The Fragility of Drunk-Driving Enforcement

IN THE early hours of February 8, 2026, 23-year-old Cebu City entrepreneur Kingston Ralph Cheng was killed in a hit-and-run along Paseo Saturnino Road in Barangay Banilad.

The driver first struck a parked car, then crashed into Cheng a few hundred meters away before fleeing. CCTV footage circulated online, raising questions about whether the driver, Sean Andrew Pajarillo, was intoxicated.

The incident sparked legal and public debate, exposing gaps in the Philippines’ enforcement of drunk-driving laws, particularly in scientific testing and emergency response.

Although multiple witnesses, accompanied by Instagram stories and CCTV footages, claimed Pajarillo appeared intoxicated and videos suggested prior alcohol consumption, an official test later returned a negative result.

If these pieces of evidence are offered in court and found to be authentic, reliable, and relevant, the driver could face charges for reckless imprudence resulting in homicide under the Revised Penal Code, as well as violations of the Anti-Drunk and Drugged Driving Act of 2013 (Republic Act No. 10586).

However, the integrity and timing of the scientific examination will inevitably play a decisive role in determining criminal liability.

Gaps in Enforcement Under RA 10586

Republic Act No. 10586 mandates that drivers involved in fatal vehicular incidents be subjected to immediate alcohol and drug testing. The rationale is straightforward: intoxication must be measured promptly to preserve evidentiary value.

In Cheng’s case, however, the delayed administration of the test highlighted logistical shortcomings, ranging from limited breathalyzer availability to unclear coordination protocols between law enforcement and hospitals. These lapses risk rendering an otherwise mandatory safeguard ineffective.

Compounding public frustration were conflicting narratives from government agencies. The Cebu City Police Office relied on the delayed test in reporting a negative result, while the Land Transportation Office Region 7 initiated administrative proceedings, issuing show-cause orders and recommending severe sanctions that may include lifetime disqualification from driving.

Such divergence underscores the need for standardized investigative procedures and inter-agency coordination.

The Push for Reform

The case has triggered calls for systemic reform. Local legislators proposed what is being referred to as the “Kingston Ralph Ordinance,” a measure that would hold bars and alcohol vendors accountable if they knowingly serve visibly intoxicated patrons who later cause harm.

The proposal aims to embed responsibility at the source of alcohol consumption and reinforce enforcement beyond post-crash testing.

If this case is to mean anything beyond public outrage, the national government must treat it as a policy turning point. Republic Act No. 10586 has long been in place. The problem is not the absence of law, but the fragility of its enforcement.

First, it should allocate dedicated funding for the acquisition and maintenance of calibrated breathalyzers nationwide, particularly in highly urbanized cities.

Second, clear, time-bound protocols must be institutionalized, requiring immediate on-site testing or mandatory blood extraction within a fixed window, with penalties for unjustified delay.

Finally, inter-agency guidelines between the Philippine National Police, hospitals, and the Department of Health should be formalized to eliminate ambiguity during critical first-response hours.

The tragic loss of Cheng, an emerging business figure in Cebu’s growing economy, has thus become a catalyst for broader discussion on public safety, law enforcement capacity, and the imperative of closing loopholes in the nation’s approach to drunk-driving prevention.