Letter to an Attorney

Dear Attorney,

I hope this letter finds you well. I am seeking your guidance regarding a legal concern. I was convicted in 1996 in the United States for a federal drug offense related to conspiracy to distribute marijuana. I have not had any legal troubles since then and have maintained a clean record for almost three decades.

I am planning to visit the Philippines and would like to know whether my past conviction might pose any issues regarding my ability to enter the country. I would greatly appreciate your insights on the immigration policies and laws of the Philippines concerning individuals with a criminal record.

Thank you for your time and assistance.

Sincerely,
A Concerned Individual

Legal Analysis: Entering the Philippines with a Federal Drug Conviction

The concern about whether a past federal drug conviction may hinder entry into the Philippines requires an examination of both Philippine immigration laws and policies regarding foreign nationals with criminal records.

1. The Governing Law on Entry to the Philippines

The primary law regulating the entry, stay, and exit of foreign nationals in the Philippines is the Philippine Immigration Act of 1940 (Commonwealth Act No. 613), as amended. Section 29(a) of this law lists the categories of aliens who are excluded from entry into the country. Pertinent to this discussion, Section 29(a)(5) prohibits the entry of:

"Persons who have been convicted of a crime involving moral turpitude."

To determine whether a past federal conviction for conspiracy to distribute marijuana might render someone inadmissible, it is crucial to address the following:

Does the conviction constitute a crime involving moral turpitude (CIMT)?
Does Philippine immigration exercise discretion for old convictions?
Are there mechanisms to appeal or seek a waiver for inadmissibility?

2. Definition of "Crime Involving Moral Turpitude"

The term moral turpitude is not explicitly defined in Philippine law, but case law has provided guidance. In CIR v. CTA (G.R. No. 221780, 2017), the Supreme Court stated:

"Moral turpitude refers to an act of baseness, vileness, or depravity in the private and social duties which a man owes to his fellowmen or society in general, contrary to accepted and customary rule of right and duty between man and man."

The Philippine judiciary often references U.S. jurisprudence when interpreting moral turpitude. U.S. federal courts have ruled inconsistently on whether marijuana-related offenses constitute CIMTs, but conspiracy to distribute marijuana often is considered a CIMT because it involves intent to violate societal norms and laws.

3. Factors Considered by Philippine Immigration Authorities

Philippine immigration authorities may consider the following when assessing admissibility:

The Recency of the Conviction
A conviction from 1996 is nearly three decades old, which could influence a leniency determination. Immigration authorities may assess whether the conviction reflects a continuing threat to Philippine society.
The Nature of the Offense
Drug-related offenses, even minor ones, are taken seriously under Philippine law due to the country's strict anti-drug policies, including the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002 (Republic Act No. 9165).
Subsequent Behavior and Rehabilitation
Evidence of rehabilitation, such as a clean record for many years, stable employment, and community involvement, can significantly impact the assessment of admissibility.

4. Discretionary Entry and Waivers

While Section 29(a)(5) provides a basis for exclusion, the Commissioner of Immigration has discretionary power to allow entry, particularly if:

The conviction is not considered a CIMT under Philippine law.
The foreign national presents compelling evidence of rehabilitation.
A waiver is obtained from the Department of Justice (DOJ) or the Bureau of Immigration (BI).

It is advisable for individuals with old convictions to apply for a visa rather than relying on visa-free entry, as this process allows pre-assessment of admissibility.

5. Practical Steps for a Concerned Traveler

Obtain Certified Records of the Conviction
Provide documentation of the 1996 conviction, including evidence that the sentence was served and all penalties fulfilled.
Secure Evidence of Rehabilitation
Gather records such as proof of employment, lack of subsequent criminal activity, and community involvement.
Consult the Philippine Embassy or Consulate
Submit a visa application and disclose the conviction. Consular officers may pre-assess whether the conviction would bar entry.
Engage a Philippine Immigration Lawyer
Legal counsel can assist in preparing documentation and representing the individual before immigration authorities, if necessary.

6. Appeal and Legal Remedies

If entry is denied at the port, an appeal can be filed with the Bureau of Immigration’s Board of Commissioners. For more serious cases, a petition for review may be filed with the DOJ or the appropriate judicial forum.

7. Conclusion

While a 1996 federal drug conviction for conspiracy to distribute marijuana could potentially raise concerns under Philippine immigration laws, several mitigating factors exist, such as the age of the conviction and evidence of rehabilitation. To reduce the risk of complications, the individual should be transparent in their application and seek professional legal assistance if necessary.

It is essential to engage a competent immigration attorney to navigate the complexities of the Philippine immigration system and to maximize the likelihood of a favorable outcome.