Short answer. Yes. Section 25 makes a positive drug test a qualifying aggravating circumstance when a person commits a crime under the influence of dangerous drugs. That pushes the penalty for the underlying offence to its maximum, and because it is qualifying rather than ordinary, it cannot simply be offset by a mitigating circumstance.
What the law says
a positive finding for the use of dangerous drugs shall be a qualifying aggravating circumstance in the commission of a crime by an offender
RA 9165, Section 25 — Committing Crimes While On Drugs. Read the full provision →
What Section 25 does
The section provides that, notwithstanding any law to the contrary, a positive finding for the use of dangerous drugs shall be a qualifying aggravating circumstance in the commission of a crime by an offender, and that the penalty rules of the Revised Penal Code then apply. The crime being aggravated is not a drug offence — it is whatever separate crime the person committed while under the influence. The drug use functions here purely as a circumstance that makes the penalty for that other crime heavier. A theft, an assault or a homicide committed by someone who tests positive is treated more severely because of the finding.
Qualifying, not ordinary, aggravating
The label matters. An ordinary aggravating circumstance can be cancelled out by a mitigating one and merely tips the penalty toward its higher range. A qualifying circumstance is stronger: it is not offset by ordinary mitigating circumstances, and it must be specifically alleged in the charge and proven, not sprung at sentencing. Its effect is to fix the penalty at the maximum the underlying offence allows. Treating a positive drug finding this way is a deliberate legislative choice to punish crimes committed under the influence more harshly than the same crimes committed sober.
What has to be established
The trigger is a positive finding for the use of dangerous drugs — that is, an actual test result, not suspicion, rumour or the arresting officer's impression. And the finding has to connect to the offence: the person must have committed the crime while under the influence. If the drug finding is not properly obtained, or is not alleged in the information, it cannot do its work, because a qualifying circumstance that is not pleaded and proven cannot lawfully raise the sentence. So both the existence of the result and the way it was introduced into the case are open to scrutiny.
Where this surfaces, and what to watch
Section 25 does not create a new crime; it changes the penalty for the crime already charged, so it comes to a head at conviction and sentencing on that underlying offence. For anyone facing it, the useful questions are practical ones: was the drug test lawfully taken, was the positive finding actually alleged in the charge, and is there real proof the offence was committed under the influence rather than merely that the accused used drugs at some point. Those are matters for counsel to examine against the record, since each is a point on which the circumstance can fall away.