Justice Secretary Raul Gonzalez said Wednesday that he will not reverse the dismissal of the so-called "Alabang Boys" illegal drug case if he finds the decision correct and justifiable.

"If I think honestly that the resolution is correct, no matter what the grammar is, I will sustain it. If I believe that the resolution is wrong, I will overturn it," Gonzalez said before the House hearing on the "Alabang Boys" drug bribery controversy.

On the other hand, Gonzalez assured the House panel that he will overturn the resolution should he find it inappropriate, saying that he has already reversed several resolutions.

Gonzalez announced that he will be conducting the automatic review of the illegal drug case filed against Richard Brodett, Joseph Tecson, and Jorge Joseph, which he called "a very serious case," within ten days.

However, Gonzalez stressed that he usually has nothing to do with preliminary investigations, with the only exception of a petition for review.

"The preliminary investigation of cases do not go to the Secretary of Justice. The Secretary of Justice has nothing to do with preliminary investigations because you can imagine the situation if the Secretary of Justice will have to review every resolution of the fiscals of the country," he said.

"It is only actually when there is a petition for review when the Secretary of Justice will have to take over these cases. Or even in preliminary investigation if there is a complaint of bias among the prosecutors," he added.

Gonzalez also said that the mandate for automatic review should be made before the resolution is released to the involved parties.

Gonzalez to PDEA: Show us proof

Gonzalez made it clear that he has no intention of defending the prosecutors responsible for filing the resolution of the "Alabang Boys" case. However, he said that the Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency (PDEA) should at least provide evidence to support their claim that prosecutors were bribed to dismiss the illegal drug case.

"I'm not here to defend the prosecutors because that is subject to ongoing investigation. But I would not also make the hasty conclusion that prosecutors are guilty or receiving bribes when they have no proof of actual bribery being given," he said.

"Why not arrest these bribe-givers because a crime has actually been committed when the offer was made? Or why did they not ask for an entrapment of these bribe- givers? They can easily go to the CIDG (Criminal Investigation and Detection Group), to the NBI (National Bureau of Investigation), to ask for an entrapment process. Then maybe these things would not have reached this big issue," he added.

Gonzalez, meanwhile, also pointed out media's "complete misstatement" and the "twisted attempt to muddle the issues," with recent newspaper headlines which drag the names of government agencies with statements of only a few of its members.

"It has been our observation that, as a general rule, whenever an employee or an official of a government agency, it would be made to appear as the department itself. For example, even with the CBCP (Catholic Bishops Conference of the Philippines), one bishop speaks, and the headline is the CBCP is speaking already. In this particular case, let us assume that the prosecutors are the ones being questioned, but the headlines speak of the DOJ (Department of Justice) having ordered the release," he said.