and expose the abuses committed at Gateway Mall.
Justice Must Prevail
Security agencies must uphold their legal and ethical responsibilities when dealing with the public. This case is a glaring example of how unchecked authority can lead to severe human rights violations.
Ross Flores Del Rosario was not a criminal—he was a concerned citizen trying to do the right thing. Instead of being treated with the respect and dignity he deserved, he was victimized by those who should have ensured his safety. This injustice cannot and should not be ignored.
It is time for Gateway Mall Araneta, the security agency involved, and all responsible parties to answer for their actions. The fight for justice does not end here—it only begins.
Ross is known as the Pambansang Blogger ng Pilipinas - An Information and Communication Technology (ICT) Professional by profession and a Social Media Evangelist by heart.
.jpg)
Post a Comment