Philippine Customs Seizes 500g Cocaine Worth Php2.65M in Davao City

Nov.24.2022
The Philippine Customs Bureau seized cocaine worth 2.65 million pesos in a joint operation with other agencies in Davao City.

An official announced yesterday that the Bureau of Customs (BOC) confiscated cocaine and other items worth 2.65 million pesos (approximately 33,350 RMB) in an operation in the city of Davao on Tuesday.


Customs Commissioner Yogi Filemon Ruiz reported that customs agents, along with the Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency (PDEA) and the National Intelligence Coordinating Agency, conducted a raid at the AFP-RSBS Industrial Park where they seized 500 grams of cocaine, electronic pods containing cannabis oil, and other drug paraphernalia. Ruiz stated that the evidence will be turned over to the PDEA.


Statement:


This article is compiled from third-party information and is provided for industry professionals for the purpose of knowledge sharing and learning.


This article does not represent the views of 2FIRSTS and 2FIRSTS cannot confirm the authenticity or accuracy of its content. The translation of this article is only intended for industry research and communication purposes.


Due to limitations in translation ability, the translated article may not fully reflect the original text. Please refer to the original text for accuracy.


2FIRSTS is fully aligned with the Chinese government's positions and statements on all domestic issues, as well as those related to Hong Kong, Macau, Taiwan, and international matters.


The compilation of this information belongs to the original media and author, and if there is any infringement, please contact us for deletion.



Disclaimer

This article is provided solely for professional research, industry discussion, and informational purposes. Any references to brands, companies, products, technologies, or policies are made for factual reporting and analytical purposes only, and do not constitute endorsement, recommendation, promotion, or advertising by 2Firsts.

Nicotine-containing products, including but not limited to cigarettes, e-cigarettes, heated tobacco products, and nicotine pouches, carry significant health risks. Readers are responsible for complying with all applicable laws and regulations in their respective jurisdictions, including age restrictions and access limitations.

The information contained in this article should not be regarded as investment, legal, medical, regulatory, or commercial advice. While 2Firsts strives to ensure the accuracy and reliability of its content, it does not assume liability for any direct or indirect loss arising from errors, omissions, inaccuracies, or reliance on the information contained herein.

This article is not intended for individuals below the legal age for accessing tobacco or nicotine-related information in their jurisdiction.

 

Copyright Notice

This article is either original content produced by 2Firsts or content reproduced, translated, summarized, or adapted from third-party sources with attribution where applicable. The intellectual property rights of the original content remain with 2Firsts or the respective original rights holders.

No individual or organization may copy, reproduce, distribute, republish, modify, translate, or otherwise use this content without prior authorization. Any unauthorized use may result in legal action.

For copyright-related inquiries, corrections, or removal requests, please contact: info@2firsts.com.

 

AI-Assisted Translation and Editing Notice

Portions of this article may have been translated, edited, or reviewed with the assistance of artificial intelligence tools to improve efficiency and readability. Due to the limitations of AI-assisted translation and editing, discrepancies, omissions, or inaccuracies may exist when compared with the original source.

Where applicable, readers are advised to refer to the original source for the most complete and accurate information. If you identify any errors or believe that any content infringes upon your rights, please contact us at info@2firsts.com, and we will review and address the matter promptly.

Juul Sublicense Reshapes Vuse Alto Patent Bill as Court Ends R.J. Reynolds’ 5.25% Royalty Obligation to Altria
Juul Sublicense Reshapes Vuse Alto Patent Bill as Court Ends R.J. Reynolds’ 5.25% Royalty Obligation to Altria
According to Law360 on August 31, 2026, a federal judge in North Carolina ruled that a patent sublicense between R.J. Reynolds Vapor Co. and Juul Labs Inc. relieves Reynolds of its obligation to continue paying royalties to Altria Client Services LLC over Vuse Alto. A jury had previously found that Vuse Alto infringed three Altria patents and awarded approximately $95.2 million in past damages, after which Reynolds was ordered to pay an ongoing royalty equal to 5.25% of positive net sales. The new ruling finds that a valid sublicense can eliminate future infringement, potentially ending what Altria described as hundreds of millions of dollars in future royalties.
Sep.01
UK HMRC Unveils Red and Yellow Transitional Vape Duty Stamps Ahead of October Tax Launch
UK HMRC Unveils Red and Yellow Transitional Vape Duty Stamps Ahead of October Tax Launch
HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC) has released sample images of the UK’s transitional vaping duty stamps, showing red and yellow versions ahead of the new Vaping Products Duty and Vaping Duty Stamps Scheme starting on October 1, 2026. Transitional stamps contain physical security features but no digital scanning function. Approved businesses may purchase them through November 30 and affix them through December 31. HMRC has not stated that the red and yellow samples represent different product categories or tax statuses.
Regulations
Sep.02
Gallery | InterTabac 2026 Opens as VAPORESSO, SKE, GREENTANK, GEEK BAR and Other Brands Take the Floor
Gallery | InterTabac 2026 Opens as VAPORESSO, SKE, GREENTANK, GEEK BAR and Other Brands Take the Floor
InterTabac 2026 opened in Dortmund, Germany, on September 15 alongside NUBIZ and InterSupply. According to the latest figures released by the organizer, the three trade shows bring together around 750 exhibitors from 64 countries. On site, 2Firsts observed vaping and related brands including VAPORESSO, DOJO, SKE, GREENTANK, GEEK BAR, HQD and ELUX.
Special Report
Sep.15
BREAKING | China’s Tobacco Regulator Summons iMiracle Over Suspected Compliance Breaches
BREAKING | China’s Tobacco Regulator Summons iMiracle Over Suspected Compliance Breaches
Based on public records reviewed by 2Firsts, this is the first time China’s State Tobacco Monopoly Administration has publicly announced regulatory talks with an e-cigarette company.
Jul.29
Australia’s One Nation Proposes 75% Tobacco Tax Cut, Says Lower Prices Could Hit Illicit Market
Australia’s One Nation Proposes 75% Tobacco Tax Cut, Says Lower Prices Could Hit Illicit Market
Australia’s One Nation party has proposed cutting tobacco excise by 75%, arguing that lower legal cigarette prices could narrow the gap with illicit tobacco and reduce demand for black-market products. The proposal comes as Australia continues expanding enforcement against illicit tobacco supply chains through border controls, retail inspections and organised-crime investigations. Supporters argue high taxes have contributed to illicit-market growth, while opponents warn that lower tobacco prices could undermine public-health goals. The proposal is a party policy position and has not been adopted by the Australian government.
Aug.18
U.S. Fifth Circuit Vacates NicQuid Vape MDO, Says FDA Comparative-Efficacy Standard Violated APA Procedures
U.S. Fifth Circuit Vacates NicQuid Vape MDO, Says FDA Comparative-Efficacy Standard Violated APA Procedures
According to VitalLaw on August 27, 2026, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit vacated an FDA marketing denial order (MDO) against NicQuid LLC, ruling that the agency’s comparative-efficacy standard for electronic nicotine delivery system (ENDS) applications had become a substantive rule requiring notice-and-comment rulemaking under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA). The court did not reject FDA’s authority to compare the public health benefits and risks of flavored vapes, but held that the agency could not establish a broadly binding standard through informal adjudications. The case was remanded to FDA for further proceedings.
Aug.28