TITLE I- CRIME AGAINST NATIONAL SECURITY AND under Philippine courts for any war crimes for only

y war crimes for only Japanese

THE LAW OF NATIONS courts can do so.

LAUREL v. MISA
ISSUE: Whether or not Manayao is guilty of treason.
77 PHIL 856

FACTS:
HELD: No. Manayao‘s swearing of allegiance to Japan was not
Anastacio Laurel filed a petition for habeas corpus contending proven as a fact nor is it proven that he joined the Japanese
that he cannot be prosecuted for the crime of treason defined Naval, Army or Air Corps. What he joined is the Makapili, a
and penalized by the Article 114 of the Revised Penal Code on group of Filipino traitors pure and simple. The Supreme Court
the grounds that the sovereignty of the legitimate government also emphasized that in times of war when the state invokes
and the allegiance of Filipino citizens was then suspended, and the Constitutional provision which state
that there was a change of sovereignty over the Philippines
upon the proclamation of the Philippine Republic.

ISSUE: ―The defense of the state is a prime duty of the

government, in the fulfillment of this duty all citizens may be
1. Is the absolute allegiance of the citizens suspended during required to render personal, military or civil service…‖
Japanese occupation?

2. Is the petitioner subject to Article 114 of the Revised

Penal Code? no one can effectively cast off his duty to defend the state by
merely swearing allegiance to an enemy country, leaving and
HELD: joining the opposite force, or by deserting the Philippine Armed
Forces. Or even if Manayao did lose his citizenship it is also
The absolute and permanent allegiance of the inhabitants of a indicated that no such person shall take up arms against his
territory occupied by the enemy of their legitimate government native country; he shall be held guilty of a felony and treason,
on sovereign is not abrogated or severed by the enemy if he does not strictly observe this duty.
occupation because the sovereignty of the government or
sovereign de jure is not transferred to the occupier. There is PEOPLE V. PEREZ
no such thing as suspended allegiance.

The petitioner is subject to the Revised Penal Code for the

change of form of government does not affect the prosecution FACTS:
of those charged with the crime of treason because it is an
offense to the same government and same sovereign people.
-Susano Perez alias Kid Perez was convicted of treason and
People of the Philippines vs Pedro Manayao
was sentenced to death by electrocution.

Pedro Manayao was a member of the Makapili (a group of

-TC found the accused, together with the other Filipinos,
Filipino traitors aiding the Japanese cause). Manayao conspired
recruited, apprehended and commandeered numerous girls
together with his Japanese comrade soldiers to inflict terror
and women against their will for the purpose of using them, to
upon the barrio of Banaban in Bulacan where they killed 60 to
satisfy the sexual desire of the Japanese officers.
70 residents. The residents they killed were alleged to be
supporters, wives and relatives of guerillas fighting the
Japanese forces. Manayao was positively identified by credible
witnesses and he was later convicted with the high crime of -The Solicitor General submitted an opposite view stating that
treason with multiple murder. He was sentenced to death and the deeds committed by the accused do not constitute treason.
to pay the damages. Manayao‘s counsel argued that his client It further discussed that if furnishing women for immoral
cannot be tried with treason because Manayao has already lost purposes to the enemies was treason because women‘s
his Filipino citizenship due to his swearing of allegiance to company kept up their morale, so fraternizing them,
support the Japanese cause. Hence, Manayao cannot be tried entertaining them at parties, selling them food and drinks, and

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-1
kindred acts, would be treason . Any act of hospitality -The next witness, testified that he saw the accused following
produces the same result. an American and the accused were Japanese and other
Filipinos.

-The lower court believes that the accused is ―guilty beyond

ISSUE: Whether the acts of the accused constituted the crime reasonable doubt of the crime of treason complexed by murder
of treason. and physical injuries‖, with ―the aggravating circumstances
mentioned above‖. Apparently, the court has regarded the
murders and physical injuries charged in the information, not
only as crimes distinct from treason but also as modifying
HELD: NO. The law of treason does not prescribe all kinds of
circumstances. The Solicitor General agrees with the decision
social, business and political intercourse between the
except as to the technical designation of the crime. In his
belligerent occupants of the invaded country and its
opinion, the offense committed by the appellant is a ―complex
inhabitants. What aid and comfort constitute treason must
crime of treason with homicide‖.
depend upon their nature degree and purpose.
-Accused being a member of the Japanese Military Police and
As a general rule, to be treasonous, the extent of the aid and
acting as undercover man for the Japanese forces with the
comfort given to the enemies must be to render assistance to
purpose of giving and with the intent to give aid and comfort
them as enemies and not merely as individuals and in addition,
feloniously and treasonably lad, guide and accompany a patrol
be directly in furtherance of the enemies‘ hostile designs.
of Japanese soldiers and Filipino undercovers for the purpose
His ―commandeering‖ of women to satisfy the lust of Japanese of apprehending guerillas and locating their hideouts.
officers or men or to enliven the entertainment helped to make
ISSUES;
life more pleasant for the enemies and boost their spirit.
1. Whether the ―two-witness‖ rule was sufficiently
Sexual and social relations with the Japanese did not directly
complied.
and materially tend to improve their war efforts or to weaken
the power of US. Whatever favorable effect the defendant‘s
2. Whether the TC erred in ruling that the murders and
collaboration with the Japanese might have in their
physical injuries were crimes distinct from treason.
prosecution of the war was trivial, imperceptible, and
unintentional. Intent of disloyalty is a vital ingredient in the HELD:
crime of treason, which, in the absence of admission, may be
gathered from the nature and circumstance of each particular 1. NO, it was not sufficiently complied. The witnesses
case. evidently referred to two different occasions. The two
witnesses failed to corroborate each other not only on the
But the accused may be punished for the rape as principal by whole overt act but on any part of it.
direct participation. Without his coordination in the manner
above stated, these rapes could not have been committed. 2. The execution of some of the guerilla suspects
mentioned and the infliction of physical injuries on others are
PEOPLE V. PRIETO not offenses separate from treason. There must concur both
adherence to the enemy and giving him aid and comfort. One
without the other does not make treason.
FACTS:

In the nature of things, the giving aid and comfort can only be
accomplished by some kind of action. Its very nature partakes
-The appellant was prosecuted for treason.
of a deed or physical activity as opposed to a mental
-Two witnesses gave evidence but their statements do not operation. This deed or physical activity may be, and often is,
coincide in any single detail. The first witness testified that the in itself a criminal offense under another penal statute or
accused with other Filipino undercovers and Japanese soldiers provision. Even so, when the deed is charged as an element of
caught an American aviator and had the witness carry the treason it becomes identified with the latter crime and cannot
American to town on a sled pulled by a carabao. That on the be the subject of a separate punishment.
way, the accused walked behind the sled and asked the
However, the brutality with the killing or physical injuries were
prisoner if the sled was faster than the airplane; that the
carried out may be taken as an aggravating circumstances.
American was taken to the Kempetai headquarters, after which
Thus, the use of torture and other atrocities on the victims
he did not know what happened to the flier.
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-2
instead of the usual and less painful method of execution will act of the present accused whereby he gave aid and comfort
be taken into account to increase the penalty. to the Japanese invaders.

PEOPLE V. ADRIANO The fact that he was seen on a certain day by one of the state
witnesses being a member of the Makapili, and was seen by
another state witness but on a different day being a member
of the same organization, does not mean that his membership
FACTS:
on the first day was different or independent from his
membership on the other day.

People vs Lol-lo and Saraw

-Apolonio Adriano owing allegiance to the US and the
Commonwealth of the Philippines, in violation of aid allegiance,
27 February 1922 | Ponente: Malcolm
did then and there willfully, criminally and treasonably adhere
to the Military Forces of Japan In the Philippines, against which Overview: Moros surrounded a boat, took its cargo, took two
the Philippines and the United States were then at war, giving women and left it for it to sink. The marauders, Lol-lo and
the said enemy aid and comfort. Saraw, who were in Tawi-Tawi, were arrested for piracy. They
questioned the jurisdiction of the Philippines to the case, but
-The accused is alleged to be a member of the Makapili and
the court ruled that piracy is a crime against all mankind, so
alleged to be a member of the Makapili and alleged to have
every court also has jurisdiction to try these cases. In addition,
been bore arms and joined and assisted the Japanese Military
the Spanish Penal Code is still in force in the Philippines.
Forces and the Makapili Army in armed conflicts and
engagements against the US armed forces and the Guerillas. Statement of Facts:

-TC found that the accused participated with Japanese soldiers -On or about 30 June 1920: Two boats left Matuta, a Dutch
in certain raids and in confiscation of personal property. The possession, for Peta, another Dutch possession.-Boat 1 had
court below, however, said these acts had not been one Dutch subject-Boat 2 had 11 men, women and children,
established by the testimony of two witnesses, and so likewise from Holland.-After several days, at 7pm, Boat 2
regarded then merely as evidence of adherence to the enemy. arrived in Buang and Bukid in the Dutch East Indies.-Here, the
There is only one item on which the witnesses agree: it is that boat was surrounded by 6 vintas, manned by 24 armed
the defendant was a Makapili and was seen by them in Moros.-The Moros first asked for food, but once in the boat,
Makapili uniform carrying arms. took all the cargo, attacked some of the men, andbrutally
violated 2 of the women.-The Moros took the 2 women with
ISSUE: Whether being a mere member of Makapili shows
them, placed holes in the ship to let it sink, and left the people
overt acts of committing treason
there.-After 11 days, the Moros arrived at Maruro, a Dutch
possession.-The two Moro marauders were identified as Lol-lo,
HELD: Yes. The mere fact of having joined a Makapili is
as the one who raped one of the women, and Saraw.-While in
evidence of both adherence to the enemy and giving him aid
Maruro, the two women were able to escape.
and comfort unless forced upon one against his will.
One day, Lol-lo and Saraw went home to South Ubian, Tawi-
Being a Makapili is in itself constitutive of an overt act. It is not
Tawi, Sulu. Here, they were arrested and charged with piracy
necessary that the defendant actually went to battle or
at the CFI.
committed nefarious acts against his country or countrymen.
The crime of treason was committed if he placed himself at the
The Moros interposed a demurrer, saying that the charge was
enemy‘s call to fight side by side with him when the opportune
not within the jurisdiction of the CFI, nor of any court in the
time came even though an opportunity never presented itself.
Philippines.
Such membership by its very nature gave the enemy aid and
comfort. The enemy derived psychological comfort in the They were saying that the facts did not constitute a public
knowledge that he had on his side nationals or the country offense under Philippine laws.
with which his was at war.
The demurrer was overruled, and Lol-lo and Saraw were found
SC set aside the judgment of the SC. guilty, and were both sentenced to life imprisonment, together
with Kinawalang and Maulanis, two other defendants in
DISSENT:
another case. In addition to imprisonment, they were ordered
to return the 39 sacks of copra they robbed, or to indemnify
Being a member of the Makapili during the Japanese
the offended parties924 rupees, and to pay one-half of the
occupation of those areas of the Philippines referred to in the
costs.
information, was one single, continuous, and indivisible overt
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-3
Issue: Background on the laws of piracy:

Did the CFI in the Philippines have jurisdiction over Lol-lo and -The Spanish Penal Code was applicable to the Philippines
Saraw? because of Art. 156 of the Penal Code.-Grotius: Piracy by the
law of nations is the same thing as piracy by the civil law.
HELD: Piracy in the penal codeas similar to the concepts of civil law,
especially since the Penal Code found its inspiration from the
YES-First of all, the facts can‘t be disputed. All the elements of
Novelas, Partidas and Novisima Recopilacion.
the crime of piracy were there.
-The US Constitution itself defines and punishes piracy – that
-Piracy is robbery or forcible depredation on the high seas,
whoever on the high seas, commits the crimeof piracy as
without lawful authority and done animo furandi, and in the
defined by the law of nations, shall be imprisoned for life. This
spirit and intention of universal hostility.
definition rests its conception of piracy on the law of nations.
This further shows that the Penal Code is not inconsistent with
-The CFI has jurisdiction because pirates are in law hostes
the provisions in force in the US
humani generis.
People vs. RodriguezMarch 20, 1985Facts:

Facts
Piracy is a crime against all mankind, therefore, it can be
punished in any competent tribunal of any country where the
On or about 3:15am of Aug. 31, 1981,within the territorial
offender may be found.
waters of Tawi-Tawi, the above named Jaime Rodriguez and
three others, being crew members of the M/V Noria 767,
-The jurisdiction of piracy has no territorial limits. The crime is
conspiring and confederating together and mutually helping
against all mankind, so it is also punished by all.
one another and armed with bladed weapons and high caliber
-It doesn‘t matter that the crime was committed within the firearms, with intent to gain and by means of violence and
jurisdictional 3-mile limit of a foreign state. Those limits, intimidation upon persons, did then and there willfully and
though neutral to war, are not neutral to crimes. unlawfully, take, steal and carry away equipment and other
personal belongings of the crew and passengers; that by
Issue: reason of the said piracy, accused did then and there, with
intent to kill, and with evident premeditation, treacherously
Are the provisions of the Penal Code dealing with piracy still in attack, assault, stab and shot the persons.
force?
-The acts of execution produced the death of several persons
HELD: and inflicted several physical injuries of others that could have
caused their death but did not by reason independent of the
YES
will of accused, that is by timely and able medical assistance
rendered which prevented death.
-Art. 153 of the Penal Code refers to the crime of piracy
―committed against Spaniards, or subjects of another nation
-The three-pleaded guilty and
not war with Spain shall be punished with a penalty ranging
from cadena temporal to cadena perpetua. If the crime is sentenced ―to suffer the extreme penalty of death.‖
against nonbelligerent subjects of another nation at war with
Spain, it shell be punished with the penalty of presidio mayor.‖

-Since Spain already ceded the Philippines to the US, the rule The case is now on automatic review.
is that ―the political law of the former sovereignty is necessarily
changed. But corollary to this rule, laws subsisting at the time Issue: W/N plea of guilty is a mitigating circumstance?
of transfer, designed to secure good order and peace in the
Held: No. PD 532, Anti-Piracy Law, amending Art.134 of RPC
community, which are strictly of a municipal character,
provides:
continue until by direct action of the new government they are
altered or repealed.-The instructions of President McKniley on
―Piracy- The penalty of RT in its medium and maximum periods
May 19, 1989 to General Wesley Merrit, Commanding General
shall be imposed…If rape, murder or homicide is committed as
of the Army of Occupation in the Philippines, was clear that
a result or on the occasion of piracy, or when the offenders
municipal laws that provide for the punishment of crime, are
abandoned the victims without means of saving themselves, or
considered continuing in force so far as they are compatible
when the seizure is accomplished by firing upon or boarding a
with the new order of things until superseded.-
vessel, the mandatory penalty of death shall be imposed.‖
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-4
Clearly the lower court committed no error in not considering Yes.
the guilty plea as a mitigating circumstance
1. If accused were culprits, they would have easily robbed
Art. 63 of RPC their victims at Kiram‘s house or on any occasion that they
were travelling together. Robbing the victims at Kiram‘s house
–Rules for the application of indivisible penalties. would make Kiram and his family immediately suspect and
robbing them before all the goods were sold would be
–In all cases in which the law prescribes a single indivisible
premature.
penalty, it shall be applied by the courts regardless of any
mitigating or aggravating circumstances that may have 2. Accused immediately reported incident to the PC. The
attended the commission of the deed. records do not support hisassertion.

People vs. Siyoh Feb. 18, 1986 3. Wife of the deceased victims stated in affidavits that De
Guzman informed them shortly after the incident that the
Facts:
companions of Siyoh and Kiram killed theirhusbands.
-Julaide Siyoh, Omarkyam Kiram, NamliIndanan and Andaw
4. That there is no evidence Anastacio de Guzman was killed
Jamahali were accused of qualified piracy with triple murder
together with the rest because his remains were never
and frustrated murder.
recovered. There is no reason to suppose that he is still alive
or that he died in a manner different from his companions. The
- People‘s version:
number of persons killed is not material. PD 532considers
On July 10, 1979, the victims Antonio de Guzman, Danilo qualified piracy as a special complex crime punishable by death
Hiolen, Rodolfo de Castro and Anastacio de Guzman, who were regardless of the number of victims.
traveling merchants, were on their way to Pilas Island,
5. The death certificates are vague as to the nature of injuries
Basilanto sell the goods they received from Alberto Aurea.
sustained; were they hacked or gunshot wounds? The cause is
They took their dinner and slept that night in the house of
consistent with testimony of De Guzman.
accused Kiram at Pilas Island. The next two days, the group
was accompanied by Kiram and Siyoh in selling their goods. On
the night of July 12, they again slept at Kiram‘s house, but
Kiram was not there. Kiram claimed he spent the night at
Siyoh‘s house.
PEOPLE VS TULIN
On July 13, De Guzman‘s group went to Baluk-Baluk as
suggested by Kiram and returned to Kiram‘s house for the FACTS:
night, but Kiram did not sleep with them. The following day,
July 14, the group again went to Baluk-Baluk with Kiram and MT Tabangao is a cargo vessel owned by PNOC. It was sailing
Siyoh using Kiram‘s pump boat. While they were selling their near the coast of Mindoro loaded with barrels of kerosene,
goods, the group saw Kiram and Siyoh talking with two gasoline, and diesel oil with a total value of 40.4M. The vessel
persons whose faces they could not recognize. After selling was suddenly boarded by 7 fully armed pirates (accused in the
their goods, the group, together with Kiram and Siyoh, case – Emilio Changco, Cecilio Changco, Tulin, Loyola, Infante,
prepared to return to Pilas. On their way back, De Guzman etc.). they detained and took control of the vessel. The name
saw another pump boat. Shortly after, Kiram turned off the MT Tabangao and the PNOC logo were painted over with
engine of their pump boat and two shots were fired from the black. Then it was painted with the name Galilee. The ship
other pump boat as it moved towards them. De Guzman crew was forced to sail to Singapore.
recognized them to be the same persons he saw Kiram
In Singapore, the ship was awaiting another vessel that did not
conversing with in Baluk-Baluk. De Guzman and his
arrive. Instead, the ship went back to Batangas Philippines and
companions were divested of their money and their goods by
remained at sea. Days later, it went back to Singapore. This
Kiram. Thereafter, the accused ordered the victims to undress.
time, another vessel called the Navi Pride anchored beside it.
Siyoh then hacked Hiolen while Kiram hacked De Castro. De
Another accused, Cheong San Hiong, supervised the Navi‘s
Guzman jumped. He was able to swim away even though his
crew and received the cargo on board MT Tabangao/Galilee.
back was injured.
After the transfer of goods were completed, MT
-This case is on automatic review.
Tabangao/Galilee went back to the Philippines and the original
Issue: W/N the accused are guilty beyond reasonable doubt. crew members were released by the pirates in batches. The
crew was ordered not to tell authorities of what happened.
Held:
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-5
The chief engineer of the crew, however, reported the incident penalizing piracy, it remains to be a reprehensible crime
to the coast guard. Afterwards, a series of arrests were against the whole world.
effected in different places. An information charging the
accused with qualified piracy or violation of the PD 532 – Title: Southern Hemisphere Engagement Network, Inc. v. Anti-
Piracy in the Philippine Waters – was filed against the accused. Terrorism Council SCRA Citation: 632 SCRA 146 Date
Promulgated: October 5, 2010 Petitioners:
As it turns out, Navi Pride captain, Hiong, was employed with
Navi Marine Services ( a Singaporean firm, I think). Before the This case consists of 6 petitions challenging the
seizure of the MT Tabangon, Navi Marine was dealing for the constitutionality of RA 9372, ―An Act to Secure the State and
first time with Paul Gan, a Singaporean broker who offered to Protect our People from Terrorism,‖ aka Human Security Act of
sell bunker oil to the former. When the transaction pushed 2007.
through, Hiong was assigned to supervise a ship to ship
 Petitioner-organizations assert locus standi on the basis of
transfer. He was told that the Galilee would be making the
being suspected ―communist fronts‖ by the government,
transfer, so Navi Pride ship-sided with Galilee and the transfer
whereas individual petitioners invoke the ―transcendental
was effected. Paul Gan received the payment. Upon arrival in
importance‖ doctrine and their status as citizens and
Singapore, Hiong was asked again to transact another transfer
taxpayers.
of oil. The same procedure was followed. Hiong then went to
the Philippines to arrange another transfer with Changco – the
 KARAPATAN, Hustisya, Desaparecidos, SELDA, EMJP, and
pirates head. This was how Hiong was arrested by the NBI
PCR allege they have been subjected to ―close security
agents.
surveillance by state security forces,‖ their members followed
by ―suspicious persons‖ and ―vehicles with dark windshields,‖
All the accused put up denials and alibis. The trial court, with
and their offices monitored by ―men with military build.‖ They
ROMEO CALLEJO deciding, ruled that the accused were all
likewise claim they have been branded as ―enemies of the
guilty.
State.‖
ISSUE: w/n the accused are guilty of qualified piracy – YES!
 BAYAN, GABRIELA, KMP, MCCCL, COURAGE, KADAMAY,
RULING: [only the important part for crim] Hiong argues that
he can not be convicted under PD 534 or Art 122 of the RPC as SCW, LFS, Anakbayan, PAMALAKAYA, ACT, Migrante, HEAD,
amended, since both laws punish piracy committed in and Agham would like the Court to take judicial notice of
Philippine waters. Hiong also contends that the court never respondents‘ alleged action of tagging them as militant
acquired jurisdiction over him since the crime was committed organizations fronting for the CPP and NPA. They claim such
outside Philippine waters. tagging is tantamount to the effects of proscription without
following the procedure under the law.
Art. 122 of the RPC (piracy in general and mutiny in the high
seas) provided that piracy must be committed in the high seas  Meanwhile, IBP and CODAL base their claim of locus standi
by any person not a member of its complement nor a on their sworn duty to uphold the Constitution.
passenger thereof. It was amended by RA 7659, which
 Petitioners claim that RA 9372 is vague and broad, in that
broadened the law to include offenses committed in Philippine
terms like ―widespread and extraordinary fear and panic
waters. PD 532 on the other hand, embraces any person,
among the populace‖ and ―coerce the government to give in to
including a passenger or member of the complement of said
an unlawful demand‖ are nebulous, leaving law enforcement
vessel in the Philippine waters. Passenger or not, member of
agencies with no standard to measure the prohibited acts.
the complement or not, any person is covered by the law. No
conflict exists among the mentioned laws, they exist ISSUES:
harmoniously as separate laws.
1. WON petitioners‘ resort to certiorari is proper NO
The attack on and the seizure of MT Tabangao and its cargo
were committed in Philippine waters, although the captive 2. WON petitioners have locus standiNO.
vessel was later brought by the pirates to Singapore, where its
cargo was off-loaded, transferred and sold. Such transfer was 3. WON the Court can take judicial notice of the alleged
done under Hiong‘s supervision. Although the disposition by ―tagging‖ NO.
the pirates of the vessel and its cargo was not done in
Philippine waters, it is still deemed part of the same act. Piracy 4. WON petitioners can invoke the ―transcendental importance‖
falls under Title 1 of Book 2 of the RPC. It is an exception to doctrine NO.
the rule on territoriality in criminal law. The same principle
5. WON petitioners can be conferred locus standi as they are
applies to the case, even if Hiong is charged with violation of a
taxpayers and citizens NO.
special penal law, instead of the RPC. Regardless of the law

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-6
6. WON petitioners were able to present an actual case or iii. The injury is likely to be redressed by a favorable
controversy NO. action.

7. WON RA 9372 is vague and broad in defining the crime of d. RA 9372 is a penal statute. While Chavez v. PCGG holds that
terrorism NO. transcendental public importance dispenses with the
requirement that petitioner has experienced or is in actual
8. WON a penal statute may be assailed for being vague as danger of suffering direct and personal injury, cases involving
applied to petitioners NO. the constitutionality of penal legislation belong to an altogether
different genus of constitutional litigation. Such necessitates
9. WON there is merit in the claim that RA 9372 regulates closer judicial scrutiny of locus standi.
speech so as to permit a facial analysis of its validity NO.
e. The mere invocation of the duty to preserve the rule of law
HELD AND RATIO: does no, however, suffice to clothe the IBP or any of its
members with standing. They failed to sufficiently demonstrate
1. Petition for certiorari is improper. a. Certiorari does not lie
how its mandate under the assailed statute revolts against its
against respondents who do not exercise judicial or quasi-
constitutional rights and duties.
judicial functions. Section 1, Rule 65 of the Rules of Court
states that petition for certiorari applies when any tribunal, f. Former Senator Ma. Ana Consuelo Madrigal who claims to
board, or officer exercising judicial or quasi-judicial functions have been the subject of ―political surveillance‖ also lacks locus
has acted without or in excess of its or his jurisdiction, or with standi. The same is true for WigbertoTañada and Osmeña III,
grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of who cite their being a human rights advocate and an
jurisdiction. b. Petitioners do not even allege with any oppositor, respectively. No concrete injury has been
modicum of particularity how respondents acted without or in pinpointed, hence, no locus standi.
excess of their respective jurisdictions, or with grave abuse of
discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction. c. The 3. Court cannot take judicial notice of the alleged ―tagging.‖ a.
power of judicial review has 4 requisites: i. There must be an Matters of judicial notice have 3 material requisites: i. matter
actual case or controversy. ii. Petitioners must possess locus must be one of common and general knowledge ii. must be
standi. iii. Question of constitutionality must be raised at the well and authoritatively settled, not doubtful or uncertain or
earliest opportunity. iv. The issue of constitutionality must be capable of accurate and ready determination iii. known to be
the lismota of the case. The present case lacks the 1st 2 within the limits of the jurisdiction of the court b. The principal
requisites, which are the most essential. guide in determining what facts may be assumed to be
judicially known is that of notoriety. It can be said that judicial
2. Petitioners lack locus standi. notice is limited to facts evidenced by public records and facts
of general notoriety. Hence, it can be said that judicial notice is
a. Locus standi or legal standing requires a personal stake in
limited to: (1) facts evidenced by public records and (2) facts
the outcome of the controversy as to assure concrete
of general notoriety.
adverseness.
c. A court cannot take judicial notice of any fact which, in part,
b. In Anak Mindanao Party-List Group v. The Executive
is dependent on the existence or nonexistence of a fact of
Secretary,locus standihas been defined as that requiring:
which the Court has no constructive knowledge.
i. That the person assailing must have a direct and
d. Petitioners‘ apprehension is insufficient to substantiate their
personal interest AND
plea. That no specific charge or proscription under RA 9371
ii. That the person sustained or is in immediate has been filed against them, 3 years after its effectivity, belies
danger of sustaining some direct inquiry as a result of the act any claim of imminence of their perceived threat emanating
being challenged. from the so-called tagging. They fail to particularize how the
implementation of specific provisions of RA 9372 would result
c. For a concerned party to be allowed to raise a constitutional in direct injury to their organization and members.
question, he must show that:
e. Notwithstanding the statement of Ermita and Gonzales that
i. He has personally suffered some actual or the Arroyo administration will adopt the US and EU
threatened injury; classification of CPP and NPA as terrorist organizations, there is
yet to be filed before the courts an application to declare the
ii. The injury is fairly traceable to the challenged CPP and NPA organizations as domestic terrorist or outlawed
action; AND organization under RA 9372.

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-7
4. In Kilosbayan v. Guingona,to invoke the transcendental d. Prevailing American jurisprudence allows
doctrine, the following are the determinants: adjudication on the merits when an anticipatory
petition clearly shows that the challenged prohibition
a. The character of the funds or other assets involved forbids the conduct or activity that a petitioner seeks
in the case to do, as there would be a justiciable controversy.
However, in the case at bar, the petitioners have
b. The presence of a clear case of disregard of a
failed to show that the challenged provisions of RA
constitutional or statutory prohibition by the public respondent
9372 forbid constitutionally protected conduct or
agency or instrumentality of the government;
activity. No demonstrable threat has been
established, much less a real and existing one.
c. The lack of any other party with a more direct and
specific interest in the questions being raised In the case at
e. Petitioners have yet to show any connection
bar, there are other partiesnot before the Court withdirect and
between the purported ―surveillance‖ and the
specific interests in the questions being raised.
implementation of RA 9372. Petitioners obscure
allegations of sporadic ―surveillance‖ and supposedly
5. Petitioners cannot be conferred upon them as taxpayers and
being tagged as ―communist fronts‖ in no way
citizens.
approximate a credible threat of prosecution. From
a. A taxpayer suit is proper only when there is an these allegations, the Court is being lured to render
exercise of the spending or taxing power of Congress, whereas an advisory opinion, which is not its function. If the
citizen standing must rest on direct and personal interest in the case is merely theorized, it lies beyond judicial review
proceeding. for lack of ripeness. Allegations of abuse must be
anchored on real events.
b. RA 9372 is a penal statute and does not even
provide for any appropriation from Congress for its 7. The doctrines of void-for-vagueness and overbreadth find
implementation, while none of the individual petitioner-citizens no application in the present case since these doctrines apply
has alleged any direct and personal interest in the only to free speech cases and that RA 9372 regulates conduct,
implementation of the law. not speech.

c. Generalized interest, albeit accompanied by the a. Romualdez v. Sandiganbayan: The overbreadth

assertion of a public right, do not establish locus standi. and the vagueness doctrines have special application only to
Evidence of a direct and personal interest is key. free speech cases, and are not appropriate for testing the
validity of penal statutes.
6. Petitioners fail to present an actual case or controversy.
None of them faces any charge under RA 9372. b. Romualdez v. COMELEC:A facial invalidation of
criminal statutes is not appropriate, but the Court nonetheless
a. Judicial power operates only when there is an proceeded to conduct a vagueness analysis, and concluded
actual case or controversy. An actual case or controversy that the therein subject election offense under the Voter‘s
means an existing case or controversy that is appropriate or Registration Act of 1996, with which the therein petitioners
ripe for determination, not conjectural or anticipatory, lest the were charged, is couched in precise language.
decision of the court would amount to an advisory opinion.
c. The aforementioned cases rely heavily on Justice
b. Courts do not sit to adjudicate mere academic Mendoza‘s Separate Opinion in the Estrada case: Allegations
questions to satisfy scholarly interest. The pleadings must that a penal statute is vague and overbroad do not justify a
show: facial review of its validity. A facial challenge is allowed to be
made to a vague statute and to one, which is overbroad
i. an active antagonistic assertion of a legal because of possible chilling effect upon protected speech. This
right and rationale does not apply to penal statutes. Criminal statutes
have general in terrorem effect. If facial challenge is allowed,
ii. a denial thereof
the State may well be prevented from enacting laws against
socially harmful conduct. Overbreadth and vagueness doctrines
c. However, a reasonable certainty of the occurrence
then have special application only to free speech cases. They
of a perceived threat to any constitutional interest
are inapt for testing the validity of penal statutes.
suffices to provide a basis for mounting a
constitutional challenge. This, however, is qualified by
8. Since a penal statute may only be assailed for being vague
the presence of sufficient facts.
as applied to petitioners, a limited vagueness analysis of the

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-8
definition of ―terrorism‖ in RA 9372 is legally impossible absent a. Section 3 of RA 9372 provides the following
an actual or imminent chargeagainst them. elements of the crime of terrorism:

a. The doctrine of vagueness and the doctrine of i. Offender commits an act punishable under
overbreadth do not operate on the same plane. RPC and the enumerated special penal laws;

i. A statute or acts suffers from the defect of ii. Commission of the predicate crime sows
vagueness when: and creates a condition of widespread and
extraordinary fear and panic among the populace;
1. It lacks comprehensible
standards that men of common intelligence iii. The offender is actuated by the desire to
must necessarily guess at its meaning and coerce the government to give in to an unlawful
differ as to its application. It is repugnant to demand.
the Constitution in 2 ways:
b. Petitioners contend that the element of ―unlawful
a. Violates due process for demand‖ in the definition of terrorism must
failure to accord fair notice necessarily be transmitted through some form of
of conduct to avoid expression protected by the free speech clause. The
argument does not persuade. What RA 9372 seeks to
b. Leaves law enforcers penalize is conduct, not speech.
unbridled discretion in
carrying out its provisions c. Petitioners‘ notion on the transmission of message
and becomes an arbitrary is entirely inaccurate, as it unduly focuses on just one
flexing of the Government particle of an element of the crime. Almost every
muscle. commission of a crime entails some mincing of words
on the part of offender. Utterances not elemental but
ii. The overbreadth doctrine decrees that a inevitably incidental to the doing of the criminal
governmental purpose to control or prevent activities conduct alter neither the intent of the law to punish
constitutionally subject to state regulations may not socially harmful conduct nor the essence of the whole
be achieved by means, which sweep unnecessarily act as conduct and not speech.
broadly and thereby invade the area of protected
freedoms. Concurring opinion of Justice Abad: - He concurs with
the majority opinion, but he says he needs to
b. A ―facial‖ challenge is likewise different from an ―as emphasize that the grounds for dismissal in this case
applied‖ challenge. are more procedural than substantive. Hence, when
an actual controversy arises and when it becomes
i. ―As applied‖ challenge considers only
ripe for adjudication, the specific questions raised
extant facts affecting real litigants.
here may be raised again.
ii. ―Facial‖ challenge is an examination of the
TITLE II- CRIMES AGAINST THE FUNDAMENTAL LAWS
entire law, pinpointing its flaws and defects, not only
OF THE STATE
on the basis of its actual operation to the parties, but
also on the assumption or prediction that its very
existence may cause others not before the court to What are the crimes against the fundamental laws of the
refrain from constitutionally protected speech or State?
activities.
1. Arbitrary Detention (Art 124)
1. Under no case may ordinary
penal statutes be subjected to a facial 2. Delay in the delivery of detained persons to the proper
challenge. If facial challenge to a penal judicial authorities (Art.125)
statute is permitted, the prosecution of
crimes may be hampered. No prosecution 3. Delaying release (Art. 126)
would be possible.
4. Expulsion (Art. 127)
9. There is no merit in the claim that RA 9372 regulates speech
5. Violation of domicile (Art. 128)
so as to permit a facial analysis of its validity.

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-9
6. Search warrants maliciously obtained and abuse in the MILO v SALANGA (1987)
service of those legally obtained (Art. 129)
Facts: Tuvera, a barrio captain, was charged with arbitrary
7. Searching domicile without witnesses (Art. 30) detention, together with Cpl. Mendoza and Pat. Mangsat, who
are members of the police force of Manaoag, Pangasinan in
8. Prohibition, interruption and dissolution of peaceful detaining petitioner Valdez for about eleven (11) hours in the
meetings (Art. 131) municipal jail without legal ground.

9. Interruption of religious worship (Art. 132)

10. Offending the religious feeling (Art.133) Issue: Whether or not Tuvera, Sr., a barrio captain, is a public
officer who can be liable for the crime of Arbitrary Detention.
Why are they called crimes against the fundamental laws of
the State?

They violate certain provisions of the Bill of Rights of the 1987 Ruling: YES
Constitution

A. ARBITRARY DETENTION AND EXPULSION

Long before Presidential Decree 299 was signed into law,
1. ARBITRARY DETENTION (Art. 124, RPC) barrio lieutenants (who were later named barrio captains and
now barangay captains) were recognized as persons in
Any public officer or employee who, without legal grounds,
authority. In various cases, this Court deemed them as
detains a person, shall suffer:
persons in authority, and convicted them of Arbitrary
1. The penalty of arresto mayor in its maximum period to Detention.
prision correccional in its minimum period, if the detention has
not exceeded three days;
Under Republic Act No. 3590, otherwise known as The Revised
2. The penalty of prision correccional in its medium and
Barrio Charter, the powers and duties of a barrio captain
maximum periods, if the detention has continued more than
include the following:
three but not more than fifteen days;
 to look after the maintenance of public order in the barrio
3. The penalty of prision mayor, if the detention has continued
and to assist the municipal mayor and the municipal
for more than fifteen days but not more than six months; and
councilor in charge of the district in the performance of
4. That of reclusion temporal, if the detention shall have their duties in such barrio;
exceeded six months
 to look after the general welfare of the barrio;
The commission of a crime, or violent insanity or any other
 to enforce all laws and ordinances which are operative
ailment requiring the compulsory confinement of the patient in
within the barrio; and
a hospital, shall be considered legal grounds for the detention
of any person.  to organize and lead an emergency group whenever the
same may be necessary for the maintenance of peace
Elements of Arbitrary Detention:
and order within the barrio
1. That the offender is a public officer or employee
One need not be a police officer to be chargeable with
2. That he detains a person Arbitrary Detention. It is accepted that other public officers like
judges and mayors, who act with abuse of their functions, may
3. That the detention is without legal grounds be guilty of this crime. A perusal of the powers and function
vested in mayors would show that they are similar to those of
That the offender is a public officer or employee a barrio captain except that in the case of the latter, his
territorial jurisdiction is smaller. Having the same duty of
The public officers liable for Arbitrary Detention must be maintaining peace and order, both must be and are given
vested with authority to detain or order the detention of the authority to detain or order detention. Noteworthy is the
persons accused of a crime. Such public officers are the fact that even private respondent Tuvera himself admitted that
policemen and other agents of the law, the judges or mayors. with the aid of his rural police, he as a barrio captain,
could have led the arrest of petitioner Valdez.
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-10
That he detains a person the private offended parties and even laughed with them while
conversing over dinner. This scenario is inconsistent with a
Detention - actual confinement of a person in an enclosure, hostile confrontation between the parties. Moreover,
or in any manner detaining and depriving him of his liberty. considering that the Mayor also served alcoholic drinks, it is
(Reyes) not at all unusual that his guests left the house at 2:00 a.m.
the following morning.
Restraint resulting from fear
That the detention is without legal grounds
ASTORGA v PEOPLE (2003)
Legal grounds for the detention of any person:
Facts: On September 1, 1997, private offended parties
together with SPO3 Andres B. Cinco, Jr. and SPO1 Rufo 1. The commission of a crime
Capoquian, were sent to the Island of Daram, Western Samar
to conduct intelligence operations on possible illegal logging 2. Violent insanity or any other ailment requiring the
activities. At around 4:30-5:00 p.m., the team found two boats compulsory confinement of the patient in a hospital
measuring 18 meters in length and 5 meters in breadth being
constructed at Barangay Locob-Locob. There they met Arrest without warrant is the usual cause of arbitrary
petitioner Benito Astorga, the Mayor of Daram, who turned out detention
to be the owner of the boats. A heated altercation ensued
 A peace officer must have a warrant of arrest properly
between petitioner and the DENR team. Petitioner called for
issued by the court in order to justify the arrest. If there
reinforcements and, moments later, a boat bearing ten armed
is no such warrant of arrest, the arrest of a person by a
men, some wearing fatigues, arrived at the scene. The DENR
public officer may constitute arbitrary detention
team was then brought to petitioner‘s house in Daram, where
they had dinner and drinks. The team left at 2:00 a.m.
Art III, Constitution
ISSUE: Whether or not the petitioner is guilty of Arbitrary
Section 1. No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or
Detention
property without due process of law, nor shall any person be
denied the equal protection of the laws.
HELD: Petitioner Benito Astorga is acquitted of the crime of
Arbitrary Detention on the ground of reasonable doubt.
Section 2. The right of the people to be secure in their
persons, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable
The determinative factor in Arbitrary Detention, in the
searches and seizures of whatever nature and for any purpose
absence of actual physical restraint, is fear. After a
shall be inviolable, and no search warrant or warrant of arrest
careful review of the evidence on record, the court find no
shall issue except upon probable cause to be determined
proof that petitioner instilled fear in the minds of the private
personally by the judge after examination under oath or
offended parties. The court fail to discern any element of fear
affirmation of the complainant and the witnesses he may
from the narration of SPO1 Rufo Capoquian, the police officer
produce, and particularly describing the place to be searched
who escorted the DENR Team during their mission. SPO1
and the persons or things to be seized.
Capoquian in fact testified that they were free to leave the
house and roam around the barangay. Furthermore, he
Rule 113, Rules of Court
admitted that it was raining at that time. Hence, it is possible
that petitioner prevented the team from leaving the island Section 1. Definition of arrest. — Arrest is the taking of a
because it was unsafe for them to travel by boat. person into custody in order that he may be bound to answer
for the commission of an offense.

Section 2. Arrest; how made. — An arrest is made by an

Verily, the circumstances brought out by SPO1 Capoquian
actual restraint of a person to be arrested, or by his
created a reasonable doubt as to whether petitioner detained
submission to the custody of the person making the arrest.
the DENR Team against their consent. The events that
transpired are, to be sure, capable to two interpretations. Section 5. Arrest without warrant; when lawful. — A
While it may support the proposition that the private offended peace officer or a private person may, without a warrant,
parties were taken to petitioner‘s house and prevented from arrest a person:
leaving until 2:00 a.m. the next morning, it is equally plausible,
if not more so, that petitioner extended his hospitality and (a) When, in his presence, the person to be arrested has
served dinner and drinks to the team at his house. He could committed, is actually committing, or is attempting to commit
have advised them to stay on the island inasmuch as sea travel an offense;
was rendered unsafe by the heavy rains and ate together with
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-11
(b) When an offense has just been committed, and he has of any of the parents, elder brothers and sisters, his spouse,
probable cause to believe based on personal knowledge of the municipal mayor, the municipal judge, district school
facts or circumstances that the person to be arrested has supervisor, or priest or minister of the gospel as chosen by
committed it; and him; otherwise, such extrajudicial confession shall be
inadmissible as evidence in any proceeding.
(c) When the person to be arrested is a prisoner who has
escaped from a penal establishment or place where he is (e) Any waiver by a person arrested or detained under the
serving final judgment or is temporarily confined while his case provisions of Article 125 of the Revised Penal Code, or under
is pending, or has escaped while being transferred from one custodial investigation, shall be in writing and signed by such
confinement to another. person in the presence of his counsel; otherwise the waiver
shall be null and void and of no effect.
In cases falling under paragraph (a) and (b) above, the person
arrested without a warrant shall be forthwith delivered to the (f) Any person arrested or detained or under custodial
nearest police station or jail and shall be proceeded against in investigation shall be allowed visits by or conferences with any
accordance with section 7 of Rule 112. member of his immediate family, or any medical doctor or
priest or religious minister chosen by him or by any member of
Republic Act No. 7438 (1992) his immediate family or by his counsel, or by any national non-
governmental organization duly accredited by the Commission
AN ACT DEFINING CERTAIN RIGHTS OF PERSON ARRESTED,
on Human Rights of by any international non-governmental
DETAINED OR UNDER CUSTODIAL INVESTIGATION AS WELL
organization duly accredited by the Office of the President. The
AS THE DUTIES OF THE ARRESTING, DETAINING AND
person's "immediate family" shall include his or her spouse,
INVESTIGATING OFFICERS, AND PROVIDING PENALTIES FOR
fiancé or fiancée, parent or child, brother or sister,
VIOLATIONS THEREOF
grandparent or grandchild, uncle or aunt, nephew or niece,
and guardian or ward.
Section 2. Rights of Persons Arrested, Detained or
Under Custodial Investigation; Duties of Public
As used in this Act, "custodial investigation" shall include
Officers.–
the practice of issuing an "invitation" to a person who is
investigated in connection with an offense he is suspected to
(a) Any person arrested detained or under custodial
have committed, without prejudice to the liability of the
investigation shall at all times be assisted by counsel.
"inviting" officer for any violation of law.
(b) Any public officer or employee, or anyone acting under his
Section 3. Assisting Counsel. – Assisting counsel is any
order or his place, who arrests, detains or investigates any
lawyer, except those directly affected by the case, those
person for the commission of an offense shall inform the latter,
charged with conducting preliminary investigation or those
in a language known to and understood by him, of his rights to
charged with the prosecution of crimes. Xxx
remain silent and to have competent and independent counsel,
preferably of his own choice, who shall at all times be allowed
In the absence of any lawyer, no custodial investigation shall
to confer privately with the person arrested, detained or under
be conducted and the suspected person can only be detained
custodial investigation. If such person cannot afford the
by the investigating officer in accordance with the provisions of
services of his own counsel, he must be provided with a
Article 125 of the Revised Penal Code.
competent and independent counsel by the investigating
officer.lawphi1Ÿ Section 4. Penalty Clause. – (a) Any arresting public officer
or employee, or any investigating officer, who fails to inform
(c) The custodial investigation report shall be reduced to
any person arrested, detained or under custodial investigation
writing by the investigating officer, provided that before such
of his right to remain silent and to have competent and
report is signed, or thumbmarked if the person arrested or
independent counsel preferably of his own choice, shall suffer
detained does not know how to read and write, it shall be read
a fine of Six thousand pesos (P6,000.00) or a penalty of
and adequately explained to him by his counsel or by the
imprisonment of not less than eight (8) years but not more
assisting counsel provided by the investigating officer in the
than ten (10) years, or both. The penalty of perpetual absolute
language or dialect known to such arrested or detained
disqualification shall also be imposed upon the investigating
person, otherwise, such investigation report shall be null and
officer who has been previously convicted of a similar offense.
void and of no effect whatsoever.
The same penalties shall be imposed upon a public officer or
(d) Any extrajudicial confession made by a person arrested,
employee, or anyone acting upon orders of such investigating
detained or under custodial investigation shall be in writing
officer or in his place, who fails to provide a competent and
and signed by such person in the presence of his counsel or in
independent counsel to a person arrested, detained or under
the latter's absence, upon a valid waiver, and in the presence
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-12
custodial investigation for the commission of an offense if the verify a confidential information which was received by their
latter cannot afford the services of his own counsel. office, about a "sparrow man" (NPA member) who had been
admitted to the said hospital with a gunshot wound. That the
(b) Any person who obstructs, prevents or prohibits any wounded man in the said hospital was among the five (5) male
lawyer, any member of the immediate family of a person "sparrows" who murdered two (2) Capcom mobile patrols the
arrested, detained or under custodial investigation, or any day before, or on 31 January 1988 at about 12:00 o'clock
medical doctor or priest or religious minister chosen by him or noon, before a road hump along Macanining St.,
by any member of his immediate family or by his counsel, from Bagong Barrio, Caloocan City. The wounded man's name was
visiting and conferring privately with him, or from examining listed by the hospital management as "Ronnie Javellon,"
and treating him, or from ministering to his spiritual needs, at twenty-two (22) years old of Block 10, Lot 4,
any hour of the day or, in urgent cases, of the night shall South City Homes, Biñan, Laguna however it was disclosed
suffer the penalty of imprisonment of not less than four (4) later that the true name of the wounded man was Rolando
years nor more than six (6) years, and a fine of four thousand Dural. In view of this verification, Rolando Dural was
pesos (P4,000.00). transferred to the Regional Medical Servicesof the CAPCOM, for
security reasons. While confined thereat, he was positively
The provisions of the above Section notwithstanding, any
identified by the eyewitnesses as the one who murdered the 2
security officer with custodial responsibility over any detainee
CAPCOM mobile patrols.
or prisoner may undertake such reasonable measures as may
be necessary to secure his safety and prevent his escape. Petitioner contended that he was illegally arrested and is
unlawfully detained. A petition for habeas corpus was filed.
PEOPLE v BURGOS (1986)

Facts: Burgos was convicted for the crime of illegal possession Issue: Whether or Not Rolando was lawfully arrested.
of firearms in furtherance of Subversion. One Masamlok
claimed that he had been forcibly recruited by Burgos to the Held:
NPA, threatening him with the use of firearm against his life
and family. Authorities went to arrest Burgos without a Rolando Dural was arrested for being a member of the NPA, an
warrant. They found him in his residence plowing his field. outlawed subversive organization. Subversion being a
Burgos denied the accusation, but his wife pointed to a place continuing offense, the arrest without warrant is justified
below their house where a gun was buried in the ground. as it can be said that he was committing as offense when
Burgos also allegedly pointed to a stock pile of cogon where he arrested. The crimes rebellion, subversion, conspiracy or
had hidden subversive documents. The prosecution presented proposal to commit such crimes, and crimes or offenses
an extrajudicial confession made by Burgos. Burgos claimed committed in furtherance therefore in connection therewith
that he had been mauled and hit repeatedly until he would constitute direct assaults against the state and are in the
admit and sign an extrajudicial confession. nature of continuing crimes.

Issue: Whether or not the warrantless arrest of Burgos is valid 2. DELAY IN THE DELIVERY OF DETAINED PERSONS TO
THE PROPER JUDICIAL AUTHORITIES
Held: It is clear that the arresting officers had no knowledge
of the commission of the offense because such information Art. 125, RPC
was only supplied to them by an informant. Neither has Burgos
committed any offense in their presence as he was merely The penalties provided in the next preceding article shall be
plowing his field at the time of arrest. imposed upon the public officer or employee who shall detain
any person for some legal ground and shall fail to deliver such
Sec 6 (b) of Rule 113 requires that a crime must in fact or person to the proper judicial authorities within the period of;
actually have been committed first. It is not enough that there twelve (12) hours, for crimes or offenses punishable by light
is reasonable ground to believe that the person to be arrested penalties, or their equivalent; eighteen (18) hours, for crimes
has committed a crime. In the instant case, it was not even or offenses punishable by correctional penalties, or their
established that indeed a crime has been committed. The equivalent and thirty-six (36) hours, for crimes, or offenses
information that a crime was probably committed was supplied punishable by afflictive or capital penalties, or their equivalent.
by Masamlok who did not even give his testimony under oath.

UMIL v RAMOS (1990)

In every case, the person detained shall be informed of the
cause of his detention and shall be allowed upon his request,
Facts: On 1 February 1988, military agents were dispatched to
to communicate and confer at any time with his attorney or
the St.Agnes Hospital, Roosevelt Avenue, Quezon City, to

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-13
counsel. (As amended by E.O. Nos. 59 and 272, Nov. 7, 1986 After the filing of the complaint or information in court without
and July 25, 1987, respectively). a preliminary investigation, the accused may, within five (5)
days from the time he learns of its filing, ask for a preliminary
Elements: investigation with the same right to adduce evidence in his
defense as provided in this Rule.
1. That the offender is a public officer or employee
―Proper Judicial Authority‖ - the courts of justices or
2. That he has detained a person for some legal ground
judges of said courts vested with judicial power to order the
temporary detention or confinement of a person charged with
3. That he fails to deliver such person to the proper judicial
having committed a public offense, that is, "the Supreme Court
authorities within:
and such inferior courts as may be established by law".
a) 12 hours, for crimes or offenses punishable by light
penalties or their equivalent; SAYO v CHIEF OF POLICE (1948)

b) 18 hours for crimes or offenses punishable by Facts: Upon complaint of one Bernardo Malinao, charging the
correctional penalties or their equivalent; or petitioners with having committed the crime of robbery,
policeman Benjamin Dumlao arrested the petitioners. When
c) 36 hours for crimes or offenses punishable by the petition for habeas corpus was heard, the petitioners were
afflictive or capital penalties or their equivalent still detained and the fiscal had not yet released them or filed
against them an information with the proper courts of justice.
In order to decide whether or not the petitioners are being
illegally restrained of their liberty, the principal question to be
 Art. 125 applies only when the arrest is made determined is the following:
without a warrant of arrest. But the arrest must be
lawful. Issue: Is the city fiscal of manila a judicial authority within the
meaning of the provisions of article 125 of the Revised Penal
 If the arrest is made with a warrant of Code?
arrest, the person arrested may be detained
indefinitely until the case is decided by the court or HELD: NO
he posts a bail for his temporary release

REASON: there is already a complaint or

information filed against him with the court which The judicial authority mentioned in section 125 of the Revised
issued the order or warrant of arrest and it is not Penal Code can not be construed to include the fiscal of the
necessary to deliver the person thus arrested to City of Manila or any other city, because they cannot issue a
that court warrant of arrest or of commitment or temporary confinement
of a person surrendered to legalize the detention of a person
Rule 112, Rules of Court arrested without warrant.

Section 7. When accused lawfully arrested without To consider the city fiscal as the judicial authority referred to in
warrant. — When a person is lawfully arrested without a article 125 of the Revised Penal Code, would be to authorize
warrant involving an offense which requires a preliminary the detention of a person arrested without warrant for a period
investigation, the complaint or information may be filed by a longer than that permitted by law without any process issued
prosecutor without need of such investigation provided an by a court of competent jurisdiction. The city fiscal, may not,
inquest has been conducted in accordance with existing rules. after due investigation, find sufficient ground for filing an
In the absence or unavailability of an inquest prosecutor, the information or prosecuting the person arrested and release
complaint may be filed by the offended party or a peace office him, after the latter had been illegally detained for days or
directly with the proper court on the basis of the affidavit of weeks without any process issued by a court or judge.
the offended party or arresting officer or person.
In the City of Manila, where complaints are not filed directly
Before the complaint or information is filed, the person with the municipal court or the Court of First Instance, the
arrested may ask for a preliminary investigation in accordance officer or person making the arrest without warrant shall
with this Rule, but he must sign a waiver of the provisions of surrender or take the person arrested to the city fiscal, and the
Article 125 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended, in the latter shall make the investigation above mentioned and file, if
presence of his counsel. Notwithstanding the waiver, he may proper, the corresponding information within the time
apply for bail and the investigation must be terminated within prescribed by section 125 of the Revised Penal Code, so that
fifteen (15) days from its inception.
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-14
the court may issue a warrant of commitment for the
temporary detention of the accused.
AGBAY v OMBUDSMAN (1999)
If the city fiscal has any doubt as to the probability of the
defendant having committed the offense charged, or is not Facts: On September 7, 1997, petitioner Agbay and a certain
ready to file the information on the strength of the testimony Jugalbot were arrested and detained for the alleged violation
or evidence presented, he should release and not detain the of RA 7610, which carries a penalty of reclusion temporal in its
medium period to reclusion perpetua, an afflictive penalty. The
person arrested for a longer period than that prescribed in the
mother of complainant filed a complaint the next day before
Penal Code, without prejudice to making or continuing the the MCTC. Petitioner contends that the same was for purposes
investigation and filing afterwards the proper information of preliminary investigation as the MCTC has no jurisdiction to
against him with the court, in order to obtain or secure a try the offense. Thus, it did not interrupt the period under Art.
warrant of his arrest. 125 considering that it is the Regional Trial Court which has
jurisdiction to try the case against him. As such, upon the
Can the Fiscal be also held liable if he does not file the lapse of the thirty-six hours given to the arresting officers to
information within the period prescribed in Art. 125? effect his delivery to the proper Regional Trial Court, private
respondents were already guilty of violating Art. 125.
If the city fiscal does not file the information within said ISSUE: whether the filing of the complaint with the Municipal
period of time and the arresting officer continues holding the Trial Court constitutes delivery to a proper judicial authority as
prisoner beyond the six-hour period, the fiscal will not be contemplated by Art. 125 of the RPC
responsible for violation of said article 125, because he is not
HELD: YES
the one who arrested and illegally detained the person
arrested, unless he has ordered or induced the arresting officer The power to order the release or confinement of an accused
to hold and not release the prisoner after the expiration of said is determinative of the issue. In contrast with a city fiscal, it is
undisputed that a municipal court judge, even in the
period
performance of his function to conduct preliminary
investigations, retains the power to issue an order of release or
commitment.

MEDINA v OROZCO (1966 Furthermore, upon the filing of the complaint with the
Municipal Trial Court, the intent behind Art. 125 is satisfied
Facts: On November 7, 1965 at 12pm, petitioner Medina was considering that by such act, the detained person is informed
of the crime imputed against him and, upon his application
arrested and incarcerated in the Caloocan City Jail. He was
with the court, he may be released on bail. Petitioner himself
allegedly one of those responsible for the death of one Marcelo acknowledged this power of the MCTC to order his release
Sangalang. At around 9AM of that same day, the case against when he applied for and was granted his release upon posting
Medina and two others was referred to the fiscal, who bail. Thus, the very purpose underlying Article 125 has been
forthwith conducted preliminary investigation in petitioner‘s duly served with the filing of the complaint with the MCTC.
presence. Only on November 10, 1965 that an information was
The filing of the complaint with the MCTC interrupted the
filed against them in the Caloocan of the CFI Rizal. The court
period prescribed in said Article. Finally, we note that it was
promptly ordered them to be committed to jail
the mother of private complainant who filed the complaint
against petitioner with the MCTC. If there was any error in
ISSUE: WON Orozco (Acting City Warden) committed arbitrary
this procedure, private respondents should not be held
detention by delay in the delivery of the detained person to
liable. In the same manner, petitioners argument that the
proper judicial authorities
controversial orders issued by the MCTC are contrary to law
HELD: does not give rise to criminal liability on the part of the
respondents. Respondent police officers may have rendered
No, Orozco did not violate Art. 125 themselves open to sanctions if they had released petitioners
without the order of the court, knowing fully well that a
It was the a fact that only after 75 hours that an information complaint was already filed with it.Article 125 of the Revised
was filed in the Caloocan Branch of the CFI Rizal but this does Penal Code is intended to prevent any abuse resulting from
not equate to arbitrary detention because to consider that confining a person without informing him of his offense and
November 7 was a Sunday, November 8 was declared an without permitting him to go on bail. More specifically, it
official holiday and November 9 was an election day. It would punishes public officials or employees who shall detain any
not be an easy task for a fiscal to look for personnel of the person for some legal ground and shall fail to deliver such
court and the judge likewise properly file the complaint. These person to the proper judicial authorities within the periods
considerations were taken into by the SC in holding that prescribed by law. The continued detention of the accused
Orozco cant be held liable for arbitrary detention under Art. becomes illegal upon the expiration of the periods provided for
125
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-15
by Art. 125 without such detainee having been delivered to the charged or suspected person to the proper judicial authority
corresponding judicial authorities. within a period of three days counted from the moment the
said charged or suspected person has been apprehended or
SORIA v DESIERTO (2005) arrested, detained, and taken into custody by the said police,
or law enforcement personnel: Provided, That the arrest of
Facts: Petitioners Soria and Bista were arrested on May 13, those suspected of the crime of terrorism or conspiracy to
2001 (a Sunday and the day before May 14 elections), without commit terrorism must result from the surveillance under
a warrant by respondents for alleged illegal possessions of Section 7 and examination of bank deposits under Section 27
firearms and ammunition. One police identified Bista to have a of this Act.
standing warrant of arrest for violation of BP blg. 6. From the
time of Soria‘s detention up to the time of his release, 22 The police or law enforcement personnel concerned shall,
hours had already elapsed. The crime for which he was before detaining the person suspected of the crime of
arrested without a warrant is punishable by correctional terrorism, present him or her before any judge at the latter's
penalty. On the other hand, Bista was detained for 26 days, residence or office nearest the place where the arrest took
the crime for which he was arrested is punishable by afflictive place at any time of the day or night. It shall be the duty of
penalty. the judge, among other things, to ascertain the identity of the
police or law enforcement personnel and the person or persons
Petitioners filed with the Office of the Ombudsman for Military they have arrested and presented before him or her, to inquire
Affairs a complaint-affidavit for violation of Art. 125 of the RPC of them the reasons why they have arrested the person and
against herein private respondents. The Ombudsman determine by questioning and personal observation whether or
dismissed the complaint for lack of merit not the suspect has been subjected to any physical, moral or
psychological torture by whom and why. The judge shall then
ISSUE: WON the officers in the Office of the Ombudsman submit a written report of what he/she had observed when the
gravely abused their discretion in dismissing the complaint for subject was brought before him to the proper court that has
violation of Art 125 of the RPC jurisdiction over the case of the person thus arrested. The
judge shall forthwith submit his/her report within three
Held: the facts on hand do not make out a case for violation calendar days from the time the suspect was brought to
of Article 125 of the Revised Penal Code.
his/her residence or office.
While it appears that the complaints against Soria for Illegal
Possession of Firearm and Violation of COMELEC Resolution Immediately after taking custody of a person charged with or
No. 3328 were filed with the Regional Trial Court and Municipal suspected of the crime of terrorism or conspiracy to commit
Trial Court of Narvacan, Ilocos Sur, only on May 15, 200[1] at terrorism, the police or law enforcement personnel shall notify
4:30 p.m., he had already been released the day before or on
in writing the judge of the court nearest the place of
May 14, 2001 at about 6:30 p.m. by the respondents, as
apprehension or arrest: Provided ,That where the arrest is
directed by Prov. Prosecutor Jessica [Viloria]. Hence, there
could be no arbitrary detention or violation of Article 125 of the made during Saturdays, Sundays, holidays or after office
Revised Penal Code to speak of. hours, the written notice shall be served at the residence of
the judge nearest the place where the accused was arrested.
Proper application of the 12-18-36 period
The penalty of ten (10) years and one day to twelve (12) years
Based on applicable laws and jurisprudence, an election day or
of imprisonment shall be imposed upon the police or law
a special holiday, should not be included in the computation of
enforcement personnel who fails to notify and judge as
the period prescribed by law for the filing of
Provided in the preceding paragraph.
complaint/information in courts in cases of warrantless arrests,
it being a no-office day SEC. 19. Period of Detention in the Event of an Actual
or Imminent Terrorist Attack. - In the event of an actual or
Republic Act. No. 9372 (Human Security Act of 2007) imminent terrorist attack, suspects may not be detained for
more than three days without the written approval of a
SEC. 18. Period of Detention Without Judicial Warrant
municipal, city, provincial or regional official of a Human Rights
of Arrest. - The provisions of Article 125 of the Revised Penal
Commission or judge of the municipal, regional trial court, the
Code to the contrary notwithstanding, any police or law
Sandiganbayan or a justice of the Court of Appeals nearest the
enforcement personnel, who, having been duly authorized in
place of the arrest. If the arrest is made during Saturdays,
writing by the Anti-Terrorism Council has taken custody of a
Sundays, holidays or after office hours, the arresting police or
person charged with or suspected of the crime of terrorism or
law enforcement personnel shall bring the person thus
the crime of conspiracy to commit terrorism shall, without
arrested to the residence of any of the officials mentioned
incurring any criminal liability for delay in the delivery of
above that is nearest the place where the accused was
detained persons to the proper judicial authorities, deliver said
arrested. The approval in writing of any of the said officials
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-16
shall be secured by the police or law enforcement personnel 2. That he expels any person from the Philippines
concerned within five days after the date of the detention of or compels a person to change his residence
the persons concerned: Provided, however, That within three
days after the detention the suspects, whose connection with 3. The offender is not authorized to do so by law
the terror attack or threat is not established, shall be released
 Only the court by a final judgment can
immediately.
order a person to change his residence
See also RA 7438 (supra) (e.g. ejectment proceedings,
expropriation, and the penalty of
3. DELAYING RELEASE destierro)

Art. 126, RPC Art. III, Constitution

The penalties provided for in Article 124 shall be imposed upon Section 7. The right of the people to information on matters
any public officer or employee who delays for the period of of public concern shall be recognized. Access to official
time specified therein the performance of any judicial or records, and to documents and papers pertaining to official
executive order for the release of a prisoner or detention acts, transactions, or decisions, as well as to government
prisoner, or unduly delays the service of the notice of such research data used as basis for policy development, shall be
order to said prisoner or the proceedings upon any petition for afforded the citizen, subject to such limitations as may be
the liberation of such person. provided by law.

 Elements: B. VIOLATION OF DOMICILE

1. the offender is a public officer or employee 5. VIOLATION OF DOMICILE

Art. 128, RPC

2. there is a judicial or executive order for the
release of a prisoner or detention prisoner, or there
The penalty of prision correccional in its minimum period shall
is a proceeding upon a petition for the liberation of
be imposed upon any public officer or employee who, not
such person
being authorized by judicial order, shall enter any dwelling
against the will of the owner thereof, search papers or other
3. the offender, without good reasons, performs any
effects found therein without the previous consent of such
of these act punishable under Art. 26:
owner, or having surreptitiously entered said dwelling, and
being required to leave the premises, shall refuse to do so.
-by delaying the performance of a judicial or
executive order for the release of a prisoner If the offense be committed in the night-time, or if any papers
or effects not constituting evidence of a crime be not returned
-by unduly delaying the service of the notice of immediately after the search made by the offender, the
such order to said prisoner penalty shall be prision correccional in its medium and
maximum periods.
-by unduly delaying the proceedings upon any
petition for the liberation of such persons  Acts punishable

 Warden and jailers are the public officers most likely to 1. By entering any dwelling against the will of the owner
violate Art. 126 thereof; or

4. EXPULSION 2. By searching papers or other effects found therein

without the previous consent of such owner
Art. 127, RPC
3. By refusing to leave the premises, after having
The penalty of prision correccional shall be imposed upon any surreptitiously entered said dwelling and after having
public officer or employee who, not being thereunto authorized been required to leave the same
by law, shall expel any person from the Philippine Islands or
shall compel such person to change his residence.  Elements common to three punishable acts

 Elements: 1. the offender is a public officer or employee

1. The offender is a public officer or employee

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-17
 2. He is not authorized by judicial order to enter the Philippines, signed by a judge and directed to a peace officer,
dwelling and/or to make a search therein for papers or commanding him to search for personal property described
other effects therein and bring it before the court. (1)

 If the offender is a private individual, the crime Section 2. Court where application for search warrant
committed is trespass to dwelling shall be filed. — An application for search warrant shall be
filed with the following:
6. SEARCH WARRANTS MALLICIOUSLY OBTAINED AND
ABUSE IN THE SERVICE OF THOSE LEGALLY OBTAINED a) Any court within whose territorial jurisdiction a crime was
committed.
Art. 129, RPC
b) For compelling reasons stated in the application, any court
In addition to the liability attaching to the offender for the within the judicial region where the crime was committed if the
commission of any other offense, the penalty of arresto mayor place of the commission of the crime is known, or any court
in its maximum period to prision correccional in its minimum within the judicial region where the warrant shall be enforced.
period and a fine not exceeding P1,000 pesos shall be imposed
upon any public officer or employee who shall procure a However, if the criminal action has already been filed, the
search warrant without just cause, or, having legally application shall only be made in the court where the criminal
procured the same, shall exceed his authority or use action is pending. (n)
unnecessary severity in executing the same.
Section 3. Personal property to be seized. — A search
 Acts punishable warrant may be issued for the search and seizure of personal
property:
1. By procuring a search warrant without just cause
(a) Subject of the offense;
2. By exceeding his authority or by using
unnecessary severity in executing a search warrant legally (b) Stolen or embezzled and other proceeds, or fruits of the
procured offense; or

 The offender must be a public officer or employee (c) Used or intended to be used as the means of committing
an offense. (2a)
Art. III, Constitution
Section 4. Requisites for issuing search warrant. — A
Section 2. The right of the people to be secure in their search warrant shall not issue except upon probable cause in
persons, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable connection with one specific offense to be determined
searches and seizures of whatever nature and for any purpose personally by the judge after examination under oath or
shall be inviolable, and no search warrant or warrant of arrest affirmation of the complainant and the witnesses he may
shall issue except upon probable cause to be determined produce, and particularly describing the place to be searched
personally by the judge after examination under oath or and the things to be seized which may be anywhere in the
affirmation of the complainant and the witnesses he may Philippines. (3a)
produce, and particularly describing the place to be searched
and the persons or things to be seized. Section 5. Examination of complainant; record. — The
judge must, before issuing the warrant, personally examine in
Section 3. (1) The privacy of communication and the form of searching questions and answers, in writing and
correspondence shall be inviolable except upon lawful order of under oath, the complainant and the witnesses he may
the court, or when public safety or order requires otherwise, as produce on facts personally known to them and attach to the
prescribed by law. record their sworn statements, together with the affidavits
submitted. (4a)
(2) Any evidence obtained in violation of this or the preceding
section shall be inadmissible for any purpose in any Section 6. Issuance and form of search warrant. — If
proceeding. the judge is satisfied of the existence of facts upon which the
application is based or that there is probable cause to believe
Rule 126, Rules of Court
that they exist, he shall issue the warrant, which must be
substantially in the form prescribed by these Rules. (5a)
SEARCH AND SEIZURE
Section 7. Right to break door or window to effect
Section 1. Search warrant defined. — A search warrant is
search. — The officer, if refused admittance to the place of
an order in writing issued in the name of the People of the
directed search after giving notice of his purpose and
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-18
authority, may break open any outer or inner door or window action has been instituted. If no criminal action has been
of a house or any part of a house or anything therein to instituted, the motion may be filed in and resolved by the court
execute the warrant or liberate himself or any person lawfully that issued the search warrant. However, if such court failed to
aiding him when unlawfully detained therein. (6) resolve the motion and a criminal case is subsequent filed in
another court, the motion shall be resolved by the latter court.
Section 9. Time of making search. — The warrant must
direct that it be served in the day time, unless the affidavit STONEHILL v DIOKNO (1967) -general warrants
asserts that the property is on the person or in the place
ordered to be searched, in which case a direction may be FACTS: Respondents herein secured a total of 42 search
inserted that it be served at any time of the day or night. (8) warrants against petitioners herein and/or the corporations of
which they were officers, to search ―books of accounts,
Section 10. Validity of search warrant. — A search financial records, vouchers, correspondence, receipts, ledgers,
warrant shall be valid for ten (10) days from its date. journals, portfolios, credit journals, typewriters, and other
Thereafter it shall be void. (9a) documents and/or papers showing all business transactions
including disbursements receipts, balance sheets and profit
Section 11. Receipt for the property seized. — The and loss statements and Bobbins (cigarette wrappers),‖ as ―the
officer seizing property under the warrant must give a detailed subject of the offense; stolen or embezzled and proceeds or
receipt for the same to the lawful occupant of the premises in fruits of the offense,‖ or ―used or intended to be used as the
whose presence the search and seizure were made, or in the means of committing the offense,‖ which is described in the
absence of such occupant, must, in the presence of at least applications adverted to above as ―violation of Central Bank
two witnesses of sufficient age and discretion residing in the Laws, Tariff and Customs Laws, Internal Revenue (Code) and
same locality, leave a receipt in the place in which he found the Revised Penal Code.‖
the seized property. (10a)
The petitioner contended that the search warrants are null and
Section 12. Delivery of property and inventory thereof void as their issuance violated the Constitution and the Rules
to court; return and proceedings thereon. — (a) The of Court for being general warrants.
officer must forthwith deliver the property seized to the judge
who issued the warrant, together with a true inventory thereof ISSUE: WON the search warrant in question and the searches
duly verified under oath. and seizures made under the authority thereof are valid

(b) Ten (10) days after issuance of the search warrant, the
HELD: NO. None of the Constitutional requirements has been
issuing judge shall ascertain if the return has been made, and complied with in the contested warrants. Indeed, the same
if none, shall summon the person to whom the warrant was were issued upon applications stating that the natural and
issued and require him to explain why no return was made. If juridical person therein named had committed a "violation of
the return has been made, the judge shall ascertain whether Central Ban Laws, Tariff and Customs Laws, Internal Revenue
section 11 of this Rule has been complained with and shall (Code) and Revised Penal Code." In other words,
require that the property seized be delivered to him. The judge no specific offense had been alleged in said applications. The
averments thereof with respect to the offense committed
shall see to it that subsection (a) hereof has been complied
were abstract. As a consequence, it was impossible for the
with. judges who issued the warrants to have found the existence of
probable cause, for the same presupposes the introduction of
(c) The return on the search warrant shall be filed and kept by competent proof that the party against whom it is sought has
the custodian of the log book on search warrants who shall performed particular acts, or committed specific omissions,
enter therein the date of the return, the result, and other violating a given provision of our criminal laws. As a matter of
actions of the judge. fact, the applications involved in this case do not allege any
specific acts performed by herein petitioners. It would be the
A violation of this section shall constitute contempt of legal heresy, of the highest order, to convict anybody of a
"violation of Central Bank Laws, Tariff and Customs Laws,
court.(11a)
Internal Revenue (Code) and Revised Penal Code," — as
alleged in the aforementioned applications — without
Section 13. Search incident to lawful arrest. — A person
reference to any determinate provision of said laws or
lawfully arrested may be searched for dangerous weapons or
anything which may have been used or constitute proof in the
To uphold the validity of the warrants in question would be to
commission of an offense without a search warrant. (12a) wipe out completely one of the most fundamental rights
guaranteed in our Constitution, for it would place the sanctity
Section 14. Motion to quash a search warrant or to of the domicile and the privacy of communication and
suppress evidence; where to file. — A motion to quash a correspondence at the mercy of the whims caprice or passion
search warrant and/or to suppress evidence obtained thereby of peace officers. This is precisely the evil sought to be
may be filed in and acted upon only by the court where the remedied by the constitutional provision above quoted — to

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-19
outlaw the so-called general warrants. It is not difficult to Re: 2 warrants issued indicted only one and the same
imagine what would happen, in times of keen political strife, address
when the party in power feels that the minority is likely to
wrest it, even though by legal means. The defect pointed out is obviously a typographical error.
Precisely, two search warrants were applied for and issued
The only possible explanation for the issuance of warrant is the because the purpose and intent were to search two distinct
necessity of fishing for evidence of the commission of the premises. It would be quite absurd and illogical for respondent
crime. Such a fishing expedition is indicative of the absence of
judge to have issued two warrants intended for one and the
evidence to establish a probable cause.
same place.
Thus, the warrants authorized the search for and seizure of
Re: general warrant
records pertaining to all business transactions of petitioners
herein, regardless of whether the transactions Another factor which makes the search warrants under
were legal or illegal. The warrants sanctioned the seizure of all consideration constitutionally objectionable is that they are in
records of the petitioners and the aforementioned the nature of general warrants. The description of the articles
corporations, whatever their nature, thus openly contravening sought to be seized under the search warrants in question are
the explicit command of our Bill of Rights — that the things to too general.
be seized be particularly described — as well as tending to
defeat its major objective: the elimination of general warrants. 6. SEARCHING DOMICILE WITHOUT WITNESSES

BURGOS v CHIEF OF STAFF (1984) Art. 130, RPC

FACTS: Two warrants were issued against petitioners for the The penalty of arresto mayor in its medium and maximum
search on the premises of ―Metropolitan Mail‖ and ―We Forum‖ periods shall be imposed upon a public officer or employee
newspapers and the seizure of items alleged to have been who, in cases where a search is proper, shall search the
used in subversive activities. Petitioners prayed that a writ of domicile, papers or other belongings of any person, in the
preliminary mandatory and prohibitory injunction be issued for absence of the latter, any member of his family, or in
the return of the seized articles, and that respondents be their default, without the presence of two witnesses
enjoined from using the articles thus seized as evidence residing in the same locality.
against petitioner.
 Elements:

1. The offender is a public officer or employee

Petitioners questioned the warrants for the lack of probable
2. That he is armed with search warrant legally procured
cause and that the two warrants issued indicated only one and
the same address. 3. That he searches the domicile, papers or other
belongings of any person
ISSUE: WON the search warrants issued are valid
4. That the owner or any member of his family or two
HELD: NO
witnesses residing in the same locality are not present.
RE: Lack of probable cause
Rule 126, Rules of Court
Probable Cause - defined as such facts and circumstances
Section 8. Search of house, room, or premise to be
which would lead a reasonably discreet and prudent man to
made in presence of two witnesses. — No search of a
believe that an offense has been committed and that the
house, room, or any other premise shall be made except in the
object sought in connection with the offense are in the place
presence of the lawful occupant thereof or any member of his
sought to be searched.
family or in the absence of the latter, two witnesses of
The broad statements in the application and joint affidavit are sufficient age and discretion residing in the same locality.
mere conclusions of law and does not satisfy
C. Prohibition, Interruption and Dissolution of Peaceful
the requirements of probable cause. Deficient of such
Meetings
particulars as would justify a finding of the existence of
probable cause, said allegation cannot serve as basis for the 8. Prohibition, Interruption and Dissolution of Peaceful
issuance of a search warrant and it was a grave error for Meetings
respondent judge to have done so.
Art. 131, RPC

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-20
The penalty of prision correccional in its minimum period shall The penalty of prision correccional in its minimum period shall
be imposed upon any public officer or employee who, without be imposed upon any public officer or employee who shall
legal ground, shall prohibit or interrupt the holding of a prevent or disturb the ceremonies or manifestations of any
peaceful meeting, or shall dissolve the same. religion.

The same penalty shall be imposed upon a public officer or If the crime shall have been committed with violence or
employee who shall hinder any person from joining any threats, the penalty shall be prision correccional in its medium
lawful association or from attending any of its and maximum periods.
meetings.
 Elements:
The same penalty shall be imposed upon any public officer or
employee who shall prohibit or hinder any person from 1. The offender is a public officer or employee
addressing, either alone or together with others, any
petition to the authorities for the correction of abuses or 2. that religious ceremonies or manifestations of any
redress of grievances. religion are about to take place or are going on

 Acts punishable 3. That the offender prevents or disturbs the same

1. by prohibiting or by interrupting, without legal  Qualifying circumstances - If the crime is committed

ground, the holding of a peaceful meeting or by with violence or threats
dissolving the same;
Art. III, Constitution
2. by hindering any person from enjoining any
Section 5. No law shall be made respecting an establishment
lawful association or from attending any of its
of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. The free
meetings; exercise and enjoyment of religious profession and worship,
without discrimination or preference, shall forever be allowed.
3. by prohibiting or hindering any person from No religious test shall be required for the exercise of civil or
addressing, either alone or together with others, any political rights.
petition to the authorities for the correction of
10. OFFENDING THE RELIGIOUS FEELINGS
abuses or redress of grievances
Art. 133, RPC
 The offender must be a public officer or employee.
The penalty of arresto mayor in its maximum period to prision
If private individual, the crime is disturbance of correccional in its minimum period shall be imposed upon
public order defined in Art. 153. anyone who, in a place devoted to religious worship or during
the celebration of any religious ceremony shall perform acts
Art. III, Constitution notoriously offensive to the feelings of the faithful.

Section 4. No law shall be passed abridging the freedom of  Elements:

speech, of expression, or of the press, or the right of the
people peaceably to assemble and petition the government for 1. The acts complained of were performed (1) in a
redress of grievances. place devoted to religious worship or (2) during the
celebration of any religious ceremony;
Section 8. The right of the people, including those employed
2. The the acts must be notoriously offensive to the
in the public and private sectors, to form unions, associations,
feelings of the faithful.
or societies for purposes not contrary to law shall not be
abridged. PEOPLE v MANDORIAO (1955)

 The right to peaceful meeting and the right to peaceably FACTS: The Iglesia ni Cristo held a religious rally at a public
assemble are not absolute and may be regulated. place in Baguio. About 200 people attended the meeting,
about 50 of whom were members of the INC but the rest were
D. CRIMES AGAINST RELIGIOUS WORSHIP
outsiders and curious listeners. While Salvio, a minister of INC,
9. INTERRUPTION OF RELIGIOUS WORSHIP was expounding on his topic to the effect that Christ is not
God, but only a man, the crowd became unruly. Some people
Art. 132, RPC urged Mandoriao to go up to the stage and have a debate with
Salvio. Mandoriao, however, was not able to speak before the

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-21
microphone because the wire connecting it was abruptly day. Upon the request of Tiburcio, Tengson with his assistant,
disconnected. Olegario, performed a religious service in accordance with their
sect practice. He was also informed by Tiburcio that Ines
ISSUE: WON the meeting was a religious ceremony would be buried in the Roman Catholic Cemetery of Batanga,
and that a burial permit had been obtained from the catholic
HELD: NO, the meeting was not a religious ceremony.
church.
A religious meeting is an ―assemblage of people meeting for
On the day of the internment, another service was held in the
the purpose of performing acts of adoration to the Supreme
barrio chapel of ―Christ is the Answer‖ for the deceased. The
Being, or to perform religious services in recognition of God as
funeral cortege then headed to the cemetery.
a object of worship‖.
The funeral coach stopped in front of an unfinished chapel and
the coffin was taken out. The coffin was taken to the tomb
situated about 70km meters away from the chapel and as it
The meeting here was not limited to the members of the INC.
was being pushed inside, Olegario closed his eyes and prayed,
The supposed prayers and singing hymns were merely
the crowd joining him.
incidental because the principal object of the rally was to
persuade new converts to their religion.
ISSUE: WON Tengson and Olegario performed acts offensive
to the feelings of a Roman Catholic faithful
Assuming that the rally was a religious ceremony, the
appellant cannot be said to have performed acts or uttered
words offensive to the feelings of the faithful. The acts HELD: NO
complained of must directed against a dogma or ritual, or upon
an object of veneration. There was no object of veneration at For an act to be notoriously offensive to religious feelings, it
the meeting. must be directed against a religious practice for the purpose of
ridicule. The offender mocks, scoffs or attempts to damage an
PEOPLE v BAES (1939) object of religious veneration and the act must be abusive,
FACTS: Baes, the parish priest of the Roman Catholic Church insulting and obnoxious.
of Lumban, Laguna, charged the accused with an offense
The act of perfoming burial rites in accordance with the rules
against the religion for causing the funeral of a member of the
of practice of ―Christ is the Answer‖ is not notoriously
―Church of Christ‖ to pass through the churchyard fronting the
offensive to the feelings of religious persons.
Roman Catholic Church, belonging to said church and devoted
to the religious worship thereof. The parish pries opposed this, Here, the appellant and his assistant merely performed
but through force and threats of physical violence by the religious rites in accordance with the practice of their sect. It
accused, was compelled to allow the funeral pass through the may have offended the feelings of some catholic adherents but
said churchyard. since there was a permit for the burial, the rites are not
offensive to the feelings of everybody who profess the
ISSUE: WON the act complained of is notoriously offensive to
Christian religion.
the religious feelings of the Catholic
Offenses to religious feelings should be measured by the
HELD: The facts alleged in the complaint constitute the
nature of the acts committed.
offense defined and penalized in Art. 133 of the RPC, and
should the fiscal file an information alleging the said facts and
PEOPLE v NANOY (1972)
a trial be thereafter held at which said facts should be
conclusively established, the court may find the accused guilty FACTS: While the congregation of the Assembly of God was
of the offense complained of, or that of coercion, or that of having its afternoon services in its chapel, accused who was
trespass under Art 281 of the RPC allegedly drunk entered with uplifted hands and attempted to
grab the song leader who ran away from him. The other
Whether or not the act complained of is offensive to the
members of the sect also ran out of the church and the
religious feelings of the Catholics, is a question of fact which
religious services were discontinued, even as one member held
must be judged only according to the feelings of the Catholic
the accused and led him outside the church.
and not those of other faithful ones.

PEOPLE v TENGSON
HELD: the accused is only guilty of unjust vexation penalized
FACTS: Tengson, a minister of the sect called ―Christ is the by the 2nd paragraph of Art. 287 of the RPC.
Answer‖, received a telegram informing of the death of Ines
Cepillo, wife of Tiburcio, and of her internment the following
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-22
To constitute the offense under Art. 133, there must be a (5) The submersion of the head in water or water polluted with
deliberate intent to hurt the feelings of the faithful. excrement, urine, vomit and/or blood until the brink of
suffocation;
The appellant did not perform acts notoriously offensive to the
feelings of the faithful. Neither did he cause such a serious (6) Being tied or forced to assume fixed and stressful bodily
disturbance as to interrupt or disturb the services of the said position;
congregation.
(7) Rape and sexual abuse, including the insertion of foreign
E. ANTI-TORTURE ACT objects into the sex organ or rectum, or electrical torture of
the genitals;
Republic Act No. 9745 (2009)
(8) Mutilation or amputation of the essential parts of the body
(a) "Torture" refers to an act by which severe pain or such as the genitalia, ear, tongue, etc.;
suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted
on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him/her or a (9) Dental torture or the forced extraction of the teeth;
third person information or a confession; punishing him/her for
an act he/she or a third person has committed or is suspected (10) Pulling out of fingernails;
of having committed; or intimidating or coercing him/her or a
(11) Harmful exposure to the elements such as sunlight and
third person; or for any reason based on discrimination of any
extreme cold;
kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the
instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a person
(12) The use of plastic bag and other materials placed over the
in authority or agent of a person in authority. It does not
head to the point of asphyxiation;
include pain or Buffering arising only from, inherent in or
incidental to lawful sanctions. (13) The use of psychoactive drugs to change the perception,
memory. alertness or will of a person, such as:
(b) "Other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or
punishment" refers to a deliberate and aggravated treatment (i) The administration or drugs to induce confession
or punishment not enumerated under Section 4 of this Act, and/or reduce mental competency; or
inflicted by a person in authority or agent of a person in
authority against a person under his/her custody, which attains (ii) The use of drugs to induce extreme pain or certain
a level of severity causing suffering, gross humiliation or symptoms of a disease; and
debasement to the latter.
(14) Other analogous acts of physical torture; and
Section 4. Acts of Torture. - For purposes of this Act,
torture shall include, but not be limited to, the following:

(a) Physical torture is a form of treatment or punishment (b) "Mental/Psychological Torture" refers to acts
inflicted by a person in authority or agent of a person in committed by a person in authority or agent of a person in
authority upon another in his/her custody that causes severe authority which are calculated to affect or confuse the mind
pain, exhaustion, disability or dysfunction of one or more parts and/or undermine a person's dignity and morale, such as:
of the body, such as:
(1) Blindfolding;
(1) Systematic beating, headbanging, punching, kicking,
(2) Threatening a person(s) or his/fher relative(s) with bodily
striking with truncheon or rifle butt or other similar objects,
harm, execution or other wrongful acts;
and jumping on the stomach;
(3) Confinement in solitary cells or secret detention places;
(2) Food deprivation or forcible feeding with spoiled food,
animal or human excreta and other stuff or substances not
(4) Prolonged interrogation;
normally eaten;
(5) Preparing a prisoner for a "show trial", public display or
(3) Electric shock;
public humiliation of a detainee or prisoner;
(4) Cigarette burning; burning by electrically heated rods, hot
(6) Causing unscheduled transfer of a person deprived of
oil, acid; by the rubbing of pepper or other chemical
liberty from one place to another, creating the belief that
substances on mucous membranes, or acids or spices directly
he/she shall be summarily executed;
on the wound(s);
(7) Maltreating a member/s of a person's family;

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-23
(8) Causing the torture sessions to be witnessed by the (5) days of every month at the minimum. Every regional office
person's family, relatives or any third party; of the PNP, AFP and other law enforcement agencies shall also
maintain a similar list far all detainees and detention facilities
(9) Denial of sleep/rest; within their respective areas, and shall make the same
available to the public at all times at their respective regional
(10) Shame infliction such as stripping the person naked,
headquarters, and submit a copy. updated in the same manner
parading him/her in public places, shaving the victim's head or
provided above, to the respective regional offices of the CHR.
putting marks on his/her body against his/her will;
Section 8. Applicability of the Exclusionary Rule;
(11) Deliberately prohibiting the victim to communicate with
Exception. - Any confession, admission or statement obtained
any member of his/her family; and
as a result of torture shall be inadmissible in evidence in any
proceedings, except if the same is used as evidence against a
(12) Other analogous acts of mental/psychological torture.
person or persons accused of committing torture.
Section 5. Other Cruel, Inhuman and Degrading
Section 9. Institutional Protection of Torture Victims
Treatment or Punishment. - Other cruel, inhuman or
and Other Persons Involved. - A victim of torture shall
degrading treatment or punishment refers to a deliberate and
have the following rights in the institution of a criminal
aggravated treatment or punishment not enumerated under
complaint for torture:
Section 4 of this Act, inflicted by a person in authority or agent
of a person in authority against another person in custody,
(a) To have a prompt and an impartial investigation by the
which attains a level of severity sufficient to cause suffering,
CHR and by agencies of government concerned such as the
gross humiliation or debasement to the latter. The assessment
Department of Justice (DOJ), the Public Attorney's Office
of the level of severity shall depend on all the circumstances of
(PAO), the PNP, the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) and
the case, including the duration of the treatment or
the AFP. A prompt investigation shall mean a maximum period
punishment, its physical and mental effects and, in some
of sixty (60) working days from the time a complaint for
cases, the sex, religion, age and state of health of the victim.
torture is filed within which an investigation report and/or
resolution shall be completed and made available. An appeal
Section 6. Freedom from Torture and Other Cruel,
whenever available shall be resolved within the same period
Inhuman and Degrading Treatment or Punishment, An
prescribed herein,
Absolute Right. - Torture and other cruel, inhuman and
degrading treatment or punishment as criminal acts shall apply
(b) To have sufficient government protection against all forms
to all circumstances. A state of war or a threat of war, internal
of harassment; threat and/or intimidation as a consequence of
political instability, or any other public emergency, or a
the filing of said complaint or the presentation of evidence
document or any determination comprising an "order of battle"
therefor. In which case, the State through its appropriate
shall not and can never be invoked as a justification for torture
agencies shall afford security in order to ensure his/her safety
and other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or
and all other persons involved in the investigation and
punishment.
prosecution such as, but not limited to, his/her lawyer,
witnesses and relatives; and
Section 7. Prohibited Detention. - Secret detention places,
solitary confinement, incommunicado or other similar forms of
(c) To be accorded sufficient protection in the manner by
detention, where torture may be carried out with impunity are
which he/she testifies and presents evidence in any fora in
hereby prohibited.
order to avoid further trauma.
In which case, the Philippine National Police (PNP), the Armed
Section 10. Disposition of Writs of Habeas Corpus,
Forces of the Philippines (AFP) and other law enforcement.
Amparo and Habeas Data Proceedings and Compliance
agencies concerned shall make an updated list of all detention
with a Judicial 0rder. - A writ of habeas corpus or writ of
centers and facilities under their respective jurisdictions with
amparo or writ of habeas data proceeding, if any, filed on
the corresponding data on the prisoners or detainees
behalf of the victim of torture or other cruel, degrading and
incarcerated or detained therein such as, among others,
inhuman treatment or punishment shall be disposed of
names, date of arrest and incarceration, and the crime or
expeditiously and any order of release by virtue thereof, or
offense committed. This list shall be made available to the
other appropriate order of a court relative thereto, shall be
public at all times, with a copy of the complete list available at
executed or complied with immediately.
the respective national headquarters of the PNP and AFP. A
copy of the complete list shall likewise be submitted by the Section 13. Who are Criminally Liable. - Any person who
PNP, AFP and all other law enforcement agencies to the actually participated Or induced another in the commission of
Commission on Human Rights (CHR), such list to be torture or other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or
periodically updated, by the same agencies, within the first five punishment or who cooperated in the execution of the act of
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-24
torture or other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or (3) Torture with rape;
punishment by previous or simultaneous acts shall be liable as
principal (4) Torture with other forms of sexual abuse and, in
consequence of torture, the victim shall have become insane,
Any superior military, police or law enforcement officer or imbecile, impotent, blind or maimed for life; and
senior government official who issued an order to any lower
ranking personnel to commit torture for whatever purpose (5) Torture committed against children.
shall be held equally liable as principals.
(b) The penalty of reclusion temporal shall be imposed on
The immediate commanding officer of the unit concerned of those who commit any act of mental/psychological torture
the AFP or the immediate senior public official of the PNP and resulting in insanity, complete or partial amnesia, fear of
other law enforcement agencies shall be held liable as a becoming insane or suicidal tendencies of the victim due to
principal to the crime of torture or other cruel or inhuman and guilt, worthlessness or shame.
degrading treatment or punishment for any act or omission, or
(c) The penalty of prision correccional shall be imposed on
negligence committed by him/her that shall have led, assisted,
those who commit any act of torture resulting in psychological,
abetted or allowed, whether directly or indirectly, the
mental and emotional harm other than those described 1n
commission thereof by his/her subordinates. If he/she has
paragraph (b) of this section. '
knowledge of or, owing to the circumstances at the time,
should have known that acts of torture or other cruel, inhuman
(d) The penalty of prision mayor in its medium and maximum
and degrading treatment or punishment shall be committed, is
periods shall be imposed if, in consequence of torture, the
being committed, or has been committed by his/her
victim shall have lost the power of speech or the power to hear
subordinates or by others within his/her area of responsibility
or to smell; or shall have lost an eye, a hand, a foot, an arm or
and, despite such knowledge, did not take preventive or
a leg; or shall have lost the use of any such member; Or shall
corrective action either before, during or immediately after its
have become permanently incapacitated for labor.
commission, when he/she has the authority to prevent or
investigate allegations of torture or other cruel, inhuman and (e) The penalty of prision mayor in its minimum and medium
degrading treatment or punishment but failed to prevent or periods shall be imposed if, in consequence of torture, the
investigate allegations of such act, whether deliberately or due victim shall have become deformed or shall have lost any part
to negligence shall also be liable as principals. of his/her body other than those aforecited, or shall have lost
the use thereof, or shall have been ill or incapacitated for labor
Any public officer or employee shall be liable as an accessory if
for a period of more than ninety (90) days.
he/she has knowledge that torture or other cruel, inhuman and
degrading treatment or punishment is being committed and (f) The penalty of prision correccional in its maximum period to
without having participated therein, either as principal or prision mayor in its minimum period shall be imposed if, in
accomplice, takes part subsequent to its commission in any of consequence of torture, the victim shall have been ill or
the following manner: incapacitated for labor for mare than thirty (30) days but not
more than ninety (90) days.
(a) By themselves profiting from or assisting the offender to
profit from the effects of the act of torture or other cruel, (g) The penalty of prision correccional in its minimum and
inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment; medium period shall be imposed if, in consequence of torture,
the victim shall have been ill or incapacitated for labor for
(b) By concealing the act of torture or other cruel, inhuman
thirty (30) days or less.
and degrading treatment or punishment and/or destroying the
effects or instruments thereof in order to prevent its discovery; (h) The penalty of arresto mayor shall be imposed for acts
or(c) By harboring, concealing or assisting m the escape of the constituting cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or
principal/s in the act of torture or other cruel, inhuman and punishment as defined in Section 5 of this Act.
degrading treatment or punishment: Provided, That the
accessory acts are done with the abuse of the official's public (i) The penalty of prision correccional shall be imposed upon
functions. those who establish, operate and maintain secret detention
places and/or effect or cause to effect solitary confinement,
Section 14. Penalties. - (a) The penalty of reclusion incommunicado or other similar forms of prohibited detention
perpetua shall be imposed upon the perpetrators of the as provided in Section 7 of this Act where torture may be
following acts: carried out with impunity.

(1) Torture resulting in the death of any person; (j) The penalty of arresto mayor shall be imposed upon the
responsible officers or personnel of the AFP, the PNP and other
(2) Torture resulting in mutilation;
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-25
law enforcement agencies for failure to perform his/her duty to CHAPTER I. REBELLION, COUP D’ETAT, SEDITION AND
maintain, submit or make available to the public an updated DISLOYALTY
list of detention centers and facilities with the corresponding
data on the prisoners or detainees incarcerated or detained ARTICLE 134 - REBELLION /INSURRECTION
therein, pursuant to Section 7 of this Act.
How committed?
Section 15. Torture as a Separate and Independent
By rising publicly and taking up arms against the Government
Crime. - Torture as a crime shall not absorb or shall not be
for any of the purposes specified in Article 134 which are
absorbed by any other crime or felony committed as a
political in nature.
consequence, or as a means in the conduct or commission
thereof. In which case, torture shall be treated as a separate
Elements:
and independent criminal act whose penalties shall be
imposable without prejudice to any other criminal liability a. There is a public uprising and taking arms against the
provided for by domestic and international laws. government;
b. The purpose of the uprising or movement is:
Section 16. Exclusion from the Coverage of Special i. To remove from the allegiance to the
Amnesty Law. - In order not to depreciate the crime of government or its laws the Philippine territory or
torture, persons who have committed any act of torture shall any part thereof, or any body of land, naval, or
not benefit from any special amnesty law or similar other armed forces; or
measures that will have the effect of exempting them from ii. To deprive the Chief Executive or Congress,
any criminal proceedings and sanctions. wholly or partially, of any of their powers or
prerogatives.
Section 17. Applicability of Refouler. - No person shall be
Rule on Complexing of Rebellion: Rebellion cannot be
expelled, returned or extradited to another State where there
complexed with, but absorbs other crimes committed in
are substantial grounds to believe that such person shall be in
furtherance of rebellion. There is no complex crime of rebellion
danger of being subjected to torture. For the purposes of
with murder and other common crimes.
determining whether such grounds exist, the Secretary of the
Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA) and the Secretary of the
The doctrine laid down in People v. Hernandez remains good
DOJ, in coordination with the Chairperson of the CHR, shall
law. This prohibits the complexing of rebellion with any other
take into account all relevant considerations including, where
offense committed in the occasion thereof, either as a means
applicable and not limited to, the existence in the requesting
to its commission or as an unintended effect of an activity that
State of a consistent pattern of gross, flagrant or mass
constitutes rebellion. [Enrile vs. Salazar (1990)]
violations of human rights.
All crimes, whether punishable under special or general law,
Section 18. Compensation to Victims of Torture. - Any
which are mere components or ingredients, or committed in
person who has suffered torture shall have the right to claim
furtherance thereof, become absorbed in the crime of rebellion
for compensation as provided for under Republic Act No. 7309:
and cannot be isolated and charged as separate crimes
Provided, That in no case shall compensation be any lower
themselves. [Enrile vs. Amin (1990)]
than Ten thousand pesos (P10,000.00). Victims of torture shall
also have the right to claim for compensation from such other Both motive and overt acts are essential components of the
financial relief programs that may be made available to crime of rebellion. If the political motive of a supposedly
him/her under existing law and rules and regulations. rebellious act cannot be sufficiently proven, the accused should
be convicted of the common crime (e.g. murder) and not of
Section 22. Applicability of the Revised Penal Code. -
rebellion.
The provisions of the Revised Penal Code insofar as they are
applicable shall be suppletory to this Act. Moreover, if the Rebellion is not covered by Art. 2 on extraterritorial
commission of any crime punishable under Title Eight (Crimes jurisdiction. [People v. Lovedioro (1995)]
Against Persons) and Title Nine (Crimes Against Personal
Liberty and Security) of the Revised Penal Code is attended by Note: When any of the objectives of rebellion is pursued but
any of the acts constituting torture and other cruel, inhuman there is no public uprising in the legal sense, the crime is direct
and degrading treatment or punishment as defined herein, the assault of the first form.
penalty to be imposed shall be in its maximum period.
CASES:
TITLE III- CRIMES AGAINST THE PUBLIC ORDER
People v. LOVEDIORO, G.R. No. 112235 November 29,

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-26
 1995 People v. Dasig, G.R. No. 100231. April 28, 1993

DOCTRINE: In deciding if the crime is rebellion, or murder, it

becomes imperative for the courts to ascertain whether or not
the act was done in furtherance of a political end. The political DOCTRINE: REBELLION; ABSORBS THE CRIME OF
motive of the acts should be conclusively demonstrated. The DIRECT ASSAULT WHEN DONE IN FURTHERANCE
THEREOF - The crime of rebellion consists of many acts. It is
burden of proving that the motivation for the crime is political
a vast movement of men and a complex net of intrigues and
and not private is on the defense. Since this is a matter that plots. Acts committed in furtherance of rebellion though crimes
lies peculiarly with (the accused's) knowledge and since in themselves are deemed absorbed in one single crime of
moreover this is an affirmative defense, the burden is on them rebellion. The act of killing a police officer, knowing too well
to prove, or at least to state, which they could easily do that the victim is a person in authority is a mere component or
personally or through witnesses, that they killed the deceased ingredient of rebellion or an act done in furtherance of the
rebellion. It cannot be made a basis of a separate charge.
in furtherance of the resistance movement.

FACTS: Accused was charged together with Edwin Nuñez and

FACTS: As a result of the killing of a police officer, the office
6 others who are still at large, of the crime of murder with
of the provincial prosecutor of Albay, filed an Information direct assault.
charging accused-appellant Elias Lovedioro y Castro of the
crime of Murder under Article 248 of the Revised Penal Code. ISSUE: WON the crime committed is murder with direct
assault or simple rebellion.
ISSUE: WON the TC erred in finding the accused guilty of the
crime of murder and not rebellion. HELD: Simple rebellion.

HELD: NO. RATIO: The act of killing a police officer, knowing too well
that the victim is a person in authority is a mere component or
RATIO: GRAVAMAN OF THE OFFENSE - The gravamen of ingredient of rebellion or an act done in furtherance of a
the crime of rebellion is an armed public uprising against the rebellion the Court however noted that the accused, who was
government. By its very nature, rebellion is essentially a crime charged with murder, not only admitted his membership with
of masses or multitudes involving crowd action, which cannot the NPA but also executed an extrajudicial confession to the
be confined a priori within predetermined bounds. One aspect effect that he was a member of an NPA "sparrow unit," a fact
noteworthy in the commission of rebellion is that other acts to which even the Solicitor General, in his brief therein was in
committed in its pursuance are, by law, absorbed in the crime agreement. The Solicitor General's brief in Dasig which this
itself because they acquire a political character. Court favorably quoted, noted that:

OVERT ACTS AND MOTIVE MUST CONCUR - From the [T]he sparrow unit is the liquidation squad of
foregoing, it is plainly obvious that it is not enough that the the New People's Army with the objective of
overt acts of rebellion are duly proven. Both purpose and overt overthrowing the duly constituted
acts are essential components of the crime. With either of government. It is therefore not hard to
these elements wanting, the crime of rebellion legally does not comprehend that the killing of Pfc. Manatad
exist. In fact, even in cases where the act complained of were was committed as a means to or in
committed simultaneously with or in the course of the furtherance of the subversive ends of the
rebellion, if the killing, robbing, or etc., were accomplished for NPA.
private purposes or profit, without any political motivation, it
has been held that the crime would be separately punishable Moreover, in the case of People v. Mangallan, We held that
as a common crime and would not be absorbed by the crime where the accused who was charged with murder admitted his
rebellion. membership with the NPA and the killing of a suspected PC
informer, the crime committed is not murder but rebellion
punishable under Articles 134 and 135 of the Revised Penal
It follows, therefore, that if no political motive is established Code.
and proved, the accused should be convicted of the common
crime and not of rebellion. In cases of rebellion, motive relates
to the act, and mere membership in an organization dedicated Umil v. Ramos, G.R. No. 81567 October 3, 1991
to the furtherance of rebellion would not, by and of itself,
suffice. DOCTRINE: Rebellion is a continuing crime. Hence, Rebels
can be arrested at anytime without a warrant.

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-27
 attained.

FACTS: The accused, a "sparrow man" (NPA member) who Viewed from another but related perspective, it may also be
had been admitted to St. Agnes Hospital with a gunshot said, under the facts of the Umil case, that the arrest of Dural
wound, was arrested without a warrant. falls under Section 5, paragraph (b), Rule 113 of the Rules of
Court, which requires two (2) conditions for a valid arrest
without warrant: first, that the person to be arrested has just
ISSUE: WON the warrantless arrest is valid. committed an offense, and second, that the arresting peace
officer or private person has personal knowledge of facts
indicating that the person to be arrested is the one who
committed the offense. Section 5(b), Rule 113, it will be noted,
HELD: Yes. refers to arrests without warrant, based on "personal
knowledge of facts" acquired by the arresting officer or private
RATIO: The arrest Rolando Dural (G.R. No. 81567) without person.
warrant is justified it can be said that, within the contemplation
of Section 5 Rule 113, he (Dural) was committing an offense,
when arrested because Dural was arrested for being a member People v. Hernandez, 99 Phil 515 (1956)
of the New People's Army, an outlawed organization, where
membership penalized, and for subversion which, like rebellion
is, under the doctrine of Garcia vs. Enrile, 8a continuing
offense, thus: DOCTRINE: In short, political crimes are those directly aimed
against the political order, as well as such common crimes as
may be committed to achieve a political purpose. The decisive
The crimes of insurrection or rebellion,
factor is the intent or motive. If a crime usually regarded as
subversion, conspiracy or proposal to commit
common, like homicide, is perpetrated for the purpose of
such crimes, and other crimes and offenses
removing from the allegiance "to the Government the territory
committed in the furtherance (sic) on the
of the Philippine Islands or any part thereof," then it becomes
occasion thereof, or incident thereto, or in
stripped of its "common" complexion, inasmuch as, being part
connection therewith under Presidential
and parcel of the crime of rebellion, the former acquires the
Proclamation No. 2045, are all in the nature
political character of the latter.
of continuing offenses which set them apart
from the common offenses, aside from their
essentially involving a massive conspiracy of FACTS: Accused charged with and convicted of the crime of
nationwide magnitude. rebellion complexed with murders, arson and robbery and was
sentenced to life imprisonment.
Given the ideological content of membership in the CPP/NPA
which includes armed struggle for the overthrow of organized ISSUE: WON the accused can be convicted of complex crime
government, Dural did not cease to be, or became less of a of rebellion.
subversive, FOR PURPOSES OF ARREST, simply because he
was, at the time of arrest, confined in the St. Agnes Hospital. Argument – No complex crime of rebellion.
Dural was identified as one of several persons who the day
before his arrest, without warrant, at the St. Agnes Hospital, HELD: No.
had shot two (2) CAPCOM policemen in their patrol car. That
Dural had shot the two (2) policemen in Caloocan City as part RATIO: Murder, arson and robbery are mere ingredients of
of his mission as a "sparrow" (NPA member) did not end there the crime of rebellion. The ingredients of the crime form part
and then. Dural, given another opportunity, would have shot thereof and, hence are absorbed by the same and cannot be
or would shoot other policemen anywhere as agents or punished either separately therefrom.
representatives of organized government. It is in this sense
that subversion like rebellion (or insurrection) is perceived here POLITICAL CRIMES V. COMMON CRIMES – The former
as a continuing offense. Unlike other so-called "common" are those directly aimed against the political order, as well as
offenses, i.e. adultery, murder, arson, etc., which generally such common crimes as may be committed to achieve a
end upon their commission, subversion and rebellion are political purpose. If a crime usually regarded as common like
anchored on an ideological base which compels the repetition homicide, is perpetrated for the purposes mentioned in Art
of the same acts of lawlessness and violence until the 134, then the said offenses are stripped of its common
overriding objective of overthrowing organized government is complexion, inasmuch as, being part and parcel of the crime of

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-28
rebellion, the former acquires the political character of the
former.
People v. Geronimo, G.R. No. L-8936. October 23, 1956
As in treason, where both intent and overt act are necessary,
the crime of rebellion is integrated by the coexistence of both
the armed uprising for the purposes expressed in article 134 of Reiteration of People v. Hernandez.
the Revised Penal Code, and the overt acts of violence
described in the first paragraph of article 135. That both
purpose and overt acts are essential components of one crime,
and that without either of them the crime of rebellion legally DOCTRINE: Jurisprudence tells us that acts committed in
does not exist, is shown by the absence of any penalty furtherance of the rebellion though crimes in themselves are
attached to article 134. It follows, therefore that any or all of deemed absorbed in the one single crime of rebellion.
the acts described in article 135, when committed as a means
to or in furtherance of the subversive ends described in article
134, become absorbed in the crime of rebellion, and cannot be
Enrile v. Salazar, G.R. No. 92163 June 5, 1990
regarded or penalized as distinct crimes in themselves. In law
they are part and parcel of the rebellion itself, and cannot be
DOCTRINE: Reiterated the long standing proscription against
considered as giving rise to a separate crime that, under article
splitting the component offenses of rebellion and subjecting
48 of the Code, would constitute a complex one with that of
them to separate prosecutions, a procedure reprobated in
rebellion.
the Hernandez case

To admit the complexing of the crime of rebellion with the

FACTS: The information charged Senator Enrile, the spouses
felonies committed in furtherance thereof, would lead to these
Rebecco and Erlinda Panlilio, and Gregorio Honasan with the
undesirable results: (1) to make the punishment for rebellion
crime of rebellion with murder and multiple frustrated murder
heavier than that of treason, since it has been repeatedly held
allegedly committed during the period of the failed coup
that the latter admits no complexing with the overt acts
attempt from November 29 to December 10, 1990.
committed in furtherance of the treasonous intent, and, in
addition, requires two witnesses to every overt act which is not
true in the case of rebellion; (2) to nullify the policy expressed ISSUE: WON the information filed against Enrile et al
in article 135 (R.P.C.) of imposing lesser penalty upon the constitutes complex crime of rebellion.
rebel followers as compared to their leaders, because under
the complexing theory every rebel, leader or follower, must HELD: No.
suffer the heavier penalty in its maximum degree; (3) to
violate the fundamental rule of criminal law that all doubts RATIO: Based on the doctrine of People v. Hernandez, the
should be resolved in favor of the accused. information filed against Senator Enrile and Panlilio spouses
should be read as simple rebellion only.
HOWEVER, NOT ALL COMMON CRIMES ARE ABSORBED
BY THE CRIME OF REBELLION - Of course, not every act of Three options presented to the court:
violence is to be deemed absorbed in the crime of rebellion
solely because it happens to be committed simultaneously with 1. Abandon Hernandez and adopt the minority view
or in the course of the rebellion. If the killing, robbing, etc. expressed in the main dissent of Justice Montemayor in
were done for private purposes or profit, without any political said case that rebellion cannot absorb more serious
motivation, the crime would be separately punishable and crimes, and that under Article 48 of the Revised Penal
would not be absorbed by the rebellion. But ever then, the Code rebellion may properly be complexed with common
individual misdeed could not be taken with the rebellion to offenses, so-called; this option was suggested by the
constitute a complex crime, for the constitutive acts and intent Solicitor General in oral argument although it is not
would be unrelated to each other and the individual crime offered in his written pleadings;]
would not be a means necessary for committing the rebellion
as it would not be done in preparation or in furtherance of the REJECTED. In the view of the majority, the ruling remains
latter. This appears with utmost clarity in the case where an good law, its substantive and logical bases have withstood all
individual rebel should commit rape; the latter felony could not subsequent challenges and no new ones are presented here
be said to have been done in furtherance of the rebellion or persuasive enough to warrant a complete reversal.
facilitated its commission in any way. The ravisher would then
be liable for two separate crimes, rebellion and rape, and the 2. Hold Hernandez applicable only to offenses committed in
two could not be merged into a juridical whole.
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-29
 furtherance, or as a necessary means for the commission, not confine itself to common crimes but also to offenses under
of rebellion, but not to acts committed in the course of a special laws which are perpetrated in furtherance of the
rebellion which also constitute "common" crimes of grave political offense
or less grave character;

REJECTED. There is one other reason-and a fundamental one FACTS: The prosecution sought to charge Senator Juan Ponce
at that-why Article 48 of our Penal Code cannot be applied in Enrile with violation of P.D. No. 1829, for allegedly harboring
the case at bar. If murder were not complexed with rebellion, or concealing in his home Col. Gregorio Honasan in spite of the
and the two crimes were punished separately (assuming that senator's knowledge that Honasan might have committed a
this could be done), the following penalties would be crime.
imposable upon the movant, namely: (1) for the crime of
rebellion, a fine not exceeding P20,000 and prision mayor, in
the corresponding period, depending upon the modifying ISSUE: WON not the petitioner could be separately charged
circumstances present, but never exceeding 12 years of prision for violation of PD No. 1829 notwithstanding the rebellion case
mayor, and (2) for the crime of murder, reclusion temporal in earlier filed against him.
its maximum period to death, depending upon the modifying
circumstances present. in other words, in the absence of
aggravating circumstances, the extreme penalty could not be
imposed upon him. However, under Article 48 said penalty HELD: No.
would have to be meted out to him, even in the absence of a
single aggravating circumstance. Thus, said provision, if
construed in conformity with the theory of the prosecution,
RATIO: This Court held, against the prosecution's contention,
would be unfavorable to the movant.
that rebellion and violation of P.D 1829 could be tried
separately (on the principle that rebellion is based on the
Upon the other hand, said Article 48 was enacted for the Revised Penal Code while P.D. 1829 is a special law), that the
purpose of favoring the culprit, not of sentencing him to a act for which the senator was being charged, though
penalty more severe than that which would be proper if the
punishable under a special law, was absorbed in the crime of
several acts performed by him were punished separately.
rebellion being motivated by, and related to the acts for which
he was charged.
The reason for this benevolent spirit of article 48 is readily
discernible. When two or more crimes are the result of a single
act, the offender is deemed less perverse than when he
commits said crimes thru separate and distinct acts. Instead of The prosecution for violation of P.D. No. 1829 cannot prosper
sentencing him for each crime independently from the other, because a separate prosecution for rebellion had already been
he must suffer the maximum of the penalty for the more filed and in fact decided, the Court said: The attendant
serious one, on the assumption that it is less grave than the circumstances in the instant case, however constrain us to rule
sum total of the separate penalties for each offense. that the theory of absorption in rebellion cases must not
confine itself to common crimes but also to offenses under
3. Maintain Hernandez as applying to make rebellion absorb special laws which are perpetrated in furtherance of the
all other offenses committed in its course, whether or not political offense.
necessary to its commission or in furtherance thereof.

The rejection of both options shapes and determines the

All crimes, whether punishable under a special law or general
primary ruling of the Court, which is that Hernandez remains
law, which are mere components or ingredients, or committed
binding doctrine operating to prohibit the complexing of
in furtherance thereof, become absorbed in the crime of
rebellion with any other offense committed on the occasion
rebellion and cannot be isolated and charged as separate
thereof, either as a means necessary to its commission or as
crimes in themselves. Thus:
an unintended effect of an activity that constitutes rebellion.

This does not detract, however, from the rule

Enrile v. Amin, G.R. No. 93335 September 13, 1990 that the ingredients of a crime form part and
parcel thereof, and hence, are absorbed by
the same and cannot be punished either
separately therefrom or by the application of
DOCTRINE: The theory of absorption in rebellion cases must

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-30
 Article 48 of the Revised Penal Code. cover to effect warrantless arrests even if the state of rebellion
or the instances stated in Rule 113, Section 5 of the Rules are
Intent or motive is a decisive factor. If Senator Ponce Enrile is absent or no longer exist.
not charged with rebellion and he harbored or concealed
Colonel Honasan simply because the latter is a friend and
former associate, the motive for the act is completely different. ARTICLE 134-A - COUP D’ÉTAT
But if the act is committed with political or social motives that
is in furtherance of rebellion, then it should be deemed to form Art. 134-A. Coup D′ÉTAT. – How committed. – The crime
part of the crime of rebellion instead of being punished of coup D′ÉTAT is a swift attack accompanied by violence,
separately. intimidation, threat, strategy or stealth, directed against duly
constituted authorities of the Republic of the Philippines, or
In this case, the act of harboring or concealing Col. Honasan is any military camp or installation, communications networks,
clearly a mere component or ingredient of rebellion or an act public utilities or other facilities needed for the exercise and
done in furtherance of the rebellion. It cannot therefore be continued possession of power, singly or simultaneously
made the basis of a separate charge. carried out anywhere in the Philippines by any person or
persons, belonging to the military or police or holding any
public office or employment, with or without civilian support or
SANLAKAS v. Reyes, G.R. No. 159085, 159103, 159185, participation, for the purpose of seizing or diminishing state
159196, February 03, 2004; SEPARATE OPINION, power.
YNARES-SANTIAGO, J

The majority ignored the fact that the state of rebellion Elements:
declared by the President was in effect five days after the
peaceful surrender of the militant group. Thus, the declaration a. (COMMITTED BY WHOM) Offender is a person or
of a state of rebellion does not have any legal meaning or persons belonging to the military or police or holding
consequence. This declaration does not give the President any any public office or employment;
extra powers. It does not have any good purpose. If the b. (HOW) It is committed by means of a swift attack
declaration is used to justify warrantless arrests even after the accompanied by violence, intimidation, threat,
rebellion has ended, as in the case of Cardenas, such strategy or stealth;
declaration or, at the least, the warrantless arrests, must be c. (AGAINST WHOM COMMITTED) The attack is
struck down. directed against the duly constituted authorities of the
Republic of the Philippines, or any military camp or
installation, communication networks, public utilities
When the soldiers surrendered peacefully in the evening of
or other facilities needed for the exercise and
July 27, the rebellion or the coup d etat ended. The President, continued possession of power;
however, did not lift the declaration of the state of rebellion d. (PURPOSE) The purpose of the attack is to seize or
until 5 days later, on August 1, 2003. diminish state power.

Rebellion has been held to be a continuing crime and the Persons who may commit coup d’état:
authorities may resort to warrantless arrests of persons
a. It may be committed singly or collectively
suspected of rebellion, as provided under Section 5, Rule 113
b. Requires as a principal offender a member of the AFP,
of the Rules of Court.[22]However, this doctrine should be
PNP, or a public officer with or without civilian
applied to its proper context i.e., relating to subversive armed support
organizations, such as the New People‘s Army, the avowed
purpose of which is the armed overthrow of the organized and
established government. Only in such instance should rebellion
be considered a continuing crime. Coup d’état, when considered as Terrorism

A person who commits an act punishable as coup d‘état under

After the peaceful surrender of the soldiers on July 27, 2003,
Article 134-A of the Revised Penal Code, including acts
there was no crime that was being attempted, being
committed by private persons, thereby sowing and creating a
committed, or had just been committed. There should,
condition of widespread and extraordinary fear and panic
therefore, be no occasion to effect a valid warrantless arrest in
among the populace, in order to coerce the government to
connection with the Oakwood Incident.
give in to an unlawful demand shall be guilty of the crime of
terrorism.
The purpose of the declaration and its duration as far as the
overeager authorities were concerned was only to give legal
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-31
 ARTICLE 135 - PENALTY FOR REBELLION, a. A person has decided to swiftly attack or to rise
INSURRECTION OR COUP D’ÉTAT publicly and take arms against the Government for
any of the purposes of rebellion or insurrection;
Persons liable for rebellion, insurrection or coup d’état: b. Such person proposes its execution to some other
person or persons
a. The leaders: (RECLUSION PERPETUA)
i. Any person who promotes, maintains or
heads a rebellion or insurrection; or
ii. Any person who leads, directs or commands Penalty:
others to undertake a coup d‘état;
b. The participants: Art. 136. Conspiracy and proposal to commit coup
i. Any person who participates or executes the D′ÉTAT, rebellion or insurrection. – The conspiracy and
commands of others in rebellion or proposal to commit coup D′ÉTAT shall be punished by prision
insurrection; (RECLUSION TEMPORAL) mayor in its minimum period and a fine which shall not exceed
ii. Any person in the government service who eight thousand pesos (P8,000.00).
participates or executes directions or
commands of others in undertaking a coup "The conspiracy and proposal to commit rebellion or
d‘état; (RECLUSION TEMPORAL IN ITS insurrection shall be punished, respectively, by prision
MAXIMUM PERIOD) correccional in its maximum period and a fine which shall not
iii. Any person not in the government service exceed five thousand pesos (P5,000.00), and by prision
who participates, supports, finances, abets
correccional in its medium period and a fine not exceeding two
or aids in undertaking a coup d‘état.
thousand pesos (P2,000.00)."
(PRISION MAYOR IN ITS MAXIMUM
PERIOD)
iv. If under the command of unknown leaders,
any person who directed the others, spoke
for them, signed receipts and other ARTICLE 137 - DISLOYALTY OF PUBLIC OFFICERS OR
documents issued in their name on behalf of
EMPLOYEES
the rebels shall be deemed a leader.

It is not a defense in rebellion that the accused never took the Elements:
oath of allegiance to, or that they never recognized the
a. Offender is a public officer or employee;
Government. [US vs. del Rosario]
b. Offender commits any of the following acts:
i. Failing to resist a rebellion by all the means
Mere silence or omission is not punishable in rebellion. [US vs.
in their power;
Ravidas]
ii. Continuing to discharge the duties of their
offices under the control of the rebels
iii. Accepting appointment to office under them.
ARTICLE 136 - CONSPIRACY AND PROPOSAL TO The crime presupposes rebellion committed by other persons.
COMMIT COUP D’ ÉTAT, REBELLION OR Offender must not be in conspiracy with the rebels, otherwise,
INSURRECTION he is himself guilty of rebellion.

Mode 1: Conspiracy to commit coup d‘état, rebellion or Penalty:

insurrection
Prision correctional in its minimum period.
Elements:

a. Two or more persons come to an agreement to

swiftly attack or to rise publicly and take arms against ARTICLE 138 - INCITING TO REBELLION OR
the Government for any of the purposes of rebellion INSURRECTION
or insurrection;
b. They decide to commit it. Elements:

a. Offender does not take arms or is not in open hostility

Mode 2: Proposal to commit coup d‘état, rebellion or against the government;
insurrection b. He incites others to the execution of any of the acts
of rebellion;
Elements:

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-32
 c. The inciting is done by means of speeches,
proclamations, writings, emblems, banners or other
representations tending to the same end. People v. Cabrera, 43 Phil 64 (1922)

Note: There is no crime of inciting to treason.

Penalty: DOCTRINE: The Court held that unlike the crime of rebellion,
common crimes committed in the occasion of sedition are to
Prision mayor in its minimum period. be appreciated as separate crimes.

ARTICLE 139 – SEDITION FACTS: A friction between the Philippine constabulary and the
Manila police escalated and resulted in the deaths of 6
Nature: Sedition is a crime of dissent or protest by means
policemen and 2 civilians and in the serious injuries of 3
outside of legal methods authorized under the freedom of
civilians.The defendants were charged in one information filed
expression and assembly clauses of the Constitution.
in the Court of First Instance of the City of Manila with the
Elements: crime of sedition, and in another information filed in the same,
court, with the crimes of murder and serious physical injuries.
a. Offenders rise publicly and tumultuously;
b. Offenders employ force, intimidation, or other means
outside of legal methods;
c. Purpose is to attain any of the following objects: RATIO: Sedition is not the same offense of murder. It is
i. To prevent the promulgation or execution of any a crime directed against the existence of the state, the
law or the holding of any popular election; authority of the government and the general public
ii. To prevent the national government or any tranquillity. Murder is a crime directed against the lives
provincial or municipal government or any public of individuals. The crimes charged in the information
officer from exercising its or his functions, or for sedition and murder are perfectly distinct in point
prevent the execution of an administrative order; of law however nearly they may be connected in point
iii. To inflict any act of hate or revenge upon the of fact.
person or property of any public officer or
employee;
iv. To commit, for any political or social end, any act
of hate or revenge against private persons or any Admission of Exhibits C to C-76 of the prosecution;
social classes;
v. To despoil for any political or social end, any The confessions contain the statements that they were made
person, municipality or province, or the national freely and voluntarily without any promise of immunity. That
government of all its property or any part thereof such was the case was corroborated by the attesting witnesses
whose credibility has not been successfully impeached. We rule
Tumultuous - If caused by more than three persons who are
that the trial court did not err in admitting Exhibits C to C-76 of
armed or provided with the means of violence. [Art. 153]
the prosecution.
The purpose of this crime is not the overthrowing of the
government but the violation of public peace.
The conspiracy between the accused;
Public uprising and an object of sedition must concur Under
R.A. 8294 (Act Amending PD No. 1866 or the Firearms Law), In other words, it is claimed that at the time of the commission
sedition absorbs the use of unlicensed firearm as an element of the crime the accused were mere automatons obeying the
thereof; hence, it is not an aggravating circumstance, and the insistent call of their companions and of their uniform.
offender can no longer be prosecuted for illegal possession of
firearm. [Boado, Comprehensive Reviewer in Criminal Law]

If the violation of RA 10591 (Comprehensive Firearms and It is incontestable that all of the defendants were imbued with
Ammunition Regulation Act) is in furtherance of, or incident to, the same purpose, which was to avenge themselves on the
or in connection with the crime of rebellion of insurrection, or police force of the city of Manila. A common feeling of
attempted coup d‘état, such violation shall be absorbed as an resentment animated all. A common plan evolved from their
element of the crime of rebellion or insurrection, or attempted military training was followed.
coup d‘état [Sec. 29, RA 10591]

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-33
 ii. Tend to instigate others to cabal and meet
together for unlawful purposes;
The conviction of the accused of a violation of the Treason and iii. Suggest or incite rebellious conspiracies or
Sediton Law; riots; or
iv. Lead or tend to stir up the people against
Subdivision 3 of section 5 of the Treason and Sedition Law the lawful authorities or to disturb the peace
makes no distinction between the persons to which it applies of the community, the safety and order of
(Whether public or private. the government

Considering that the objective of sedition is to express protest

against the government and in the process creating hate
ARTICLE 140 - PERSONS LIABLE FOR SEDITION against public officers, any act that will generate hatred
against the government or a public officer concerned or a
a. The leader of the sedition; social class may amount to Inciting to Sedition.
b. Other person participating in the sedition
Scurrilous - low, vulgar, mean or foul
ARTICLE 141 - CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT SEDITION
A published writing which calls the government one of crooks
Elements:
and dishonest persons ("dirty") infested with Nazis and
Fascists i.e. dictators, and which reveals a tendency to produce
a. Two or more persons come to an agreement and a
decision to rise publicly and tumultuously to attain dissatisfaction or a feeling incompatible with the disposition to
any of the objects of sedition; remain loyal to the government, is a scurrilous libel against the
b. They decide to commit it. Government.

Note: There is no proposal to commit sedition. If the

proposal is accepted, it is conspiracy.
Constitutional Tests relative to seditious words:

Clear and Present Danger Rule:

ARTICLE 142 – INCITING TO SEDITION
The words must be of such nature that by uttering them there
Mode1. Inciting others to the accomplishment of any of the
is a danger of a public uprising and that such danger should be
acts which constitute sedition by means of speeches,
both clear and imminent. The danger must not only be
proclamations, writings, emblems, etc.
probable but very likely inevitable.
Elements:
Dangerous Tendency Rule:
a. Offender does not take direct part in the crime of
If the words used tend to create a danger of public uprising,
sedition;
then those words could properly be the subject of a penal
b. He incites others to the accomplishment of any of the
acts which constitute sedition by means of speeches, clause.
proclamations, writings, emblems, cartoons, banners,
or other representations tending towards the same
end.
CASES:

People v. Tolentino, 5 Phil 682 (1906)

Mode 2. Uttering seditious words or speeches which tend to
disturb the public peace;

Mode 3. Writing, publishing, or circulating scurrilous libels DOCTRINE: The manifest, unmistakable tendency of the play,
against the government or any of the duly constituted in view of the time, place, and manner of its presentation, was
authorities thereof, which tend to disturb the public peace. to inculcate a spirit of hatred and enmity against the American
people and the Government of the United States in the
Elements:
Philippines, and we are satisfied that the principal object and
a. Offender does not take part in the crime of sedition. intent of its author was to incite the people of the Philippine
b. He uttered words or speeches and writing, publishing Islands to open and armed resistance to the constituted
or circulating scurrilous libels and that authorities, and to induce them to conspire together for the
i. Tend to disturb or obstruct any lawful officer secret organization of armed forces, to be used when the
in conducting the functions of his office;
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-34
opportunity presented itself, for the purpose of overthrowing such criticism should be specific and therefore constructive
the present Government and setting up another in its stead. specifying particular objectionable actuations of the
government; it must be reasoned or tempered, and not a
contemptuous condemnation of the entire government setup

FACTS: Aurelio Tolentino, the appellant in this case, was FACTS: Espuelas y Mendoza had his picture taken, making it
convicted upon an information charging him with the crime of to appear as if he were hanging lifeless at the end of a piece of
"uttering seditious words and writings, publishing and rope suspended form the limb of the tree, when in truth and in
circulating scurrilous libels against the Government of the fact, he was merely standing on a barrel. After securing copies
United States and the Insular Government of the Philippine of his photograph, Espuelas sent copies of same to several
Islands newspapers and weeklies of general circulation not only in the
Province of Bohol but also throughout the Philippines and
abroad, for their publication with a suicide note or letter (xxx I
committed suicide because I am ashamed of our government
ISSUE: WON in writing, publishing, and uttering the drama,
under Roxas. I cannot hold high my brows to the world with
the accused was in fact guilty of a violation of section 8 of Act
this dirty government. xxx)
No. 292 of the Philippine Commission, upon which the
information was based

ISSUE: WON the writing is a scurrilous libel against the

Government.
HELD: Yes.

HELD: Yes.
RATIO: The publication and presentation of the drama directly
and necessarily tend to instigate others to cabal and meet
together for unlawful purposes, and to suggest and incite RATIO: The latter is a scurrilous libel against the
rebellious conspiracies and riots and to stir up the people Government. It calls our government one of crooks and
against the lawful authorities and to disturb the peace of the dishonest persons (dirty) infested with Nazis and a Fascistis
community and the safety and order of the Government. i.e. dictators. And the communication reveals a tendency to
produce dissatisfaction or a feeling incompatible with the
disposition to remain loyal to the government.

The manner and form in which the drama was presented at Writings which tend to overthrow or undermine the security of
such a time and under such conditions, renders absurd the the government or to weaken the confidence of the people in
pretense that it was merely or even principally a literary or the government are against the public peace, and are criminal
artistic production, and the clumsy devices, the allegorical not only because they tend to incite to a breach of the peace
figures, the apparent remoteness, past and future, of the but because they are conducive to the destruction of the very
events portrayed, could not and in fact were not intended to government itself. Hence another limit of free speech and
leave the audience in doubt as to its present and immediate writing is sedition. And yet within there is ample room and
application, nor should they blind this court to the true purpose verge enough for the freest use of the tongue and pen in
and intent of the author and director of the play. passing strictures in the judgment and conduct of every
constituted authority.

Espuelas v. People, 90 Phil 524 (1951)

In disposing of this appeal, careful thought had to be given to
the fundamental right to freedom of speech. Yet the freedom
of speech secured by the Constitution "does not confer an
DOCTRINE: The essence of seditious libel is its immediate
absolute right to speak or publish without responsibility
tendency to stir up general discontent to the pitch of illegal
whatever one may choose." It is not "unbridled license that
courses or to induce people to resort to illegal methods in
order to redress the evils which press upon their minds. Any gives immunity for every possible use of language and
citizen may criticize his government and government officials prevents the punishment of those who abuse this freedom.‖ So
and submit his criticism to the "free trade of ideas." However, statutes against sedition have guaranty, although they should

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-35
not be interpreted so as to agitate for institutional changes. ARTICLE 145 - VIOLATION OF PARLIAMENTARY
IMMUNITY

Mode 1: Using force, intimidation, threats, or frauds to

The essence of seditious libel may be said to its immediate prevent any member of Congress from attending the meetings
tendency to stir up general discontent to the pitch of illegal of Congress or of any of its committees or subcommittees,
courses; that is to say to induce people to resort to illegal constitutional commissions or committees or divisions thereof,
methods other than those provided by the Constitution, in or from expressing his opinion or casting his vote;
order to repress the evils which press upon their minds.
Elements:

a. Offender uses force, intimidation, threats or fraud;

CHAPTER II - CRIMES AGAINST POPULAR b. The purpose of the offender is to prevent any
REPRESENTATION member of Congress from:
i. Attending the meetings of the Congress or of
any of its committees or constitutional
commissions;
ARTICLE 143 - ACTS TENDING TO PREVENT THE ii. Expressing his opinion; or
MEETING OF THE CONGRESS OF THE PHILIPPINES iii. Casting his vote.
AND SIMILAR BODIES
Note: Offender in mode 1 is any person
Elements:
Mode 2: Arresting or searching any member thereof while
a. There is a projected or actual meeting of Congress or any Congress is in regular or special session, except in case such
of its committees or subcommittees, constitutional member has committed a crime punishable under the Code by
committees or divisions thereof, or of any provincial board a penalty higher than prision mayor.
or city or municipal council or board;
b. Offender, who may be any person, prevents such Elements:
meetings by force or fraud.
a. Offender is a public officer of employee;
Nobody has the right to dissolve by means of violence the b. He arrests or searches any member of Congress;
meeting of a municipal council, under the pretext that said c. Congress, at the time of arrest or search, is in regular
meeting is legally defective, when the defect is not manifest, or special session;
and requires an investigation before its existence can be d. The member arrested or searched has not committed
determined. Where a municipal council is holding a meeting, a a crime punishable under the Code by a penalty
presumption arises that the meeting is not legally defective higher than prision mayor.
[People vs. Alipit and Alemus]
Parliamentary immunity does not protect members of Congress
from responsibility in accordance with the disciplinary rules of
Congress itself.
ARTICLE 144 - DISTURBANCE OF PROCEEDINGS
Members of Congress cannot be arrested for offenses
Elements: punishable by a penalty less than prision mayor (6 years and 1
day to 12 years), while Congress is in session. They can be
a. There is a meeting of Congress or any of its committees or prosecuted after Congress adjourns. [1987 Constitution]
subcommittees, constitutional commissions or committees
or divisions thereof, or of any provincial board or city or To be consistent with the 1987 Constitution, the phrase by ―a
municipal council or board; penalty higher than prision mayor‖ in Article 145 should be
b. Offender does any of the following acts: amended to read ―by the penalty of prision mayor or higher.‖
i. He disturbs any of such meetings; [Reyes, 2012]
ii. He behaves while in the presence of any such
bodies in such a manner as to interrupt its Martinez v. Morfe, 44 SCRA 22, (1972)
proceedings or to impair the respect due it.

Complaint may be filed by a member of the legislative body.

One who disturbs may also be punished for contempt by DOCTRINE:
Congress.

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-36
FACTS: Martinez and Bautista were delegates to the 1972 attempt at abuse of power. The presumption of course is that
Constitutional Convention. Both were facing criminal the judiciary would main independent. It is trite to say that in
prosecutions. The former for falsification of public document each and every manifestation of judicial endeavor, such a
and the latter for violation of the Revised Election Code. They virtue is of the essence.
were arrested while the convention was in session.

ISSUE: WON they are immune from arrest.

CHAPTER III – ILLEGAL ASSEMBLIES AND
ASSOCIATIONS

HELD:No. Illegal Assemblies vs. Illegal Associations

RATIO: No other conclusion is allowable consistently with the ARTICLE 146 - ILLEGAL ARTICLE 147 - ILLEGAL
plain and explicit command of the Constitution. As is made ASSEMBLIES ASSOCIATIONS
clear in Section 15 of Article VI, the immunity from arrest does
GRAVAMEN OF THE OFFENSE
not cover any prosecution for treason, felony and breach of
the peace. Treason exists when the accused levies war against
There must be an actual Actual meeting not necessary
the Republic or adheres to its enemies giving them aid and
meeting or assembly
comfort. A felony is act or omission punishable by law. Breach
of the peace covers any offense whether defined by the Mere gathering for the The forming of an
Revised Penal Code or any special statute. It is a well-settled unlawful purpose relating to a organization, corporation or
principle in public law that the public peace must be crime under the RPC. association, for the purpose
maintained and any breach thereof renders one susceptible to of criminal activities
prosecution. Certainly then from the explicit language of the prohibited by the RPC or by
Constitution, even without its controlling interpretation as special laws against public
shown by the debates of the Constitutional Convention to be morals or any act prejudicial
hereinafter discussed, petitioners cannot justify their claim to to public welfare.
immunity. Nor does Article 145 of the Revised Penal Code
come to their rescue. PERSONS LIABLE

Persons liable: (1) organizers Persons liable: (1) founders,

There is, to be sure, a full recognition of the necessity to have or leaders of the meeting; (2) directors, president
members of Congress, and likewise delegates to the persons present at the (2)members
Constitutional Convention, entitled to the utmost freedom to meeting
enable them to discharge their vital responsibilities, bowing to
no other force except the dictates of their conscience. ELEMENTS
Necessarily the utmost latitude in free speech should be
Mode 1: Any meeting a. Associations totally or
accorded them. When it comes to freedom from arrest,
attended by armed persons partially organized for the
however, it would amount to the creation of a privileged class,
for the purpose of committing purpose of committing any of
without justification in reason, if notwithstanding their liability
any of the crimes punishable the crimes punishable under
for a criminal offense, they would be considered immune
under the Code; the Code;
during their attendance in Congress and in going to and
returning from the same. There is likely to be no dissent from
Elements: b. Associations totally or
the proposition that a legislator or a delegate can perform his
partially organized for some
functions efficiently and well, without the need for any a. There is a meeting, a purpose contrary to public
transgression of the criminal law. Should such an unfortunate gathering or group of morals.
event come to pass, he is to be treated like any other citizen persons, whether in a
considering that there is a strong public interest in seeing to it fixed place or
that crime should not go unpunished. To the fear that may be moving;
expressed that the prosecuting arm of the government might b. The meeting is
unjustly go after legislators belonging to the minority, it attended by armed
suffices to answer that precisely all the safeguards thrown persons;
around an accused by the Constitution, solicitous of the rights c. The purpose of the
of an individual, would constitute an obstacle to such an meeting is to commit
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-37
 any of the crimes Mode 1: Any meeting attended by armed persons for the
punishable under the purpose of committing any of the crimes punishable under the
Code. Code;

Elements:
Mode 2: Any meeting in
which the audience, whether d. There is a meeting, a gathering or group of persons,
armed or not, is incited to the whether in a fixed place or moving;
commission of the crime of e. The meeting is attended by armed persons;
f. The purpose of the meeting is to commit any of the
treason, rebellion or
crimes punishable under the Code.
insurrection, sedition, or
assault upon person in
authority or his agents. Mode 2: Any meeting in which the audience, whether armed
or not, is incited to the commission of the crime of treason,
Elements:
rebellion or insurrection, sedition, or assault upon person in
a. There is a meeting, a authority or his agents.
gathering or group of
Elements:
persons, whether in a
fixed place or c. There is a meeting, a gathering or group of persons,
moving; whether in a fixed place or moving;
b. The audience, d. The audience, whether armed or not, is incited to the
whether armed or commission of the crime of treason, rebellion or
not, is incited to the insurrection, sedition or direct assault.
commission of the
Persons liable for illegal assembly:
crime of treason,
rebellion or
a. The organizer or leaders of the meeting;
insurrection, sedition b. Persons merely present at the meeting, who must
or direct assault. have a common intent to commit the felony of illegal
assembly.

In the first form of illegal assembly, the persons present at the

Presumptions if a person meeting must be armed. But the law does not require that all
carried an unlicensed the persons present must be armed. The unarmed persons
firearm: present at the meeting are also liable.

a. The purpose of the Presumptions if a person carried an unlicensed firearm:

meeting insofar as he
is concerned is to c. The purpose of the meeting insofar as he is
commit acts concerned is to commit acts punishable under the
punishable under the RPC
RPC d. He is considered a leader or organizer of the meeting.
b. He is considered a
Note: Not all persons present at the meeting of the first form
leader or organizer of
of illegal assembly must be armed.
the meeting.

Note: Not all persons present

at the meeting of the first ARTICLE 147 - ILLEGAL ASSOCIATIONS
form of illegal assembly must
be armed. Gravamen of the offense is the forming of an organization,
corporation or association, for the purpose of criminal activities
prohibited by the RPC or by special laws against public morals
or any act prejudicial to public welfare.
ARTICLE 146 - ILLEGAL ASSEMBLIES
a. Associations totally or partially organized for the
Gravamen of the offense is mere gathering for the unlawful purpose of committing any of the crimes punishable
purpose relating to a crime under the RPC. under the Code;
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-38
 b. Associations totally or partially organized for some Section 4. Permit when required and when not required - A
purpose contrary to public morals. written permit shall be required for any person or persons to
organize and hold a public assembly in a public place.
Persons liable:
However, no permit shall be required if the public assembly
a. Founders, directors and president of the association; shall be done or made in a freedom park duly established by
b. Mere members of the association. law or ordinance or in private property, in which case only the
consent of the owner or the one entitled to its legal possession
is required, or in the campus of a government-owned and
operated educational institution which shall be subject to the
Public Morals – matters which affect the interest of society
rules and regulations of said educational institution. Political
and public convenience, not limited to good customs
meetings or rallies held during any election campaign period as
provided for by law are not covered by this Act.
BP 880 - PUBLIC ASSEMBLY ACT OF 1985
Section 5. Application requirements - All applications for a
Section 2. Declaration of policy - The constitutional right of
permit shall comply with the following guidelines:
the people peaceably to assemble and petition the government
for redress of grievances is essential and vital to the strength
a. The applications shall be in writing and shall include
and stability of the State. To this end, the State shall ensure the names of the leaders or organizers; the purpose
the free exercise of such right without prejudice to the rights of such public assembly; the date, time and duration
of others to life, liberty and equal protection of the law. thereof, and place or streets to be used for the
intended activity; and the probable number of
Section 3. Definition of terms - For purposes of this Act: persons participating, the transport and the public
address systems to be used.
a. "Public assembly" means any rally, demonstration, b. The application shall incorporate the duty and
march, parade, procession or any other form of mass responsibility of applicant under Section 8 hereof.
or concerted action held in a public place for the c. The application shall be filed with the office of the
purpose of presenting a lawful cause; or expressing mayor of the city or municipality in whose jurisdiction
an opinion to the general public on any particular the intended activity is to be held, at least five (5)
issue; or protesting or influencing any state of affairs working days before the scheduled public assembly.
whether political, economic or social; or petitioning d. Upon receipt of the application, which must be duly
the government for redress of grievances. acknowledged in writing, the office of the city or
The processions, rallies, parades, demonstrations, municipal mayor shall cause the same to immediately
be posted at a conspicuous place in the city or
public meetings and assemblages for religious
municipal building.
purposes shall be governed by local ordinances:
Provided, however, That the declaration of policy as Section 6. Action to be taken on the application –
provided in Section 2 of this Act shall be faithfully
observed. a. It shall be the duty of the mayor or any official acting
in his behalf to issue or grant a permit unless there is
The definition herein contained shall not include clear and convincing evidence that the public
picketing and other concerted action in strike areas by assembly will create a clear and present danger to
workers and employees resulting from a labor dispute public order, public safety, public convenience, public
as defined by the Labor Code, its implementing rules morals or public health.
and regulations, and by the Batas Pambansa Bilang b. The mayor or any official acting in his behalf shall act
227. on the application within two (2) working days from
the date the application was filed, failing which, the
b. "Public place" shall include any highway, boulevard, permit shall be deemed granted. Should for any
avenue, road, street, bridge or other thoroughfare, reason the mayor or any official acting in his behalf
park, plaza, square, and/or any open space of public refuse to accept the application for a permit, said
ownership where the people are allowed access. application shall be posted by the applicant on the
c. "Maximum tolerance" means the highest degree of premises of the office of the mayor and shall be
restraint that the military, police and other peace deemed to have been filed.
keeping authorities shall observe during a public c. If the mayor is of the view that there is imminent and
assembly or in the dispersal of the same. grave danger of a substantive evil warranting the
d. "Modification of permit" shall include the change of denial or modification of the permit, he shall
the place and time of the public assembly, rerouting immediately inform the applicant who must be heard
of the parade or street march, the volume of loud- on the matter.
speakers or sound system and similar changes.

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-39
 d. The action on the permit shall be in writing and public assembly. However, to adequately ensure public safety,
served on the application within twenty-four hours. a law enforcement contingent under the command of a
e. If the mayor or any official acting in his behalf denies responsible police officer may be detailed and stationed in a
the application or modifies the terms thereof in his place at least one hundred (100) meter away from the area of
permit, the applicant may contest the decision in an activity ready to maintain peace and order at all times.
appropriate court of law.
f. In case suit is brought before the Metropolitan Trial Sec. 10. Police assistance when requested - It shall be
Court, the Municipal Trial Court, the Municipal Circuit imperative for law enforcement agencies, when their
Trial Court, the Regional Trial Court, or the assistance is requested by the leaders or organizers, to
Intermediate Appellate Court, its decisions may be perform their duties always mindful that their responsibility to
appealed to the appropriate court within forty-eight
provide proper protection to those exercising their right
(48) hours after receipt of the same. No appeal bond
peaceably to assemble and the freedom of expression is
and record on appeal shall be required. A decision
primordial. Towards this end, law enforcement agencies shall
granting such permit or modifying it in terms
satisfactory to the applicant shall, be immediately observe the following guidelines:
executory.
a. Members of the law enforcement contingent who deal
g. All cases filed in court under this Section shall be
with the demonstrators shall be in complete uniform
decided within twenty-four (24) hours from date of
with their nameplates and units to which they belong
filing. Cases filed hereunder shall be immediately
displayed prominently on the front and dorsal parts of
endorsed to the executive judge for disposition or, in
their uniform and must observe the policy of
his absence, to the next in rank.
"maximum tolerance" as herein defined;
h. In all cases, any decision may be appealed to the
b. The members of the law enforcement contingent shall
Supreme Court.
not carry any kind of firearms but may be equipped
i. Telegraphic appeals to be followed by formal appeals
with baton or riot sticks, shields, crash helmets with
are hereby allowed.
visor, gas masks, boots or ankle high shoes with shin
Section 7. Use of public thoroughfare - Should the proposed guards;
public assembly involve the use, for an appreciable length of c. Tear gas, smoke grenades, water cannons, or any
time, of any public highway, boulevard, avenue, road or street, similar anti-riot device shall not be used unless the
the mayor or any official acting in his behalf may, to prevent public assembly is attended by actual violence or
grave public inconvenience, designate the route thereof which serious threats of violence, or deliberate destruction
of property.
is convenient to the participants or reroute the vehicular traffic
to another direction so that there will be no serious or undue Sec. 11. Dispersal of public assembly with permit - No public
interference with the free flow of commerce and trade. assembly with a permit shall be dispersed. However, when an
assembly becomes violent, the police may disperse such public
Section 8. Responsibility of applicant - It shall be the duty assembly as follows:
and responsibility of the leaders and organizers of a public
assembly to take all reasonable measures and steps to the end a. At the first sign of impending violence, the ranking
that the intended public assembly shall be conducted officer of the law enforcement contingent shall call
peacefully in accordance with the terms of the permit. These the attention of the leaders of the public assembly
shall include but not be limited to the following: and ask the latter to prevent any possible
disturbance;
a. To inform the participants of their responsibility under b. If actual violence starts to a point where rocks or
the permit; other harmful objects from the participants are
b. To police the ranks of the demonstrators in order to thrown at the police or at the non-participants, or at
prevent non-demonstrators from disrupting the lawful any property causing damage to such property, the
activities of the public assembly; ranking officer of the law enforcement contingent
c. To confer with local government officials concerned shall audibly warn the participants that if the
and law enforcers to the end that the public assembly disturbance persists, the public assembly will be
may be held peacefully; dispersed;
d. To see to it that the public assembly undertaken shall c. If the violence or disturbances prevailing as stated in
not go beyond the time stated in the permit; and the preceding subparagraph should not stop or abate,
e. To take positive steps that demonstrators do not the ranking officer of the law enforcement contingent
molest any person or do any act unduly interfering shall audibly issue a warning to the participants of the
with the rights of other persons not participating in public assembly, and after allowing a reasonable
the public assembly. period of time to lapse, shall immediately order it to
forthwith disperse;
Sec. 9. Non-interference by law enforcement authorities - Law
enforcement agencies shall not interfere with the holding of a
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-40
 d. No arrest of any leader, organizer or participant shall Section 14. Penalties - Any person found guilty and convicted
also be made during the public assembly unless he of any of the prohibited acts defined in the immediately
violates during the assembly a law, statute, ordinance preceding Section shall be punished as follows:
or any provision of this Act. Such arrest shall be
governed by Article 125 of the Revised Penal Code, as a. violation of subparagraph (a) shall be punished by
amended: imprisonment of one month and one day to six
e. Isolated acts or incidents of disorder or branch of the months;
peace during the public assembly shall not constitute b. violations of subparagraphs (b), (c), (d), (e), (f), and
a group for dispersal. item 4, subparagraph (g) shall be punished by
imprisonment of six months and one day to six years;
Sec. 12. Dispersal of public assembly without permit - When c. violation of item 1, subparagraph (g) shall be
the public assembly is held without a permit where a permit is punished by imprisonment of six months and one day
required, the said public assembly may be peacefully to six years without prejudice to prosecution under
dispersed. Presidential Decree No. 1866;
d. violations of item 2, item 3, or item 5 of subparagraph
Sec. 13. Prohibited acts - The following shall constitute (g) shall be punished by imprisonment of one day to
violations of this Act: thirty days.

a. The holding of any public assembly as defined in this Section 15. Freedom parks - Every city and municipality in
Act by any leader or organizer without having first the country shall within six months after the effectivity of this
secured that written permit where a permit is Act establish or designate at least one suitable "freedom park"
required from the office concerned, or the use of such or mall in their respective jurisdictions which, as far as
permit for such purposes in any place other than practicable, shall be centrally located within the poblacion
those set out in said permit: Provided, however, That where demonstrations and meetings may be held at any time
no person can be punished or held criminally liable for without the need of any prior permit.
participating in or attending an otherwise peaceful
assembly; In the cities and municipalities of Metropolitan Manila, the
b. Arbitrary and unjustified denial or modification of a respective mayors shall establish the freedom parks within the
permit in violation of the provisions of this Act by the
period of six months from the effectivity of this Act.
mayor or any other official acting in his behalf.
c. The unjustified and arbitrary refusal to accept or
acknowledge receipt of the application for a permit by
the mayor or any official acting in his behalf; NOTES:
d. Obstructing, impeding, disrupting or otherwise
denying the exercise of the right to peaceful Limitation on the freedom of assembly
assembly;
e. The unnecessary firing of firearms by a member of As in the case of freedom of expression, this right is
any law enforcement agency or any person to not to be limited, much less denied, except on a showing of a
disperse the public assembly; clear and present danger of a substantive evil that Congress
f. Acts in violation of Section 10 hereof; has a right to prevent. In other words, like other rights
g. Acts described hereunder if committed within one embraced in the freedom of expression, the right to assemble
hundred (100) meters from the area of activity of the
is not subject to previous restraint or censorship. It may not
public assembly or on the occasion thereof:
be conditioned upon the prior issuance of a permit or
i. the carrying of a deadly or offensive weapon
authorization from the government authorities except, of
or device such as firearm, pillbox, bomb, and
course, if the assembly is intended to be held in a public place,
the like;
ii. the carrying of a bladed weapon and the a permit for the use of such place, and not for the assembly
like; itself, may be validly required. (David v. Arroyo)
iii. the malicious burning of any object in the
streets or thoroughfares; Q: Can participation in a peaceable assembly be a basis for
iv. the carrying of firearms by members of the warrantless arrest on a charge for sedition?
law enforcement unit;
v. the interfering with or intentionally A: NO. The ringing truth here is that petitioner David, et al.
were arrested while they were exercising their right to peaceful
disturbing the holding of a public assembly
assembly. They were not committing any crime, neither was
by the use of a motor vehicle, its horns and
there a showing of a clear and present danger that warranted
loud sound systems. the limitation of that right. As can be gleaned from
circumstances, the charges of inciting to
sedition and violation of BP 880 were mere
afterthought. Even the Solicitor General, during the oral
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-41
argument, failed to justify the arresting officer‘s the crimes of rebellion and sedition, or shall attack, employ
conduct. In De Jonge v. Oregon, it was held that peaceable force or seriously intimidate or resist any person in authority or
assembly cannot be made a crime, thus: any of his agents, while engaged in the performance of official
duties, or on occasion of such performance, shall suffer the
Peaceable assembly for lawful discussion penalty of prisión correccional in its medium and maximum
cannot be made a crime. The holding of periods and a fine not exceeding 1,000 pesos, when the
meetings for peaceable political action assault is committed with a weapon or when the offender is a
cannot be proscribed. Those who assist in public officer or employee, or when the offender lays hands
the conduct of such meetings cannot be upon a person in authority. If none of these circumstances be
branded as criminals on that score. The present, the penalty of prisión correccional in its minimum
question, if the rights of free speech and period and a fine not exceeding 500 pesos shall be imposed.
peaceful assembly are not to be preserved,
is not as to the auspices under which the ARTICLE 152. Persons in Authority and Agents of Persons in
meeting was held but as to its purpose; not Authority – Who shall be deemed as such. – In applying the
as to the relations of the speakers, but provisions of the preceding and other articles of this Code, any
whether their utterances transcend the
person directly vested with jurisdiction, whether as an
bounds of the freedom of speech which the
Constitution protects. If the persons individual or as a member of some court or government
assembling have committed crimes corporation, board, or commission, shall be deemed a person
elsewhere, if they have formed or are in authority. A barangay captain and a barangay chairman
engaged in a conspiracy against the public shall also be deemed a person in authority.
peace and order, they may be prosecuted
for their conspiracy or other violations of Any person who, by direct provision of law or by election or by
valid laws. But it is a different matter appointment by competent authority, is charged with the
when the State, instead of prosecuting
maintenance of public order and the protection and security of
them for such offenses, seizes upon
life and property, such as a barrio councilman, barrio
mere participation in a peaceable
assembly and a lawful public discussion policeman and barangay leader, and any person who comes to
as the basis for a criminal charge. the aid of of persons in authority, shall be deemed an agent of
a person in authority.
Tolerance is the rule and limitation is the
exception. Only upon a showing that an assembly presents a In applying the provisions of articles 148 and 151 of this Code,
clear and present danger that the State may deny the citizens teachers, professors, and persons charged with the supervision
right to exercise it. Indeed, respondents failed to show or of public or duly recognized private schools, colleges and
convince the Court that the rallyists committed acts amounting universities, and lawyers in the actual performance of their
to lawless violence, invasion or rebellion. With the blanket professional duties or on the occasion of such performance
revocation of permits, the distinction between protected and shall be deemed persons in authority. [As amended by B.P.
unprotected assemblies was eliminated. 873]

Moreover, under BP 880, the authority to regulate ARTICLE 203. Who are Public Officers. — For the purpose of
assemblies and rallies is lodged with the local government applying the provisions of this and the preceding titles of this
units. They have the power to issue permits and to revoke book, any person who, by direct provision of the law, popular
such permits after due notice and hearing on the election or appointment by competent authority, shall take part
determination of the presence of clear and present danger. in the performance of public functions in the Government of
Here, petitioners were not even notified and heard on the the Philippine Islands, or shall perform in said Government or
revocation of their permits. The first time they learned of it in any of its branches public duties as an employee, agent or
was at the time of the dispersal. Such absence of notice is a subordinate official, of any rank or class, shall be deemed to
fatal defect. When a person‘s right is restricted by government be a public officer.
action, it behooves a democratic government to see to it that
the restriction is fair, reasonable, and according to procedure. TWO (2) FORMS OF COMMITTING THE CRIME OF
DIRECT ASSAULTS:

D. ASSAULT UPON, AND RESISTANCE AND Mode 1. Without public uprising, by employing force or
DISOBEDIENCE TO PERSONS IN AUTHORITY intimidation for the attainment of any of the purposes
AND THEIR AGENTS
enumerated in defining the crimes of rebellion and
14. DIRECT ASSAULTS sedition;

Rev. Pen. Code, Arts. 148, 152 and 203 Elements:

ARTICLE 148. Direct Assaults. — Any person or persons who, (a) Offender employs force or intimidation;
without a public uprising, shall employ force or intimidation for
the attainment of any of the purposes enumerated in defining

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-42
 (b) The aim of the offender is to attain any of the purposes performance of his duty (People vs.
of the crime of rebellion or any of the objects of the Diama).
crime of sedition;  The intimidation must produce its
(c) There is no public uprising. effect immediately, for if the threats
be of some future evil, the act
EXAMPLE: Direct assault to prevent a popular election. would be an assault.
(b) The person assaulted is a person in authority or his
- Clarin vs. Justice of the Peace: the act of the accused agent;
in preventing by force the holding of a popular
o NOT every public officer is at the same time
election in certain precincts, without public uprising, is
a PA or an APA.
direct assault (of the first form).
o Q: Who is a person in authority?
It is NOT necessary that the offended party be a person o A: any person directly vested with
in authority or his agent: If the aim of the offender is to jurisdiction, whether as an individual or as a
member of some court or government
attain an object of sedition, the offended party may be a
corporation, board, or commission, shall be
private individual or person belonging to a social class.
deemed a person in authority. A barangay
captain and a barangay chairman shall also
Mode 2. Without public uprising, by attacking, by
be deemed a person in authority.
employing force or by seriously intimidating or by
 ―DIRECTLY VESTED WITH
seriously resisting any person in authority or any of his
JURISDICTION‖ meant ―the power
agents, while engaged in the performance of official
or authority to govern and execute
duties, or on occasion of such performance. the laws.‖
 EXAMPLES: Division Superintendent
Elements:
of Schools under Sec. 917 of the
Revised Administrative Code;
(a) Offender makes an attack, employs force, makes a
President of Sanitary Division as
serious intimidation, or makes a serious resistance;
held in People vs. Quebral.
o ―ATTACK‖ – includes any offensive or
o A: Teachers, professors, and persons
antagonistic movements or action of any
charged with the supervision of public or
kind.
duly recognized private schools, colleges and
o DEGREE OF FORCE NECESSARY:
universities, and lawyers in the actual
1) If the offended party is only an AGENT
performance of their professional duties or
OF A PA: the force employed must be of
on the occasion of such performance shall be
a serious character as to indicate
deemed persons in authority.
determination defy the law and its
 For other purposes, such as to
representative at all hazards.
increase the penalty by reason of
 Us. Vs. Tabiana: hitting a policeman
the aggravating circumstances
in the breast with a fist is NOT a
where a person in authority is
direct assault → the words in ART.
involved, the teachers and
148 relating to the employment of
professors are not PA.
force appear to have reference to
 Status as a person in authority,
something more dangerous to civil
being a matter of law, ignorance
society than a simple blow with the
thereof is no excuse.
hands.
 REASON FOR PROTECTECTION:
 Where the force employed on the
People vs. Ceprioso that it is to give
APA is of a serious character,
teachers protection, dignity and
including determination to defy that
respect while in the performance of
law and its representative, the
their official duties. Respect for a
crime committed is direct assault.
teacher is required of all persons,
2) If the offended party is a PA: the force
whether pupils, parents, or
employed need not be serious.
otherwise, if we are to uphold and
o ―INTIMIDATION AND RESISTANCE‖ → must
enhance the dignity of the teaching
be serious, whether the offended party is an
profession which the law similarly
APA or he is a PA.
enjoins upon all persons for the
 Resistance must be grave: it must
sake of the pupils and the
be active resistance.
profession itself.
 EXAMPLE OF SERIOUS
o Q: Who is an agent of a person in
INTIMIDATION: pointing a gun to a
authority?
military police captain who is in the

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-43
 o A: Any person who, by direct provision of (c) At the time of the assault, the person in authority or
law or by election or by appointment by his agent is engaged in the actual performance of
comptent authority, is charged with the official duties, or that he is assaulted by reason of the
maintenance of public order and the past performance of official duties;
protection and security of life and property, o REQUIREMENT: at the time such assault or
such as a barrio councilman, barrio intimidation or resistance is made, the PA or
policeman and barangay leader, and any APA:
person who comes to the aid of persons in a. Engaged in the actual performance of
authority, shall be deemed an agent of a his official duty; or
person in authority. b. At least that the assault or intimidation
o To be an APA, one must be charged with: is done by reason of the past
a. The maintenance of public order, performance of the said duty.
and
b. The protection and security of life People vs. Beltran (1985)
and property.
o EXAMPLES OF APA:
a. Policeman (US vs. Cox; US vs. Tabiana)
b. Municipal treasurer, because he is only a PEOPLE VS. BELTRAN
deputy ex oficio of the provincial
treasurer, a person in authority within G.R. No. L-37168-69, September 13, 1985, RELOVA, J.
the province where the latter exercises
his jurisdiction (People vs. Ramos)
c. Postmaster, because he is only an agent
of the Director of Posts, a PA (People vs. APPELLANTS GUILTY OF ATTEMPTED MURDER WITH
Acierto) DIRECT ASSAULT ON MAYOR QUIROLGICO AND PAT.
d. Rural policeman, even if he is not TOLENTINO: considering that Mayor Quirolgico is a person in
provided with a uniform and does not authority and Pat. Rolando Tolentino is a policeman who at the
receive pay, because he is duly time was in his uniform, and both were performing their official
appointed by the mayor of the town and duties to maintain peace and order in the community, the
provided with a badge (People vs. finding of the trial court that appellants are guilty of
Dosal) attempted murder with direct assault on the persons of Mayor
e. Sheriff (People vs. Hernandez) Quirolgico and Pat. Tolentino is correct.
f. Agents of the BIR (People vs. Reyes, et
al.)
g. Malacanang confidential agent (People
vs. Bustamante) CONCLUSION: affirmed.
h. Barangay Chief Tanod (People vs.
Recto)

PUBLIC PERSONS IN AGENTS OF A

OFFICER AUTHORITY PERSON IN People vs. Dollantes (1987)
AUTHORITY
(ART. 203) (ART. 152) (ART. 152)

Any person who Any person directly Any person who, PEOPLE V. DOLLANTES
takes part in the vested with by direct provision
GR No. 70639, June 30, 1987, Paras, J.
performance of jurisdiction, of law or by
public functions in whether as an appointment by
the government. individual or as a competent
member of some authority is BRGY. CAPTAIN WAS IN THE ACT OF TRYING TO
court or charged with the PACIFY DOLLANTES WHEN HE WAS STABBED TO
governmental maintenance of DEATH: Finally, the records show that the Barangay Captain
corporation, board public order and was in the act of trying to pacify Pedro Dollantes who
or commission. the protection and was making trouble in the dance hall when he was
security of life and stabbed to death. He was therefore killed while in the
property. performance of his duties. In the case of People v. Hecto
(135 SCRA 113), this Court ruled that "As the barangay

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-44
captain, it was his duty to enforce the laws and DIRECT ASSAULT IS QUALIFIED:
ordinances within the barangay. If in the enforcement
thereof, he incurs, the enmity of his people who (a) When the assault is committed with a weapon:
o Include not only firearms and sharp or
thereafter treacherously slew him the crime committed
cutting instruments but also stones, clubs,
is murder with assault upon a person in authority."
and any other object with which some
physical injury may be inflicted.
(b) When the offender is a public officer or employee:
CONCLUSION: decision AFFIRMED. (c) When the offender lays hands upon a person in
authority.

COMPLEX CRIME OF DIRECT ASSAULT WITH

HOMICIDE OR MURDER, OR WITH SERIOUS PHYSICAL
INJURIES: People vs. Gayrama: When a PA or his agent is
(d) Offender knows that the one he is assaulting is a
attacked and killed while in the performance of his duty or by
person in authority or his agent in the exercise of his
reason thereof, the crime should be direct assault with
duties.
o REASON: the accused must have the homicide or murder, as the case may be in view of the
intention to offend, injure, or assault the provisions of Art. 48 of the Code.
offended party as a PA or an APA.
o The Information must allege such - The crime of slight physical injuries is absorbed
knowledge. in direct assault: the SPI sustained by a policeman,
o NOTE: disregard of respect due to offended then in the performance of his duty, s absorbed in the
party on account of rank is INHERENT in crime of direct assault, as the same is a necessary
direct assault. consequence of the force or violence inherent in all
o WHEN EVIDENCE OF MOTIVE IS kinds of assault. (People vs. Acierto)
IMPORTANT IN DIRECT ASSAULT:
(1) IMPORTANT: when the person in 15. INDIRECT ASSAULTS
authority or his agent who is attacked or
Rev. Pen. Code, Art. 149
is seriously intimidated is NOT in the
actual performance of his official duty.
ARTICLE 149. Indirect Assaults. — The penalty of prisión
 People vs. Puno: where correccional in its minimum and medium periods and a fine not
injuries were inflicted on a exceeding 500 pesos shall be imposed upon any person who
PA who was not then in shall make use of force or intimidation upon any person
the actual performance of coming to the aid of the authorities or their agents on occasion
his official duties, the of the commission of any of the crimes defined in the next
motive of the offender preceding article.
assumes importance
because if the attack was ELEMENTS:
by reason of the previous
performance of official (a) A person in authority or his agent is the victim of any of
duties by the PA, the crime the forms of direct assault defined in Article 148;
would be direct assault; (b) A person comes to the aid of such authority or his
otherwise, it would only be agent;
physical injuries. (c) Offender makes use of force or intimidation upon such
(2) IMMATERIAL: when a PA or his agent is person coming to the aid of the authority or his agent.
in the actual performance of his official INDIRECT ASSAULT CAN BE COMMITTED ONLY WHEN
duty.
A DIRECT ASSAULT IS ALSO COMMITTED: Art. 19 says
(e) There is no public uprising.
―on occasion of the commission of any of the crimes defined in
o If there is public and tumultuous uprising,
the next preceding article.‖ (Art. 148) Hence, indirect assault
the crime may be sedition. If the PA or his
agent who was attacked was in the can be committed only when direct assault is also committed.
performance of his duty, the object of the
Q: Is the crime indirect assault, if a private individual
uprising may be to prevent him from freely
exercising his functions. If the uprising was who is aiding a policeman in making a lawful arrest is
by reason of the past performance of his attacked by the person to be arrested?
official duty, the object may be to inflict an
- A: NO. It cannot be indirect assault, because the
act of hate or revenge upon the person or
policeman who is being aided is not a victim of direct
property of the public officer.
assault.
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-45
 - Q: Is the crime direct assault? (b) By refusing to be sworn or placed under affirmation
- A: While it is true that under Sec. 10, Rule 113 of the while being before such legislative or constitutional
ROC, every person summoned by an officer making a body or official;
lawful arrest shall aid him in the making of such (c) By refusing to answer any legal inquiry or to produce
arrest, yet the private individual in such case is NOT any books, papers, documents, or records in his
an APA, because he is not coming to an aid of a PA (a possession, when required by them to do so in the
policeman bring an APA under Art. 152, 2). Hence, exercise of their functions;
the crime is not direct assault, the person attacked (d) By restraining another from attending as a witness in
not being an APA. such legislative or constitutional body;
(e) By inducing disobedience to a summons or refusal to
OFFENDED PARTY MAY BE A PRIVATE PERSON: t will be be sworn by any such body or official.
noted that Art. 19 states that the use of force of intimidation
must be made ―upon any person coming to the aid of NOTE: The National Assembly is now the Congress of the
authorities or their agents.‖ Philippines consisting of the Senate and the House of
Representatives.
- A private person who also comes to the rescue of an
authority or his agent enjoys the privileges of the ―WITHOUT LEGAL EXCUSE‖ → indicates that only disobedience
latter, and any person who uses force or intimidation without legal excuse if punishable.
upon such person under the circumstances is guilty of
assault under Art. 149. - Hence, Art. 150 may not apply when the papers or
documents may be used in evidence against the
16. DISOBEDIENCE TO SUMMONS ISSUED BY owner thereof, because it would be equivalent to
CONGRESS, ITS COMMITTEES, ETC., BY compelling him to be witness against himself.
THE CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSIONS, ITS
COMMITTEES, ETC. ―WHEN REQUIRED BY THEM TO DO SO IN THE EXERCISE OF
THEIR FUNCTIONS‖ → the testimony of the person summoned
Rev. Pen. Code, Art. 150 must be upon matters into which the NA has jurisdiction to
inquire.
ARTICLE 150. Disobedience to summons issued by the
National Assembly, its committees or subcommittees, by the - When the investigation is for the purpose of passing a
Constitutional Commissions, its committees, subcommittees or legislative measure, such investigation comes under
divisions. — The penalty of arresto mayor or a fine ranging the province of the committee of the House or Senate
from two hundred to one thousand pesos, or both such fine
(Arnault vs. Nazareno)
and imprisonment, shall be imposed upon any person who,
having been duly summoned to attend as a witness before the Refusing ―TO ANSWER ANY LEGAL INQUIRY‖ → When Arnault
National Assembly, its special or standing committees and
refused to divulge the identity of the person to whom he gave
subcommittees, the Constitutional Commissions and its
committees, subcommittees or divisions, or before any an amount of P440,000, whose identity the Senate
commission or committee chairman or member authorized to investigating committee believed him to know, the Senate
summon witnesses, refuses, without legal excuse, to obey pronounced him guilty of contempt and ordered his
such summons, or being present before any such legislative or imprisonment until he would be willing to identify such person
constitutional body or official, refuses to be sworn or placed (Arnault vs. Nazareno)
under affirmation or to answer any legal inquiry or to produce
any books, papers, documents, or records in his possession, - Hence, any of the acts punished by Art. 150 may
when required by them to do so in the exercise of their also constitute contempt of the National
functions. The same penalty shall be imposed upon any person
Assembly.
who shall restrain another from attending as a witness, or who
shall induce disobedience to a summons or refusal to be sworn REASON FOR ART. 150 AND POWER OF THE NA TO PUNISH
by any such body or official. [As amended by Com. Act No. 52]
FOR CONTEMPT: The power of inquiry – with the process to
enforce it – is an essential and appropriate auxiliary to the
ACTS PUNISHED AS DISOBEDIENCE TO THE NATIONAL
ASSEMBLY OR ITS COMMITTEE OR CONSTITUTIONAL legislative functions.
COMMISSION:
- Experience has shown that mere requests for certain
(a) By refusing, without legal excuse, to obey summons information are often unavailing and also that
of Congress, its special or standing committees and information which is volunteered is not always
subcommittees, the Constitutional Commissions and accurate or complete; so, some means of compulsion
its committees, subcommittees or divisions, or by any is essential to obtain what is needed.
commission or committee chairman or member
authorized to summon witnesses;

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-46
 17. RESISTANCE AND DISOBEDIENCE TO A Elements:
PERSON IN AUTHORITY OR THE AGENTS
OF SUCH PERSON (a) An agent of a person in authority is engaged in the
performance of official duty or gives a lawful order to
Rev. Pen. Code, Art. 151 the offender;
(b) Offender disobeys such agent of a person in authority;
ARTICLE 151. Resistance and Disobedience to a Person in (c) Such disobedience is not of a serious nature.
Authority or the Agents of Such Person. — The penalty of
arresto mayor and a fine not exceeding 500 pesos shall be ―WHEN THE DISOBEDIENCE TO AN AGENT OF A PERSON IN
imposed upon any person who not being included in the AUTHORITY‖ → in view of the phrase in the second paragraph
provisions of the preceding articles shall resist or seriously of Art. 151, it is clear that in simple disobedience, the offended
party must only be an agent of a person in authority.
disobey any person in authority, or the agents of such person,
while engaged in the performance of official duties. EXAMPLE: The act of lying on the road and refusing,
despite the order of the P.C. major, to get our
When the disobedience to an agent of a person in authority is therefrom constitute the crime of simple disobedience
not of a serious nature, the penalty of arresto menor or a fine as held in the case of People vs. Macapuno.
ranging from 10 to 100 pesos shall be imposed upon the
offender. ORDER MUST BE LAWFUL: otherwise, resistance is justified.

Mode 1: Resistance and serious disobedience - Thus, when a policeman was absent during the fight,
he had no right to arrest the man who had wounded
Elements: the other, because he might have wounded him in
self-defense. The resistance put up by the man to the
(a) A person in authority or his agent is engaged in the arrest was justified. The order of the policeman that
performance of official duty or gives a lawful order to the man should submit to the arrest was not lawful.
the offender; (People vs. Dauz)
(b) Offender resists or seriously disobeys such person in
authority or his agent; DISOBEDIENCE SHOULD NOT BE OF SERIOUS NATURE: if the
(c) The act of the offender is not included in the provision disobedience to an APA is of a serious nature, the offender
of Articles 148, 149 and 150. should be punished under the first paragraph of Art. 151.

CONCEPT OF THE OFFENSE OF RESISTANCE AND DIRECT ASSAULT DISTINGUISHED FROM RESISTANCE
DISOBEDIENCE: consists in the failure to comply with orders OR SERIOUS DISOBEDIENCE:
directly issued by the authorities in the exercise of their official
1. In direct assault, the PA or his A must be engaged
duties. Failure to comply with legal provisions of a general in the performance of official duties or that he is
character or with judicial decisions merely declaratory of rights assaulted by reason thereof;
or obligations, or violations of prohibitory decisions do NOT o But in resistance, the PA or his A must be
constitute the crime of disobedience to the authorities (US vs. in actual performance of his duties.
Ramayrat) 2. Direct assault (2nd form) is committed in four
ways: (a) by attacking; (b) by employing force; (c) by
―WHILE ENGAGED IN THE PERFORMANCE OF OFFICIAL seriously intimidating; and (d) by seriously resisting a
PA or his A.
DUTIES‖ → there can be no resistance or disobedience when
o Resistance or serious disobedience is
there in nothing to resist or to disobey. committed only by resisting or seriously
disobeying a PA or his A.
- But when a PA or APA is in the performance of his 3. In both direct assault by resisting an APA and
duty or gives an order and the performance of duty is resistance against an APA, there is force
resisted or the order is disobeyed, then the crime is employed, but the use of force in resistance is not so
committed. serious, as there is no manifest intention to defy the
law and the officers enforcing it.
EXAMPLE OF RESISTANCE AND SERIOUS DISOBEDIENCE: US o The attack or employment of force which
vs. Tabiana, where the accused struck the policeman on the gives rise to the crime of direct assault
breast with a fist when the latter was arresting the said must be serious and deliberate; otherwise,
accused. even a case of simple resistance to an
arrest, which always requires the use of
- The policeman was in the performance of his duty force of some kind, would constitute direct
when he was arresting the accused. The violent assault and the lesser offense of resistance
or disobedience in Art. 151 would entirely
refusal of the accused to be arrested made him liable
disappear.
under par. 1, Art. 151.

Mode 2: Simple disobedience

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-47
 o But when the one resisted is a PA, the use of (2) Interrupting or disturbing performances, functions or
any kind or degree of force will give rise to gatherings, or peaceful meetings, if the act is not
direct assault. included in Arts. 131 and 132;
o If no force is employed by the offender in o If the act of disturbing or interrupting a
resisting or disobeying a PA, the crime meeting or religious ceremony is not
committed is resistance or serious committed by public officers, or if committed
disobedience under the first paragraph of by public officers they are participants
Art. 151. therein, Art. 153 should be applied.
 Art. 153 has preference to Arts. 131
―SHALL RESIST OR SERIOUSLY DISOBEY‖ → the word and 132, which punish the same
―seriously‖ in the phrase quoted is not used to describe acts if committed by public officers
resistance, because if the offender seriously resisted a PA or who are not participants in the
his A, the crime is direct assault. meeting or religious worship.
Hence, if the act of disturbing or
E. PUBLIC DISORDERS interrupting the meeting or religious
worship is committed by a private
18. TUMULTS AND OTHER DISTURBANCES OF individual, or even by a public
PUBLIC ORDER officer but he is a participant in the
meeting or religious worship which
Rev. Pen. Code, Art. 153 he disturbs or interrupts, Art. 153,
not Art. 131 or 12 is applicable.
ARTICLE 153. Tumults and Other Disturbances of Public (3) Making any outcry tending to incite rebellion or
Orders — Tumultuous Disturbance or Interruption Liable to sedition in any meeting, association or public place;
Cause Disturbance. — The penalty of arresto mayor in its o ―OUTCRY‖ means to shout subversive or
provocative words tending to stir up the
medium period to prision correccional in its minimum period
people to obtain by means of force or
and a fine not exceeding 1,000 pesos shall be imposed upon violence any of the objects of rebellion or
any person who shall cause any serious disturbance in a public sedition.
place, office, or establishment, or shall interrupt or disturb o INCITING TO SEDITION OR
public performances, functions or gatherings, or peaceful REBELLION DISTINGUISHED FROM
meetings, if the act is not included in the provisions of articles PUBLIC DISORDER: For an outcry or the
131 and 132. displaying of an emblems or placards to
constitute:
The penalty next higher in degree shall be imposed upon
INCITING TO SEDITION PUBLIC DISORDER
persons causing any disturbance or interruption of a
OR REBELLION
tumultuous character.

The disturbance or interruption shall be deemed to be It is necessary that the The outcry is more or less
tumultuous if caused by more than three persons who are offender should have done unconscious outburst which,
armed or provided with means of violence. the act with the idea although rebellious or
aforethought of inducing his seditious in nature, is not
The penalty of arresto mayor shall be imposed upon any hearers or readers to commit intentionally calculated to
person who in any meeting, association, or public place, shall the crime of rebellion or induce others to commit
make any outcry tending to incite rebellion or sedition or in sedition. rebellion or sedition.
such place shall display placards or emblems which provoke a
disturbance of the public order.
(4) Displaying placards or emblems which provoke a
The penalty of arresto menor and a fine not to exceed 200 disturbance of public order in such place;
pesos shall be imposed upon those persons who in violation of (5) Burying with pomp the body of a person who has
the provisions contained in the last clause of article 85 shall been legally executed.
bury with pomp the body of a person who has been legally
executed. TUMULTUOUS CHARACTER, QUALIFYING
CIRCUMSTANCE: the penalty next higher shall be imposed
Q: What are tumults and other disturbances of public upon persons causing any disturbance or interruption of a
order? tumultuous character.

(1) Causing any serious disturbance in a public place, - ―TUMULTUOUS‖ disturbance or interruption is one
office or establishment; which is caused by more than three persons who are
o ―SERIOUS DISTURBANCE‖ must be planned armed or provided with means of violence.
or intended. -

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-48
 19. UNLAWFUL USE OF MEANS OF c) Maliciously publishing or causing to be published any
PUBLICATION AND UNLAWFUL official document or resolution without proper
UTTERANCES authority, or before they have been published
officially;
Rev. Pen. Code, Art. 154 o R.A. No. 248: prohibits the reprinting,
reproduction or republication of government
ARTICLE 154. Unlawful use of means of publication and
publications and official documents without
unlawful utterances. — The penalty of arresto mayor and a previous authority.
fine ranging from 200 to 1,000 pesos shall be imposed upon; d) Printing, publishing or distributing (or causing the
same) books, pamphlets, periodicals, or leaflets which
1. Any person who by means of printing. lithography, or
do not bear the real printer‘s name, or which are
any other means of publication shall publish or cause to
classified as anonymous.
be published as news any false news which may
endanger the public order, or cause damage to the
20. ALARMS AND SCANDALS
interest or credit of the State;
2. Any person who by the same means, or by words, Rev. Pen. Code, Art. 155
utterances or speeches, shall encourage disobedience to
the law or to the constituted authorities or praise, ARTICLE 155. Alarms and Scandals. — The penalty of arresto
justify, or extol any act punished by law; menor or fine not exceeding 200 pesos shall be imposed upon:
3. Any person who shall maliciously publish or cause to be
published any official resolution or document without 1. Any person who within any town or public place, shall
proper authority, or before they have been published discharge any firearm, rocket, firecracker, or other
officially; or explosives calculated to cause alarm or danger;
4. Any person who shall print, publish, or distribute or 2. Any person who shall instigate or take an active part in
cause to be printed, published or distributed books, any charivari or other disorderly meeting offensive to
pamphlets, periodicals, or leaflets which do not bear the another or prejudicial to public tranquility;
real printer's name, or which are classified as 3. Any person who, while wandering about at night or
anonymous. [As mended by Com. Act No. 202] while engaged in any other nocturnal amusements, shall
disturb the public peace; or
ACTS PUNISHED AS UNLAWFUL USE OF MEANS OF
4. Any person who, while intoxicated or otherwise, shall
PUBLICATION AND UNLAWFUL UTTERANCES:
cause any disturbance or scandal in public places,
provided that the circumstances of the case shall not
a) Publishing or causing to be published, by means of
make the provisions of article 153 applicable.
printing, lithography or any other means of
publication, as news any false news which may ACTS PUNISHED AS ALARMS AND SCANDALS:
endanger the public order, or cause damage to the
interest or credit of the State. a. Discharging any firearm, rocket, firecracker, or other
o ACTUAL public disorder or ACTUAL damage explosive within any town or public place, calculated
to the credit of the State is NOT to cause (which produces) alarm or danger;
NECESSARY. o The discharge of the firearm should not be
o The mere possibility of causing such damage aimed at a person; otherwise, the offense
or damage is sufficient. would fall under Art. 254, punishing
o The offender must know that the news is discharge of firearm.
false: if the offender does NOT know that o The phrase ―calculated to cause alarm or
the news is false, he is not liable under this danger‖ is a wrong translation of the Spanish
article, there being no criminal intent on his text. Hence, it is the result, not the intent,
part. that counts. The act must produce alarm or
b) Encouraging disobedience to the law or to the danger as a consequence.
constituted authorities or praising, justifying or o This Article does NOT make any distinction
extolling any act punished by law, by the same means as to the particular place in the town of
or by words, utterances or speeches; public place where the discharge if effected:
o People vs. Arrogante: defendant distributed the discharge of any forearm, rocket, etc. in
leaflets urging the people to disobey and one‘s garden or yard located in the town is
resist the execution of that portion of the punished under Art. 155, as long as it
National Defense Act requiring compulsory produced alarm or danger.
military training. The crime is NOT inciting to b. Instigating or taking an active part in any charivari or
sedition. The acts charged which are other disorderly meeting offensive to another or
subversive in nature fall under this prejudicial to public tranquility;
paragraph.

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-49
 o ―CHARIVARI‖ includes a medley of VIOLENCE, INTIMIDATION OR BRIBERY IS NOT
discordant voices, a mock serenade of NECESSARY: If the accused is removed from jail or penal
discordant noises made on kettles, tins, establishment a person confined therein or helped the latter‘s
horns, etc., designed to annoy or insult. escape by means of violence, intimidation, or bribery, the
o REASON: to prevent more serious disorders. penalty is higher. Hence, it is NOT an element of the offense.
c. Disturbing the public peace while wandering about at
―BY OTHER MEANS‖ → person who substituted for a prisoner
night or while engaged in any other nocturnal
by taking his place in jail is removal of the prisoner from jail by
amusements;
other means, that is, by DECEIT.
d. Causing any disturbances or scandal in public places
while intoxicated or otherwise, provided Art. 153 is A PERSON DELIVERING A PRISONER FROM JAIL MAY BE HELD
not applicable. LIABLE AS AN ACCESSORY: if the crime committed by the
o Disturbance of serious nature falls under Art. prisoner for which he is confined or serving sentence is
153. treason, murder, or parricide, the act of taking the place of the
prisoner in the prison is that of an accessory and he may be
21. DELIVERING PRISONERS FROM JAILS held liable as such, because he assists in the escape of the
principal (Art. 19, par. 3).
Rev. Pen. Code, Art. 156
Alberto vs. De la Cruz (1980)
ARTICLE 156. Delivery of Prisoners from Jail. — The penalty
of arresto mayor in its maximum period to prisión correccional
in its minimum period shall be imposed upon any person who
ALBERTO V. DE LA CRUZ
shall remove from any jail or penal establishment any person
confined therein or shall help the escape of such person, by
GR No. L-31839, June 30, 1980, Concepcion, J.
means of violence, intimidation, or bribery. If other means are
used the penalty of arresto mayor shall be imposed.

If the escape of the prisoner shall take place outside of said The offense [of delivering prisoners from jails] may be
establishments by taking the guards by surprise, the same
committed in two ways:
penalties shall be imposed in their minimum period.

Elements:
(1) By removing a person confined in any jail or penal
(a) There is a person confined in a jail or penal
establishment; and
establishment;
(b) Offender removes therefrom such person, or helps the (2) By helping such a person to escape.
escape of such person.

PRISONER MAY BE UNDER DETENTION ONLY: the prisoner

may be a mere detention prisoner, or by final judgment. To remove means to take away a person from the place
of his confinement, with or without the active
HOSPITAL OR ASYLUM CONSIDERED EXTENTION OF JAIL OR cooperation of the person released. To help in the escape
PRISON: the article applies even if the prisoner is in the of a person confined in any jail or penal institution means to
hospital or asylum when he is removed or when the offender
furnish that person with the material means such as a
helps his escape, because it is considered as an extension of
the penal institution. file, ladder, rope, etc. which greatly facilitate his
escape. The offense under this article is usually
OFFENDER IS USUALLY AN OUTSIDER: the offense under committed by an outsider who removes from jail any
this article is usually committed by an outsider who removes person therein confined or helps him escape. If the
from jail any person therein confined or helps him escape. offender is a public officer who has custody or charge
of the prisoner, he is liable for infidelity in the custody
- APPLICABLE to an employee of the penal
of prisoner defined and penalized under Article 223 of
establishment who helps the escape of a person
confined therein, provided that he does not have the the Revised Penal Code. Since Gov. Cledera, as
custody or charge of such person. governor, is the jailer of the province, and Jose
- APPLICABLE also to a prisoner who helps the escape Esmeralda is the assistant provincial warden, they
of another prisoner. cannot be prosecuted for the escape of Pablo Denaque
- The offender under Art. 156 is ―any person‖. under Article 156 of the Revised Penal Code.
- OFFENDER IS A PUBLIC OFFICER who had the
prisoner in his custody or charge, he is liable for
infidelity in the custody of prisoner.

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-50
There is likewise no sufficient evidence to warrant their
prosecution under Article 223 of the Revised Penal ARTICLE 157. Evasion of Service of Sentence. — The penalty
of prisión correccional in its medium and maximum periods
Code. In order to be guilty under the aforequoted provisions
shall be imposed upon any convict who shall evade service of
of the Penal Code, it is necessary that the public officer his sentence by escaping during the term of his imprisonment
had consented to, or connived in, the escape of the by reason of final judgment. However, if such evasion or
prisoner under his custody or charge. Connivance in the escape shall have taken place by means of unlawful entry, by
escape of a prisoner on the part of the person in charge is an breaking doors, windows, grates, walls, roofs, or Ioors, or by
essential condition in the commission of the crime of using picklocks, false keys, disguise, deceit, violence or
faithlessness in the custody of the prisoner. If the public officer intimidation, or through connivance with other convicts or
employees of the penal institution, the penalty shall be prisión
charged with the duty of guarding him does not connive with
correccional in its maximum period.
the fugitive, then he has not violated the law and is not guilty
of the crime. For sure, no connivance in the escape of Evasion of service of sentence has three forms:
Pablo Denaque from the custody of the accused Eligio
Orbita can be deduced from the note of Gov. Cledera to (1) By simply leaving or escaping from the penal
Jose Esmeralda asking for five men to work in the establishment under Article 157;
guest house, it appearing that the notes does not (2) Failure to return within 48 hours after having left the
mention the names of the prisoners to be brought to penal establishment because of a calamity,
the guest house; and that it was the accused Eligio conflagration or mutiny and such calamity,
Orbita himself who picked the men to compose the conflagration or mutiny has been announced as already
passed under Article 158;
work party.
(3) Violating the condition of conditional pardon under
Article 159.

Elements:
Neither is there evidence to warrant the prosecution of
Cledera and Esmeralda under Article 224 of the Revised (a) Offender is a convict by final judgment;
Penal Code. This article punishes the public officer in whose (b) He is serving sentence which consists in the
custody or charge a prisoner has escaped by reason of his deprivation of liberty;
negligence. The negligence resulting in evasion is definite (c) He evades service of his sentence by escaping during
laxity amounting to deliberate non-performance of duty. In the the term of his imprisonment.
instant case, the respondent Judge said:
Qualifying circumstances as to penalty imposed if such
evasion or escape takes place:

(1) By means of unlawful entry (this should be ―by scaling‖

"We cannot, for the present be reconciled with the
– Reyes);
idea that the escape of Denaque was facilitated by
(2) By breaking doors, windows, gates, walls, roofs or
the Governor's or his assistant's negligence. According
floors;
to law, if there is any negligence committed, it must
(3) By using picklock, false keys, disguise, deceit, violence
be the officer who is charged with the custody and or intimidation; or
guarding of the prisoner.‖ (4) Through connivance with other convicts or employees
of the penal institution.

Tanega vs. Masakayan (1967)

We find no reason to set aside such findings.

TANEGA V. MASAKAYAN
CONCLUSION: Order issued is annulled and set aside. The
respondent Judge or any other judge acting in his stead is
GR No. L-27191, February 28, 1967, Sanchez, J.
directed to proceed with the trial of the case.

ACCUSED NEVER PLACED IN CONFINEMENT: Elements

of evasion of service of sentence are:
F. EVASION OF SERVICE OF SENTENCE

22. EVASION OF SERVICE OF SENTENCE

(1) the offender is a convict by final judgment;
Rev. Pen. Code, Art. 157
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-51
 (2) he "is serving his sentence which consists in deprivation
of liberty"; and People vs. Abilong (1948)
(3) he evades service of sentence by escaping during the
term of his sentence.
PEOPLE V. ABILONG

GR No. L-1960, November 26, 1948, Montemayor, J.

This must be so. For, by the express terms of the statute, a
convict evades "service of his sentence" by "escaping during
the term of his imprisonment by reason of final
judgment." That escape should take place while serving We agree with the Solicitor General that inasmuch as the
sentence, is emphasized by the provisions of the second Revised Penal Code was originally approved and enacted in
sentence of Article 157 which provides for a higher penalty if Spanish, the Spanish text governs (People vs. Manaba, 58
such "evasion or escape shall have taken place by means of Phil., 665, 668). It is clear that the word "imprisonment" used
unlawful entry, by breaking doors, windows, gates, walls, in the English text is a wrong or erroneous translation of the
roofs, or floors, or by using picklocks, false keys, disguise, phrase "sufriendo privacion de libertad" used in the Spanish
deceit, violence or intimidation, or through connivance with text. It is equally clear that although the Solicitor General
other convicts or employees of the penal institution, . . ." impliedly admits destierro as not constituting imprisonment,
Indeed, evasion of sentence is but another, expression of the it is a deprivation of liberty, though partial, in the sense
term "jail breaking". that as in the present case, the appellant by his
sentence of destierro was deprived of the liberty to
A dig into legal history confirms the views just expressed. The
enter the City of Manila. This view has been adopted in
Penal Code of Spain of 1870 in its Article 134 — from whence
the case of People vs. Samonte, No. 36559 (July 26, 1932; 57
Articles 92 and 93 of the present Revised Penal Code
Phil, 968) wherein this Court held, as quoted in the brief of the
originated. Note that in the present Article 93 the words
Solicitor General that "it is clear that a person under
"desde el día en que se notifique personalmente al reo la
sentence of destierro is suffering deprivation of his
sentencia firme", written in the old code, were deleted. The
liberty and escapes from the restrictions of the penalty
omission is significant. What remains reproduced in Article 93
when he enters the prohibited area." Said ruling in that
of the Revised Penal Code is solely "quebrantamiento de la
case was ratified by this Court, though, indirectly in the case of
condena". And, "quebrantamiento" or "evasion" means
People vs. Jose de Jesus, (45 Off. Gaz. Supp. to No. 9, p. 370)
escape. Reason dictates that one can escape only after
1, where it was held that one evades the service of his
he has started service of sentence. Even under the old
sentence of destierro when he enters the prohibited area
law, Viada emphasizes, where the penalty consists of
specified in the judgment of conviction, and he cannot invoke
imprisonment, prescription shall only begin to run
the provisions of the Indeterminate Sentence Law which
when he escapes from confinement.
provides that its provisions do not apply to those who shall
have escaped from confinement or evaded sentence.

We, therefore, rule that for prescription of penalty of

imprisonment imposed by final sentence to commence
CONCLUSION: we find and hold that the appellant is guilty
to run, the culprit should escape during the term of
of evasion of service of sentence under article 157 of the
such imprisonment.
Revised Penal Code (Spanish text), in that during the period of
his sentence of destierro by virtue of final judgment wherein
he was prohibited from entering the City of Manila, he entered
Adverting to the facts, we have here the case of a convict who said City. Judgment AFFIRMED.
— sentenced to imprisonment by final judgment — was
thereafter never placed in confinement. Prescription of
penalty, then, does not run in her favor.
23. EVASION OF SERVICE OF SENTENCE ON
THE OCCASION OF DISORDER,
CONFLAGRATIONS, EARTHQUAKES OR
CONCLUSION: the petition for certiorari and prohibition is
OTHER CALAMITIES
dismissed.
Rev. Pen. Code, Art. 158

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-52
ARTICLE 158. Evasion of Service of Sentence on the ―MUTINY‖ implies an organized unlawful resistance to a
Occasion of Disorders, Conflagrations, Earthquakes, or Other superior officer; a sedition; a revolt. (People vs. Padilla)
Calamities. — A convict who shall evade the service of his
sentence, by leaving the penal institution where he shall have - Thus, there is no mutiny if the prisoners disarmed the
been confined, on the occasion of disorder resulting from a guards and escaped, because the guards are not their
configuration, earthquake, explosion, or similar catastrophe, or superior officers. in such a case, the prisoners who
surrendered to a barrio lieutenant and then to the
during a mutiny in which he has not participated, shall suffer
police authorities, after slipping away from the
an increase of one-fifth of the time still remaining to be served
escapists, are not entitled to a reduction of 1/5 of
under the original sentence, which in no case shall exceed six
their original sentence.
months, if he shall fail to give himself up to the authorities
- Such prisoners could be held liable under Art. 157 for
within forty-eight hours following the issuance of a evasion of service of sentence.
proclamation by the Chief Executive announcing the passing - Here, the accused was NOT held liable for evasion of
away of such calamity. service of sentence under Art. 157, because he acted
under the influence of uncontrollable fear of an equal
Convicts who, under the circumstances mentioned in the or greater injury, the escapists having threatened to
preceding paragraph, shall give themselves up to the shoot at whoever remained in jail.
authorities within the above mentioned period of 48 hours,
shall be entitled to the deduction provided in article 98.
24. OTHER CASES OF EVASION OF SERVICE OF
Elements: SENTENCE [VIOLATION OF CONDITIONAL
PARDON]
(a) Offender is a convict by final judgment, who is confined
Rev. Pen. Code, Art. 159
in a penal institution;
(b) There is disorder, resulting from – ARTICLE 159. Other Cases of Evasion of Service of Sentence.
i. conflagration; — The penalty of prisión correccional in its minimum period
ii. Earthquake; shall be imposed upon the convict who, having been granted
iii. Explosion; conditional pardon by the Chief Executive, shall violate any of
iv. Similar catastrophe; or the conditions of such pardon. However, if the penalty
v. Mutiny in which he has not participated; remitted by the granting of such pardon be higher than six
(c) He evades the service of his sentence by leaving the years, the convict shall then suffer the unexpired portion of his
penal institution where he is confined, on the occasion original sentence.
of such disorder or during the mutiny;
(d) He fails to give himself up to the authorities within 48 Elements:
hours following the issuance of a proclamation by the
(a) Offender was a convict;
Chief Executive announcing the passing away of such
(b) He was granted a conditional pardon by the Chief
calamity.
Executive;
THE OFFENDER MUST BE A CONVICT BY FINAL JUDGMENT: (c) He violated any of the conditions of such pardon.
Although Art. 158 is silent, it is required that the convict must
Except in cases of impeachment, or as otherwise provided in
be one by final judgment, because only a convict by final
this Constitution, the President may grant reprieve,
judgment can ―evade service of his sentence.‖ commutations, and pardons, and remit fines and forfeitures,
after conviction by final judgment.
WHAT PUNISHED: It is NOT the leaving of the penal
institution, but the failure of the convict to give himself up to He shall also have the power to grant amnesty with the
the authorities within 48 hours after the proclamation concurrence of a majority of all the members of Congress
announcing the passing away of the calamity. (Sec. 19, Art. VII, 1987 Constitution)

EFFECT OF GIVING HIMSELF UP: He is entitled to a He has the specific power – ―To grant to convicted persons
reprieves or pardons, either plenary or partial, conditional or
deduction of 1/5 of the period of his sentence.
unconditional; to suspend sentence without pardon, fines, and
order the discharge of any convicted person upon parole,
- IF OFFENDER FAILS TO DO SO: he gets an increased
subject to such conditions as he may impose; and to authorize
penalty. the arrest and reincarceration of any such person who, in his
o The penalty is that the accused shall suffer judgment, shall fail to comply with the condition or conditions,
an increase of 1/5 of the time still of his pardon, parole, or suspension of sentence. (Sec. 64(i)
remaining to be served under the of the Revised Administrative Code)
original sentence, not to exceed six (6)
months. NATURE OF A CONDITIONAL PARDON – IT IS A
CONTRACT: A conditional pardon is a contract between the
Chief Executive, who grants the pardon, and the convict, who
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-53
accepts it. Since it is a contract, the pardoned convict is bound conditionally pardoned, Section 64 (i) of the Revised
to fulfill its conditions and accept all its consequences, not as Administrative Code is not afflicted with a constitutional
he chooses, but according to its strict terms. (People vs.
vice.
Pontillas)

TWO PENALTIES ARE PROVIDED FOR IN THIS

ARTICLE:
We do not believe we should depart from the clear and well
a. Prision correccional in its minimum period – if the understood rules and doctrine on this matter.
penalty remitted does not exceed 6 years. It may be emphasized that what is involved in the instant
b. The unexpired portion of his original sentence – if the
case is not the prosecution of the parolee for a subsequent
penalty remitted is higher than 6 years.
offense in the regular course of administration of the
VIOLATION OF CONDITIONAL PARDON IS A DISTINCT criminal law. What is involved is rather the ascertainment
CRIME: the violation of conditional pardon is committed in the of whether the convict has breached his undertaking
place where the subsequent offense is perpetrated, because by that he would "not again violate any of the penal
committing the subsequent offense, he thereby violates the laws of the Philippines" for purposes of reimposition
condition that ―he shall not again be found guilty or any crime upon him of the remitted portion of his original
punishable by the laws of the Philippines.‖
sentence. The consequences that we here deal with are the
OFFENDER MUST BE FOUND GUILTY OF SUBSEQUENT consequences of an ascertained breach of the conditions of
OFFENSE BEFORE HE CAN BE PROSECUTED FOR UNDER a pardon. A convict granted conditional pardon, like the
ART. 159: petitioner herein, who is recommitted must of course be
convicted by final judgment of a court of the subsequent
Torres vs. Gonzales (1987) crime or crimes with which he was charged before the
criminal penalty for such subsequent offense(s) can be
imposed upon him. Again, since Article 159 of the Revised
Penal Code defines a distinct, substantive, felony, the
TORRES V. GONZALES
parolee or convict who is regarded as having violated the
GR No. 76872, July 23, 1987, Feliciano, J. provisions thereof must be charged, prosecuted and
convicted by final judgment before he can be made to suffer
the penalty prescribed in Article 159. LLjur
Succinctly put, in proceeding against a convict who has
DOCTRINES:
been conditionally pardoned and who is alleged to
have breached the conditions of his pardon, the
Executive Department has two options:
1) The grant of pardon and the determination of the terms
(1) to proceed against him under Section 64 (i) of the
and conditions of a conditional pardon are purely
Revised Administrative Code; or
executive acts which are not subject to judicial scrutiny.
(2) to proceed against him under Article159 of the
2) The determination of the occurrence of a breach of a
Revised Penal Code which imposes the penalty
condition of a pardon, and the proper consequences of
of prision correccional, minimum period, upon a
such breach, may be either a purely executive act, not
convict who "having been granted conditional
subject to judicial scrutiny under Section 64 (i) of the
pardon by the Chief Executive, shall violate any of
Revised Administrative Code; or it may be a judicial act
the conditions of such pardon."
consisting of trial for and conviction of violation of a
conditional pardon under Article 159 of the Revised Here, the President has chosen to proceed against
Penal Code. Where the President opts to proceed under the petitioner under Section 64 (i) of the Revised
Section 64 (i) of the Revised Administrative Code, no Administrative Code. That choice is an exercise of the
judicial pronouncement of guilt of a subsequent crime is President's executive prerogative and is not subject to
necessary, much less conviction therefor by final judicial scrutiny.
judgment of a court, in order that a convict may be CONCLUSION: petition DISMISSED.
recommended for the violation of his conditional
pardon.
3) Because due process is not semper et unique judicial
process, and because the conditionally pardoned convict
had already been accorded judicial due process in his VIOLATION OF CONDITIONAL PARDON,
trial and conviction for the offense for which he was DISTINGUISHED FROM EVASION OF SERVICE OF
SENTENCE BY ESCAPING:

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-54
 ―OR WHILE SERVING THE SAME‖ → The other case where Art.
VIOLATION OF EVASION OF SERVICE OF 169 applies is when a convict by final judgment shall commit a
CONDITIONAL PARDON SENTENCE BY ESCAPING new felony while serving his sentence for the first offense.

- Hence, if the offender committed a new felony AFTER

Does not cause harm or injury An attempt at least to evade
serving the sentence for the first offense, and both
to the right of the other person the penalty inflicted by the offenses are embraced in the same title of the Code,
nor does it disturb the public courts upon criminals and he is an ordinary recidivist under Art. 14(9) of the
order; it is merely an thus defeat the purpose of Code, because he did not commit the new felony or
infringement of the terms the law of either reforming while serving the sentence for the first offense.
stipulated in the contract or punishing them for having
between the Chief Executive disturbed the public order. SECOND CRIME MUST BE A FELONY: note the use of the
word ―felony‖ to this article.
and the criminal. (Alvarez vs. Director of
Prisons) - But the FIRST CRIME FOR WHICH THE
OFFENDER IS SERVING SENTENCE NEED NOT
BE A FELONY: it makes no difference, for purposes
G. COMMISSION OF ANOTHER CRIME DURING of the effect of quasi-recidivism under Art. 160
SERVICE OF PENALTY IMPOSED FOR ANOTHER whether the crime for which an accused is serving
PREVIOUS OFFENSE sentence, at the time of the commission of the
offense charged, falls under said Code or under
25. COMMISSION OF ANOTHER CRIME special law (People vs. Peralta)
DURING SERVICE OF PENALTY IMPOSED
FOR ANOTHER PREVIOUS OFFENSE QUASI-RECIDIVISM REITERACION

Rev. Pen. Code, Art. 160

After having been convicted Requires that the offender
ARTICLE 160. Commission of Another Crime During Service by final judgment, shall against whom it is considered
of Penalty Imposed for Another Previous Offense — Penalty. — commit a new felony before shall have served out his
Besides the provisions of rule 5 of article 62, any person who beginning to serve such sentence for the prior
shall commit a felony after having been convicted by final sentence, or while serving offenses.
judgment, before beginning to serve such sentence, or while the same.
serving the same, shall be punished by the maximum period of
the penalty prescribed by law for the new felony.
People vs. Dioso (1984)
Any convict of the class referred to in this article, who is not a
habitual criminal, shall be pardoned at the age of seventy
years if he shall have already served out his original sentence,
or when he shall complete it after reaching said age, unless by PEOPLE V. DIOSO
reason of his conduct or other circumstances he shall not be
worthy of such clemency. GR No. L-38346-47, October 23, 1964, Escolin, J.

Quasi-recidivism is a special aggravating circumstance

where a person, after having been convicted by final
judgment, shall commit a new felony before beginning to serve It is thus noted that in their briefs, no attempt was made to
such sentence, or while serving the same. He shall be impugn the lower court's conclusion as to their guilt. Instead,
punished by the maximum period of the penalty prescribed by they seek attenuation of the death sentence imposed by the
law for the new felony. trial court by invoking the circumstances of voluntary surrender
and plea of guilty. We find no necessity to discuss at length
Elements:
the effects of such mitigating circumstances on the penalty
(a) Offender was already convicted by final judgment of imposed. Suffice it to say that the accused are quasi-
one offense; recidivist, having committed the crime charged while
(b) He committed a new felony before beginning to serve serving sentence for a prior offense. As such, the
such sentence or while serving the same. maximum penalty prescribed by law for the new felony
[murder] is death, regardless of the presence or
―BEFORE BEGINNING TO SERVE SUCH SENTENCE,‖ as when absence of mitigating or aggravating circumstance or
the judgment of conviction of the lower court in the first
the complete absence thereof.
offense having been affirmed by the appellate court, and his
commitment having been ordered, he committed the new
felony while being taken to the prison or jail.

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-55
But for lack of the requisite votes, the Court is constrained to defined under the Revised Penal Code.
commute the death sentence imposed on each of the accused
to reclusion perpetua.

The second paragraph of Section 1 of P.D. No. 1866 does not

warrant and support a conclusion that it intended to treat
"illegal possession and resultant killing" (emphasis supplied)
H. ILLEGAL POSSESSION OF FIREARMS "as a single and integrated offense" of illegal possession with
homicide or murder.
26. Pres. Decree No. 1866 (1983)

Rep. Act No. 8294 (1997)

- It does not use the clause as a result or on the occasion
Rep. Act No. 9516 (2008)
of to evince an intention to create a single integrated
Rep. Act No. 10591 (2013) crime.
- The unequivocal intent of the second paragraph of
People vs. Quijada (1996) Section 1 of P.D. No. 1866 is to respect and preserve
homicide or murder as a distinct offense penalized
under the Revised Penal Code and to increase the
penalty for illegal possession of firearm where such a
PEOPLE V. QUIJADA firearm is used in killing a person.
- Its clear language yields no intention of the lawmaker to
GR No. 115008-09, July 24, 1996, Davide, Jr., J.
repeal or modify, pro tanto, Articles 248 and 249 of the
Revised Penal Code, in such a way that if an unlicensed
firearm is used in the commission of homicide or
DOCTRINE: one who kills another with the use of an murder, either of these crimes, as the case may be,
unlicensed firearm commits two separate offenses of: would only serve to aggravate the offense of illegal
possession of firearm and would not anymore be
separately punished.

(1) Either homicide or murder under the Revised Penal

Code, and
(2) Aggravated illegal possession of firearm under the Neither is the second paragraph of Section 1 meant to punish
second paragraph of Section 1 of P.D. No. 1866. homicide or murder with death if either crime is committed
with the use of an unlicensed firearm, i.e., to consider such
use merely as a qualifying circumstance and not as an offense.

PEOPLE V. CALING: The gravamen of the offense in its

simplest form is, basically, the fact of possession of a firearm
without license. The crime may be denominated simple illegal - That could not have been the intention of the lawmaker
possession, to distinguish it from its aggravated form. It is because the term "penalty" in the subject
aggravated if the unlicensed firearm is used in the commission provision is obviously meant to be the penalty for
of a homicide or murder under the Revised Penal Code. But illegal possession of firearm and not the penalty for
the homicide or murder is not absorbed in the crime of homicide or murder.
possession of an unlicensed firearm; neither is the
latter absorbed in the former. There are two distinct
crimes that are here spoken of. One is unlawful possession of
AS IN THE CASE: In light of the doctrine enunciated
a firearm, which may be either simple or aggravated, defined
in People vs. Tac-an, and reiterated in People vs.
and punished respectively by the first and second paragraphs
Tiozon, People vs. Caling, People vs. Deunida, People vs.
of Section 1 of PD 1866. The other is homicide or murder,
Tiongco, People vs. Fernandez, and People vs. Somooc, that
committed with the use of an unlicensed firearm. The mere
one who kills another with the use of an unlicensed firearm
possession of a firearm without legal authority consummates
commits two separate offenses of (1) either homicide or
the crime under P.D. 1866, and the liability for illegal
murder under the Revised Penal Code, and (2) aggravated
possession is made heavier by the firearm's use in a killing.
illegal possession of firearm under the second paragraph of
The killing, whether homicide or murder, is obviously distinct
Section 1 of P.D. 1866, we sustain the decision of the trial
from the act of possession, and is separately punished and
court finding the appellant guilty of two separate offenses of

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-56
murder in Criminal Case No. 8178 and of aggravated illegal in the murder or homicide and no longer as a separate
possession of firearm under the second paragraph of Section 1 offense. Furthermore, the penalty for illegal possession of
of P.D. No. 1866, we sustain the decision of the trial court firearms shall be imposed provided that no other crime is
finding the appellant guilty of two separate offenses of murder committed. In other words, where murder or homicide was
in Criminal Case No. 8178 and of aggravated illegal possession committed, the penalty for illegal possession of firearms is no
of firearm in Criminal Case No. 8179. Although Tac- longer imposable since it becomes merely a special
an and Tiozon relate more to the issue of whether there is a aggravating circumstance.
violation of the constitutional proscription against double
It bears stressing, however, that the dismissal of the present
jeopardy if an accused is prosecuted for homicide or murder
case for illegal possession of firearm should not be
and for aggravated illegal possession of firearm, they at the
misinterpreted to mean that there can no longer be any
same time laid down the rule that these are separate offenses,
prosecution for the offense of illegal possession of firearms. In
with the first punished under the Revised Penal Code and the
general, all pending cases involving illegal possession of
second under a special law; hence, the constitutional bar
firearms should continue to be prosecuted and tried if no other
against double jeopardy will not apply.
crimes expressly provided in R.A. No. 8294 are involved
DOUBLE JEOPARDY NOT APPLICABLE: We observed (murder or homicide, under Section 1, and rebellion,
in Tac-an: It is elementary that the constitutional right against insurrection, sedition or attempted coup d' etat, under Section
double jeopardy protects one against a second or later 3).
prosecution for the same offense, and that when the
Pursuant to Article 22 of the Revised Penal Code, where the
subsequent information charges another and different offense,
new law is favorable to the accused, it has to be applied
although arising from the same act or set of acts, there is no
retroactively. Thus, insofar as it spares accused-appellant
prohibited double jeopardy. In the case at bar, it appears to us
a separate conviction for illegal possession of
quite clear that the offense charged in Criminal Case No. 4007
firearms, Republic Act No. 8294 has to be given
is that of unlawful possession of an unlicensed firearm
retroactive application in Criminal Case No. 13100-R.
penalized under a special statute, while the offense charged in
Criminal Case No. 4012 was that of murder punished under the On the matter of the aggravating circumstance of "use of
Revised Penal Code. It would appear self-evident that these unlicensed firearm" in the commission of murder or homicide,
two (2) offenses in themselves are quite different one from the the trial court erred in appreciating the same to qualify
other, such that in principle, the subsequent filing of Criminal to death the penalty for the murder committed by
Case No. 4012 is not to be regarded as having placed accused-appellant. It should be noted that at the time
appellant in a prohibited second jeopardy. accused-appellant perpetrated the offense, the
unlicensed character of a firearm used in taking the life
CONCLUSION: judgment AFFIRMED.
of another was not yet an aggravating circumstance in
homicide or murder; to wit:

"Neither is the second paragraph of

Section 1 meant to punish homicide or
People vs. Ringor, Jr. (1999)
murder with death if either crime is
committed with the use of an unlicensed
firearm, i.e., to consider such use merely
PEOPLE VS. RINGOR, JR as a qualifying circumstance and not as an
offense. That could not have been the
GR No. 123918, December 9, 1999, PURISIMA, J. intention of the lawmaker because the
term 'penalty' in the subject provision is
obviously meant to be the penalty for
illegal possession of firearm and not the
With respect to the conviction of accused-appellant for illegal
penalty for homicide or murder. We
possession of firearms under P.D. No. 1866, it was held in the
explicitly stated in Tac-an:
case of People vs. Molina and reiterated in the recent case
of People vs. Ronaldo Valdez, that in cases where murder There is no law which renders the
or homicide is committed with the use of an unlicensed use of an unlicensed firearm as an
firearm, there can be no separate conviction for the crime of aggravating circumstance
illegal possession of firearms under P.D. No. 1866 in view of in homicide or murder. Under an
the amendments introduced by Republic Act No. 8294. information charging homicide or
Thereunder, the use of unlicensed firearm in murder or murder, the fact that the death
homicide is simply considered as an aggravating circumstance weapon was an unlicensed

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-57
 firearm cannot be used to increase
the penalty for the second offense of
homicide or murder to
death (or reclusion perpetua under
the 1987 Constitution). The essential point
is that the unlicensed character or
condition of the instrument used in
destroying human life or committing some
other crime, is not included in the
inventory of aggravating circumstances set
out in Article 14 of the Revised Penal
Code.

A law may, of course, be enacted

making the use of an unlicensed
firearm as a qualifying
circumstance.' (Emphasis supplied)

Thus, before R.A. No. 8294 (which took effect on July 6, 1997)
made the use of unlicensed firearm as an aggravating
circumstance in murder or homicide, the penalty for the
murder committed by accused-appellant on June 23, 1994 was
not death, as erroneously imposed by the trial court. There
was yet no such aggravating circumstance of use of
unlicensed firearm to raise the penalty for murder
from reclusion perpetua to death, at the time of
commission of the crime.

The amendatory law making the "use of an unlicensed firearm"

as an aggravating circumstance in murder or homicide, cannot
be applied here because the said provision of R.A. No. 8294 is
not favorable to accused-appellant, lest it becomes an ex post
facto law.

CONCLUSION: the decision in Criminal Case No. 13102-R is

AFFIRMED with the modification that accused-appellant
Augusto Loreto Ringor, Jr. is hereby sentenced to suffer the
penalty of reclusion perpetua. It is understood that the civil
liabilities imposed below are UPHELD. Criminal Case No.
13100-R instituted pursuant to Presidential Decree No. 1866 is
DISMISSED.

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-58
 Title Three
CRIMES AGAINST PUBLIC ORDER
CHAPTER I - REBELLION, SEDITION AND DISLOYALTY

REBELLION AND INSURRECTION COUP D’ETAT SEDITION

CLASSIFICATION

Crime against public order.

ESSENCE OF THE CRIME

REBELLION: The essence is a swift attack against the government, its There is public uprising, BUT It is sufficient that the public
military camps or installations, communication network, uprising be tumultuous.
Rising publicly and taking up arms against the public facilities and utilities essential to the continued
Government is the very element of rebellion. exercise of governmental powers.

Taking up arms is not necessary.

INSURRECTION:

A movement seeking to effect some change of minor

importance or to prevent the exercise of governmental
authority with respect to particular matters or subjects.

ELEMENTS

c. There is a public uprising and taking arms against the a. (COMMITTED BY WHOM) Offender is a person or d. Offenders rise publicly and tumultuously;
government; persons belonging to the military or police or holding any e. Offenders employ force, intimidation, or other means
d. The purpose of the uprising or movement is: public office or employment; outside of legal methods;
iii. To remove from the allegiance to the f. Purpose is to attain any of the following objects:
government or its laws the Philippine b. (HOW) It is committed by means of a swift attack vi. To prevent the promulgation or execution of
territory or any part thereof, or any body of accompanied by violence, intimidation, threat, strategy or any law or the holding of any popular
land, naval, or other armed forces; or stealth; election;
iv. To deprive the Chief Executive or Congress, vii. To prevent the national government or any
c. (AGAINST WHOM COMMITTED) The attack is
wholly or partially, of any of their powers or provincial or municipal government or any
directed against the duly constituted authorities of the
prerogatives. public officer from exercising its or his
Republic of the Philippines, or any military camp or
functions, or prevent the execution of an
installation, communication networks, public utilities or
administrative order;
other facilities needed for the exercise and continued
viii. To inflict any act of hate or revenge upon
possession of power;
the person or property of any public officer
or employee;
d. (PURPOSE) The purpose of the attack is to seize or
ix. To commit, for any political or social end,

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-59
 diminish state power. any act of hate or revenge against private
persons or any social classes;
x. To despoil for any political or social end, any
person, municipality or province, or the
national government of all its property or
any part thereof

PURPOSE

i. To remove from the allegiance to the government or its Seize or diminish State power. Purposes mentioned in Article. 139.
laws the Philippine territory or any part thereof, or any
body of land, naval, or other armed forces; or

Criminal objective is to destabilize, immobilize or paralyze Primary purpose is to disturb public peace, which may be
the existing Government. political or social.
ii. To deprive the Chief Executive or Congress, wholly or
partially, of any of their powers or prerogatives.

The purpose is always political.

Criminal objective is to overthrow the Government and to

establish their own.

MANNER OF COMMISSION

There is a public uprising and taking arms against the Swift attack accomplished by violence, intimidation, Offenders rise publicly and tumultuously; and employ
government, and makes use of force and violence. threat, strategy or stealth. force, intimidation, or other means outside of legal
methods.

TIME OF COMMISSION

In times of peace.

PLACE OF COMMISSION

Only in the Philippines.

PERSON COMMITTING

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-60
Any person. Requires as a principal offender a member of the AFP, There is no distinction as to who may commit; a private
PNP, or a public officer with or without civilian support. individual may commit the offense.

NUMBER OF OFFENDERS

It involves a multitude of people. Committed singly or collectively. Tumultuous - If caused by more than three persons who
are armed or provided with the means of violence.

Who are liable?

a. The leader of the sedition;

b. Other person participating in the sedition

AGAINST WHOM COMMITTED

Directed against the Government. Committed against the government, its military camps or Disturbance and violation of public peace.
installations, communication network, public facilities and
utilities essential to the continued exercise of
governmental powers.

PENALTY

Persons liable for rebellion, insurrection or coup d’état: Art. 140. Penalty for sedition — The leader of
sedition shall suffer the penalty of prisión mayorin its
c. The leaders: (RECLUSION PERPETUA) minimum period and fine not exceeding Two million pesos
iii. Any person who promotes, maintains or heads a rebellion or insurrection; or (₱2,000,000).
iv. Any person who leads, directs or commands others to undertake a coup d‘état;

d. The participants:
v. Any person who participates or executes the commands of others in rebellion or insurrection; Other persons participating therein shall suffer the
(RECLUSION TEMPORAL) penalty of prisión correccional in its maximum period and
vi. Any person in the government service who participates or executes directions or commands of a fine not exceeding One million pesos (₱1,000,000).
others in undertaking a coup d‘état; (RECLUSION TEMPORAL IN ITS MAXIMUM PERIOD)
vii. Any person not in the government service who participates, supports, finances, abets or aids in
undertaking a coup d‘état. (PRISION MAYOR IN ITS MAXIMUM PERIOD)
viii. If under the command of unknown leaders, any person who directed the others, spoke for them,
signed receipts and other documents issued in their name on behalf of the rebels shall be deemed a
leader.

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-61
 ARTICLE 136 - CONSPIRACY AND PROPOSAL TO COMMIT COUP D’ ÉTAT, ARTICLE 141 - CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT SEDITION
REBELLION OR INSURRECTION

Mode 1: Conspiracy to commit coup d‘état, rebellion or insurrection Elements:

Elements: c. Two or more persons come to an agreement and a decision to rise publicly and
tumultuously to attain any of the objects of sedition;
c. Two or more persons come to an agreement to swiftly attack or to rise publicly d. They decide to commit it.
and take arms against the Government for any of the purposes of rebellion or
insurrection;
d. They decide to commit it. Note: There is no proposal to commit sedition. If the proposal is accepted, it is
conspiracy.

Mode 2: Proposal to commit coup d‘état, rebellion or insurrection

Elements:

c. A person has decided to swiftly attack or to rise publicly and take arms against
the Government for any of the purposes of rebellion or insurrection;
d. Such person proposes its execution to some other person or persons

PENALTY

ART. 136. The conspiracy and proposal to commit coup d’etat shall be punished Art. 141. Conspiracy to commit sedition — Persons conspiring to commit the crime
by prisión mayor in its minimum period and a fine which shall not exceed One million of sedition shall be punished by prisión correccional in its medium period and a fine not
pesos (₱1,000,000). exceeindg Four hundred thousand pesos (₱400,000).

The conspiracy and proposal to commit rebellion or insurrection shall be

punished respectively, by prisión correccional in its maximum period and a fine which
shall not exceed One million pesos (₱1,000,000) and by prisión correccional in its
medium period and a fine not exceeding Four hundred thousand pesos (₱400,000).

PROPOSAL TO COMMIT REBELLION V. INCITING

TO COMMIT REBELLION
ARTICLE 142 – INCITING TO SEDITION
AS TO ACTS PENALIZED

The offender induces another to commit rebellion. Mode1. Inciting others to the accomplishment of any of
Rebellion should not be actually committed by the the acts which constitute sedition by means of speeches,
persons to whom it is proposed or who are incited. proclamations, writings, emblems, etc.

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-62
Otherwise, they become principals by inducement in the Elements:
crime of rebellion.
c. Offender does not take direct part in the crime of
sedition;
d. He incites others to the accomplishment of any
of the acts which constitute sedition by means of
speeches, proclamations, writings, emblems,
cartoons, banners, or other representations
tending towards the same end.

Mode 2. Uttering seditious words or speeches which tend

to disturb the public peace;

Mode 3. Writing, publishing, or circulating scurrilous

libels against the government or any of the duly
constituted authorities thereof, which tend to disturb the
public peace.

Elements:

c. Offender does not take part in the crime of

sedition.
d. He uttered words or speeches and writing,
publishing or circulating scurrilous libels and that
v. Tend to disturb or obstruct any lawful
officer in conducting the functions of his
office;
vi. Tend to instigate others to cabal and
meet together for unlawful purposes;
vii. Suggest or incite rebellious conspiracies
or riots; or
viii. Lead or tend to stir up the people
against the lawful authorities or to
disturb the peace of the community, the
safety and order of the government

PENALTY

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-63
 Art. 142. Inciting to sedition.— The penalty of prisión
correccional in its maximum period and a fine not
exceeding Four hundred thousand pesos (₱400,000) xxx

PROPOSAL TO COMMIT INCITING TO COMMIT

REBELLION REBELLION

OFFENDERS DECISION TO COMMIT REBELLION

The person who proposes There is no need that the

has decided to commit offender has decided to
rebellion. commit rebellion.

MEANS EMPLOYED

The person who proposes The act of inciting is done

the execution of the crime publicly.
uses secret means.

PENALTY

Article 138. Inciting a

rebellion or
insurrection. - The
penalty of prision mayor in
its minimum period xxx.

CHAPTER II - CRIMES AGAINST POPULAR REPRESENTATION

ARTICLE 143 - ACTS TENDING TO

PREVENT THE MEETING OF THE
CONGRESS OF THE PHILIPPINES ARTICLE 144 - DISTURBANCE OF ARTICLE 145 - VIOLATION OF PARLIAMENTARY IMMUNITY
AND SIMILAR BODIES PROCEEDINGS

ELEMENTS

c. There is a projected or actual c. There is a meeting of Congress or Mode 1: Using force, intimidation, threats, or frauds to prevent any member of Congress
meeting of Congress or any of its any of its committees or from attending the meetings of Congress or of any of its committees or subcommittees,
committees or subcommittees, subcommittees, constitutional constitutional commissions or committees or divisions thereof, or from expressing his
constitutional committees or commissions or committees or opinion or casting his vote;
divisions thereof, or of any divisions thereof, or of any

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-64
 provincial board or city or municipal provincial board or city or municipal
council or board; council or board;
d. Offender, who may be any person, d. Offender does any of the following Elements:
prevents such meetings by force or acts:
c. Offender uses force, intimidation, threats or fraud;
fraud. iii. He disturbs any of such
d. The purpose of the offender is to prevent any member of Congress from:
meetings;
iv. Attending the meetings of the Congress or of any of its committees or
iv. He behaves while in the
Nobody has the right to dissolve by constitutional commissions;
presence of any such
means of violence the meeting of a v. Expressing his opinion; or
bodies in such a manner
municipal council, under the pretext that vi. Casting his vote.
as to interrupt its
said meeting is legally defective, when proceedings or to impair
the defect is not manifest, and requires the respect due it.
Note: Offender in mode 1 is any person
an investigation before its existence can
be determined. Where a municipal
council is holding a meeting, a Complaint may be filed by a member of
presumption arises that the meeting is the legislative body. One who disturbs Mode 2: Arresting or searching any member thereof while Congress is in regular or
not legally defective [People vs. Alipit may also be punished for contempt by special session, except in case such member has committed a crime punishable under the
and Alemus] Congress. Code by a penalty higher than prision mayor.

Elements:

e. Offender is a public officer of employee;

f. He arrests or searches any member of Congress;
g. Congress, at the time of arrest or search, is in regular or special session;
h. The member arrested or searched has not committed a crime punishable under
the Code by a penalty higher than prision mayor.

Parliamentary immunity does not protect members of Congress from responsibility in

accordance with the disciplinary rules of Congress itself.

Members of Congress cannot be arrested for offenses punishable by a penalty less than
prision mayor (6 years and 1 day to 12 years), while Congress is in session. They can be
prosecuted after Congress adjourns. [1987 Constitution]

To be consistent with the 1987 Constitution, the phrase by ―a penalty higher than prision

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-65
 mayor‖ in Article 145 should be amended to read ―by the penalty of prision mayor or
higher.‖ [Reyes, 2012]

PENALTY

Art. 143. Acts tending to prevent Art. 144. Disturbance of Article 145. Violation of parliamentary immunity.
the meeting of Congress and similar proceedings — The penalty of arresto
bodies — The penalty of prisión mayor or a fine from Forty thousand
correccional or a fine ranging from Forty pesos (₱40,000) to Two hundred
Mode 1 - The penalty of prision mayor.
thousand pesos (₱40,000) to Four thousand pesos (₱200,000) xxx
hundred thousand pesos (₱400,000), or
both xxx
Mode 2 - Prision correccional shall be imposed, except in case such member has
committed a crime punishable under this Code by a penalty higher than prision mayor.

CHAPTER III – ILLEGAL ASSEMBLIES AND ASSOCIATIONS

ARTICLE 146 - ILLEGAL ASSEMBLIES ARTICLE 147 - ILLEGAL ASSOCIATIONS

GRAVAMEN OF THE OFFENSE

There must be an actual meeting or assembly Actual meeting not necessary

Mere gathering for the unlawful purpose relating to a crime under the RPC. The forming of an organization, corporation or association, for the purpose of criminal
activities prohibited by the RPC or by special laws against public morals or any act
prejudicial to public welfare.

PERSONS LIABLE

Persons liable: (1) organizers or leaders of the meeting; (2) persons present at the Persons liable: (1) founders, directors, president (2)members
meeting

ELEMENTS

Mode 1: Any meeting attended by armed persons for the purpose of committing any of a. Associations totally or partially organized for the purpose of committing any of the
the crimes punishable under the Code; crimes punishable under the Code;

Elements: b. Associations totally or partially organized for some purpose contrary to public morals.

g. There is a meeting, a gathering or group of persons, whether in a fixed place

or moving;

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-66
 h. The meeting is attended by armed persons;
i. The purpose of the meeting is to commit any of the crimes punishable under
the Code.

Mode 2: Any meeting in which the audience, whether armed or not, is incited to the
commission of the crime of treason, rebellion or insurrection, sedition, or assault upon
person in authority or his agents.

Elements:

e. There is a meeting, a gathering or group of persons, whether in a fixed place

or moving;
f. The audience, whether armed or not, is incited to the commission of the crime
of treason, rebellion or insurrection, sedition or direct assault.

Presumptions if a person carried an unlicensed firearm:

e. The purpose of the meeting insofar as he is concerned is to commit acts

punishable under the RPC
f. He is considered a leader or organizer of the meeting.

Note: Not all persons present at the meeting of the first form of illegal assembly must
be armed.

PENALTY

Article 146. Illegal assemblies. Art. 147. Illegal associations.

The organizer or leaders of the meeting – The penalty of prision correccional in its The organizer or leaders of the meeting - The penalty of prisión correccional in its
maximum period to prision mayor in its medium period minimum and medium periods and a fine not exceeding Two hundred thousand pesos
(₱200,000)

Persons merely present at the meeting, who must have a common intent to
commit the felony of illegal assembly – shall suffer the penalty of arresto mayor, Mere members said associations - shall suffer the penalty of arresto mayor.
unless they are armed, in which case the penalty shall be prision correccional.

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-67
 CHAPTER IV - ASSAULT UPON, AND RESISTANCE AND DISOBEDIENCE TO, PERSONS IN AUTHORITY AND THEIR AGENTS

ARTICLE 203. WHO ARE PUBLIC OFFICERS ARTICLE 152. PERSONS IN AUTHORITY ARTICLE 152. AGENTS OF A PERSON IN
AUTHORITY

DEFINITION

Any person who takes part in the performance of public Any person directly vested with jurisdiction, whether as Any person who, by direct provision of law or by
functions in the government. an individual or as a member of some court or appointment by competent authority is charged with the
governmental corporation, board or commission. maintenance of public order and the protection and
security of life and property.

―Directly vested with jurisdiction‖ - the power or

authority to govern and execute the laws.

ARTICLE 150 - DISOBEDIENCE TO

SUMMONS ISSUED BY CONGRESS,
ITS COMMITTEES OR ARTICLE 151 - RESISTANCE AND
SUBCOMMITTEES, BY THE DISOBEDIENCE TO A PERSON IN
CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSIONS, AUTHORITY OR THE AGENTS OF SUCH
ITS COMMITTEES, PERSONS
SUBCOMMITTEES OR DIVISIONS
ARTICLE 148 - DIRECT ASSAULT ARTICLE 149 - INDIRECT
ASSAULT

ELEMENTS

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-68
Mode 1. Without public uprising, by employing a. A person in authority HOW COMITTED? Mode 1: Resistance and serious disobedience
force or intimidation for the attainment of any of or his agent is the
the purposes enumerated in defining the crimes victim of any of the Elements:
of rebellion and sedition; forms of direct assault
a. By refusing, without legal a. A person in authority or his agent is
Elements: defined in Article 148;
excuse, to obey summons of engaged in the performance of
b. A person comes to the
a. Offender employs force or intimidation; Congress, its special or official duty or gives a lawful order to
aid of such authority
b. The aim of the offender is to attain any standing committees and the offender;
or his agent;
of the purposes of the crime of rebellion subcommittees, the b. Offender resists or seriously disobeys
c. Offender makes use of
or any of the objects of the crime of Constitutional Commissions such person in authority or his agent;
force or intimidation
sedition; and its committees, c. The act of the offender is not
upon such person
c. There is no public uprising. subcommittees or divisions, or included in the provision of Articles
coming to the aid of
by any commission or 148, 149 and 150.
the authority or his
committee chairman or
agent.
member authorized to
Mode 2. Without public uprising, by attacking, by summon witnesses;
employing force or by seriously intimidating or by Mode 2: Simple disobedience
b. By refusing to be sworn or
seriously resisting any person in authority or any Indirect assault can only be placed under affirmation while
Elements:
of his agents, while engaged in the performance committed when a direct being before such legislative or
of official duties, or on occasion of such assault is also committed. constitutional body or official; a. An agent of a person in authority is
performance. Elements: c. By refusing to answer any engaged in the performance of
legal inquiry or to produce any official duty or gives a lawful order to
a. Offender makes an attack, employs
books, papers, documents, or the offender;
force, makes a serious intimidation, or Article 152 clothes any person
records in his possession, b. Offender disobeys such agent of a
makes a serious resistance; who comes to the aid of a
when required by them to do person in authority;
b. The person assaulted is a person in person in authority with the
so in the exercise of their c. Such disobedience is not of a serious
authority or his agent; fiction of an agent of a person
functions; nature.
c. At the time of the assault, the person in in authority.
d. By restraining another from
authority or his agent is engaged in the
attending as a witness in such
actual performance of official duties, or Any assault on him on the
legislative or constitutional
that he is assaulted by reason of the occasion of his aiding a person
body; SERIOUS DISOBEDIENCE V. SIMPLE
past performance of official duties; in authority or his agent is
e. By inducing disobedience to a DISOBEDINCE
d. Offender knows that the one he is indirect assault.
summons or refusal to be
assaulting is a person in authority or his SERIOUS SIMPLE
sworn by any such body or
agent in the exercise of his duties. DISOBEDIENCE DISOBEDINCE
official.
e. There is no public uprising.
The accused must In simple
have knowledge that disobedience, the
the person giving the offended party
Note: The first form of direct assault is order is a peace
tantamount to rebellion or sedition, except that officer. must be only an
agent of a person
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-69
there is no public uprising. in authority.

The disobedience
contemplated
QUALIFIED DIRECT ASSAULT consists in the failure The order must be
or refusal to obey a lawful. The
a. When the assault is committed with a
direct order
weapon; disobedience
b. When the offender is a public officer or from the authority or should not be of a
employee; or his agent. serious nature.
c. When the offender lays hands upon a
person in authority.
PENALTY

DIRECT ASSAULT Prisión correccional in its Arresto mayor or a fine ranging from SERIOUS DISOBEDIENCE
minimum and medium periods Forty thousand pesos (₱40,000) to Two
Prisión correccional in its medium and maximum and a fine not exceeding One hundred thousand pesos (₱200,000), or Arresto mayor and a fine not exceeding One
periods and a fine not exceeding Two hundred hundred thousand (₱100,000). both. hundred thousand pesos (₱100,000).
thousand pesos (₱200,000).

SIMPLE DISOBEDINCE
QUALIFIED FORM
Arresto menor or a fine ranging from Two
Prisión correccional in its minimum period and a thousand pesos (₱2,000) to Twenty thousand
fine not exceeding One hundred thousand pesos pesos (₱20,000).
(₱100,000).

DIRECT ASSULT V. SERIOUS

DISOBEDINCE

DIRECT ASSULT SERIOUS

DISOBEDINCE

WHEN COMMITTED

Person in authority or Person in authority or

his agent must be his agent must be in
engaged in the actual performance of
his duties
performance of
official duties or he is
assaulted by reason

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-70
 of the past
performance of
official duties

FORCE EMPLOYED

Force employed is Use of force is not so

serious as there is a serious as there is no
manifest intent to manifest intent to
defy the law and its defy the law and its
enforcers. enforcers

DELIBERATE FORCE

Attack or employment Attack or employment

of force is deliberate. of force is not
deliberate.

HOW COMMITTED

Committed in four Committed only by

ways (see Art. 148, resisting or seriously

Mode 2 above) disobeying a person
in authority or his
agent

CHAPTER V - PUBLIC DISORDERS

ARTICLE 153 - TUMULTS AND OTHER DISTURBANCES OF PUBLIC ORDER

PUNISHABLE ACTS

Mode 1 - Causing any serious disturbance in a public place, office or establishment;

Mode 2 - Interrupting or disturbing performances, functions or gatherings, or peaceful meetings, if the act is not included in Arts. 131 and 132;

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-71
Mode 3 - Making any outcry tending to incite rebellion or sedition in any meeting, association or public place;

Mode 4 - Displaying placards or emblems which provoke a disturbance of public order in such place;

Mode 5 - Burying with pomp the body of a person who has been legally executed.

PENALTY

Mode 1 and 2

Arresto mayor in its medium period to prisión correccional in its minimum period and a fine not exceeding Two hundred thousand pesos (₱200,000).

Note: The penalty next higher in degree shall be imposed upon persons causing any disturbance or interruption of a tumultuous character.

Mode 3 and 4

Arresto mayor.

Mode 5

Arresto mayor and a fine not to exceed Forty thousand pesos (₱40,000).

INCITING TO SEDITION OR REBELLION PUBLIC DISORDER

MANNER OF COMMISSION

It is necessary that the offender should have done the act with the idea aforethought The outcry is more or less unconscious outburst which, although rebellious or seditious
of inducing his hearers or readers to commit the crime of rebellion or sedition. in nature, is not intentionally calculated to induce others to commit rebellion or
sedition.

TREATMENT OF THE MEETING

At the outset, the meeting is unlawful. At the outset, the meeting is lawful but becomes unlawful after the outburst described
above.

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-72
 ARTICLE 155. ALARMS AND SCANDALS ARTICLE 254. DISCHARGE OF FIREARM

CLASSIFICATION

Crimes against public order. Crimes against persons.

ACTS PUNISHED ELEMENTS

a. Discharging any firearm, rocket, firecracker, or other explosive within any a. Offender discharges a firearm against or at another person.
town or public place, calculated to cause (which produces) alarm or danger; b. Offender has no intention to kill that person.
b. Instigating or taking an active part in any charivari or other disorderly meeting
offensive to another or prejudicial to public tranquility;
c. Disturbing the public peace while wandering about at night or while engaged
in any other nocturnal amusements;
d. Causing any disturbances or scandal in public places while intoxicated or
otherwise, provided Art. 153 is not applicable.
GRAVAMEN OF THE OFFENSE

Calculated to cause alarm or danger to the public. Act of shooting another without intent to kill.

SEVERITY

Light felony. Less grave felony.

PLACE OF COMMISSION

Town or public place. Anywhere.

PENALTY

Arresto menor or a fine not exceeding Forty thousand pesos (₱40,000). Prision correccional in its minimum and medium periods, unless the facts of the case
are such that the act can be held to constitute frustrated or attempted parricide,
murder, homicide or any other crime for which a higher penalty is prescribed by any of
the articles of this Code.

VIOLATION OF CONDITIONAL PARDON EVASION OF SERVICE OF SENTENCE

An infringement of the stipulated terms in conditional pardon. Defeats the purpose of the law of either reforming or punishing the offender.

Does not affect public order. Disturbs public order.

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-73
 DELIVERING PRISONERS FROM JAIL INFEDELITY IN THE CUSTODY OF PRISONERS

OFFENDER

Any person who is not the custodian of the prisoner. Public officer who had the prisoner in his custody or charge who was in connivance
with the prisoner in the latter‘s escape.

CLASS OF PERSON IN CUSTODY

May be a convict or a detainee.

SUMMARY OF INTERCONNECTION AMONG ARTS. 156-158 AND 223-225

DELIVERY OF PRISONER FROM JAIL EVASION OF SENTENCE INFIDELITY IN THE CUSTODY OF PRISONER

PERSONS LIABLE

Any person who is not the custodian of the prisoner. A prisoner in confinement by final judgment. Public officer who had the prisoner in his custody or
charge who was in connivance with the prisoner in the
latter‘s escape.

Detention prisoner if he participated in the plan to make A pardonee violating the conditions of his pardon. A public officer-custodian of the prisoner whose
him escape or at least acquiesced thereto. negligence caused the evasion. (Art. 224)

Convict whose conviction is not yet final or on appeal Convict sentenced to destierro who entered the Private person to whom the custody of the prisoner was
under the same condition. prohibited area. confided, who consented, connived, or was negligent,
causing the evasion. (Art. 225)

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-74
TITLE IV- CRIMES AGAINST THE PUBLIC INTEREST (10) Article 186 – Monopolies and Combinations in
Restraint of Trade;
(11) Article 187 – Importation and Disposition of Falsely
The following are the crimes against public interest: 1 Marked Articles or Merchandise Made of Gold, Silver,
or other Precious Metals or their Alloy
Acts of Counterfeiting

(1) Article 162 - Using Forged Signature or Counterfeit Forgeries

Seal or Stamp;
(2) Article 161 - Counterfeiting the Great Seal of the
Government of the Philippine Islands, Forging the Forging the seal of the Government of the Philippine Islands,
Signature or Stamp of the Chief Executive; the signature or stamp of the Chief Executive
(3) Article 164 - Mutilation of Coins;
(4) Article 163 - Making and Importing and Uttering False
Coins; Article 161. Counterfeiting the great seal of the Government of
(5) Article 165 - Selling of False or Mutilated Coin, the Philippine Islands, forging the signature or stamp of the
Without Connivance; Chief Executive. - The penalty of reclusion temporal shall be
(6) Article 167 - Counterfeiting, Importing, and Uttering imposed upon any person who shall forge the Great Seal of the
Instruments Not Payable to Bearer Government of the Philippine Islands or the signature or stamp
(7) Article 166 - Forging Treasury or Bank Notes or Other of the Chief Executive.
Documents Payable to Bearer; Importing and Uttering
Such False or Forged Notes and Documents Q: What are the acts punished?
A: Forging of:
Acts of Forgery (1) The Great Seal of the Government of the Philippines;
(2) The signature of the President; and
(1) Article 168 - Illegal Possession and Use of False (3) The stamp of the President.
Treasury or Bank Notes and Other Instruments of
Credit; NOTE: Intent to use is necessary. Actual use, however, is not
(2) Article 169 - How Forgery is Committed required, as long as the forger intended to use it.

Acts of Falsification The Great Seal

(1) Article 170 - Falsification of Legislative Documents; Q: Who has custody and use of the Great Seal?
(2) Article 171 - Falsification by Public Officer, Employee
or Notary or Ecclesiastical Minister; A: The Great Seal shall be and shall remain in the custody of
(3) Article 172 - Falsification by Private Individual and the President of the Philippines, and shall be affixed to or
Use of Falsified Documents; placed upon all commissions signed by him, and upon such
(4) Article 173 - Falsification of Wireless, Cable, other official documents and papers of the Republic of the
Telegraph and Telephone Messages, and Use of Said Philippines as may by law be provided, or as may be required
Falsified Messages; by custom and usage in the discretion of the President of the
(5) Article 175 - Using False Certificates Philippines.
(6) Article 174 - False Medical Certificates, False
Certificates of Merits or Service, etc.; When in a public document, the signature of the President is
(7) Article 176 - Manufacturing and Possession of forged, the crime is forging the signature of the Chief
Instruments or Implements for Falsification Executive, not falsification of public document.

Other Falsities Q: What is the penalty imposed?

A: Reclusion temporal
(1) Article 177 - Usurpation of Authority or Official
Functions Article 162. Using forged signature or counterfeit seal or
(2) Article 179 - Illegal Use of Uniforms and Insignia; stamp. - The penalty of prision mayor shall be imposed upon
(3) Article 178 - Using Fictitious and Concealing True any person who shall knowingly make use of the counterfeit
Name; seal or forged signature or stamp mentioned in the preceding
(4) Article 180 - False Testimony Against a Defendant; article.
(5) Article 181 - False Testimony Favorable to the
Defendant; Elements:
(6) Article 182 - False Testimony in Civil Cases; 1) The great Seal of the Republic was counterfeited or
(7) Article 184 - Offering False Testimony in Evidence; the Signature or stamp of the Chief Executive was
(8) Article 183 - False Testimony in Other Cases and forged by another person;
Perjury in Solemn Affirmation; 2) Offender knew of the counterfeiting or forgery;
(9) Article 185 - Machinations in Public Auctions; 3) He used the counterfeit seal or forged signature or
stamp.

1
UP Law BOC Reviewer 2016
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-75
Essence: Knowingly using the counterfeit seal or stamp or authorized by the Government as a legal tender, regardless of
forged signature of the Chief Executive. its intrinsic value.

NOTE: Q: What is counterfeiting?

A: Counterfeiting means the imitation of a legal or genuine
1) Offender under this article should not be the forger. coin. There is counterfeiting when a spurious coin is made.
Otherwise, he will be penalized under Article 161. There must be an imitation of the peculiar design of a genuine
2) The accused is to be prosecuted as a principal in the coin. (U.S. vs. Basco, 6 Phil. 110).
crime of knowingly using the forged signature or
counterfeit seal or stamp of the Chief Executive, U.S. vs. BASCO
although the participation of or act done by the G.R. No. 2747, April 11, 1906
offender is in effect that of an accessory under Art. Mapa, J.
19. FACTS:
3) Although the general rule is that he should be
punished by a penalty of two degrees lower, under The defendant attempted to pay for a package of
Article 162 he is punished by a penalty only one cigarettes which he bought at a certain store with what
degree lower. appeared to be silver coin, but which, as a matter of fact, was
a Philippine copper cent. He insisted that the owner of the
Counterfeiting coins store should accept the same as a peseta, that is to say, a
Q: What are the crimes under counterfeiting coins? twenty cent piece. But the owner refused to accept it upon
A: noticing what the real value and denomination of the coin was.
The defendant again insisted that the money be accepted and
1) Making and importing and uttering false coins (Art.
the owner of the store refused to do so. As a result of such
163); refusal, a quarrel ensued between them. A policeman then
2) Mutilation of coins – importation and utterance of
interfered, and upon being informed of what had happened,
mutilated coins (Art. 164); placed the defendant under arrest and took him to the police
3) Selling of false or mutilated coin, without connivance
station, where several Mexican and Japanese coins were found
(Art. 165). in his possession together with a roll of Philippine copper
cents, the latter being silver plated, and identical with the coin
Article 163. Making and importing and uttering false coins. - which he had attempted to pass at the store as a twenty-cent
Any person who makes, imports, or utters, false coins, in piece. Upon an examination of these plated coins it was found
connivance with counterfeiters, or importers, shall suffer: that they were genuine Philippine copper cents, which
1) Prision mayor in its minimum and medium periods apparently and been wkkhitened with quicksilver to give them
and a fine not to exceed P10,000 pesos, if the the color and brightness of silver.
counterfeited coin be silver coin of the Philippines or
coin of the Central Bank of the Philippines of ten ISSUE: WON the defendant should be held liable for
centavo denomination or above. counterfeiting of coins under Art. 163.
2) Prision correccional in its minimum and medium
HELD: NO.
periods and a fine of not to exceed P2,000 pesos, if
the counterfeited coins be any of the minor coinage
There can be no counterfeiting of money when, as in
of the Philippines or of the Central Bank of the
this case, no spurious or clipped coin was used. The coins in
Philippines below ten-centavo denomination.
question were genuine copper cents and bore their original
3) Prision correccional in its minimum period and a fine
designs and inscriptions. The defendant did not make or
not to exceed P1,000 pesos, if the counterfeited coin
attempt to make any alteration in the designs and inscriptions
be currency of a foreign country.
of the said coins. All that he did was to give them the
appearance of silver pieces for the purpose of passing them as
twenty-cent coins. He did not, however, attempt to imitate the
Elements:
peculiar design of such coins. The acts committed by the
1) There be false or counterfeited coins; defendant for the purpose of defrauding third persons by
2) Offender either made, imported or uttered such coins; deceiving them us to the real value of the coins in question
3) In case of uttering such false or counterfeited coins, constitute the crime of estafa and not of counterfeiting money.
he connived with the counterfeiters or importers. There were not legal grounds upon which a charge for these
latter offense could be based.
FIRST ELEMENT: False or counterfeited coins
Therefore, if a person gives a genuine copper cent the
Q: When is a coin deemed to be false or counterfeited? appearance of a silver piece by whitening them with quicksilver
A: A coin is deemed false or counterfeited when it is spurious for the purpose of defrauding third persons by deceiving the as
and contains merely an imitation of a particular design of a to the real value of the coins in question, he is not liable for
genuine coin.2 It is also such if it is forged, or if it is not counterfeiting of coins under Art. 163 but for estafa under Art.
318.

Second element
2
Amurao
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-76
Q: What are the acts punishable under Art. 163? The penalty of prision correccional in its minimum period and a
A: fine not to exceed P2,000 pesos shall be imposed upon any
1. Making of false coins; person who shall mutilate coins of the legal currency of the
2. Importing of false coins; United States or of the Philippine Islands or import or utter
3. Uttering false coins in connivance with counterfeiters mutilated current coins, or in connivance with mutilators or
or impostors. importers.

Q: What does ―import‖ mean? Q: What are the acts punished under Art. 164?
A: It means to bring them into port. The importation is A:
complete before entry at the Customs House. (U.S. v. Lymn, 1) Mutilating coins of the legal currency, with the further
26 Fed. Cas. 1024). requirement that there be intent to damage or to
 Under Section 1202 of the Tariff and Customs Code, defraud another.
importation begins when the carrying vessel or 2) Importing such mutilated coins, with the further
aircraft enters the jurisdiction of the Philippines with requirement that there be connivance with the
intention to unlade therein. mutilator or importer in case of uttering.
 Importation is deemed terminated upon payment of 3) Uttering such mutilated coins, with the further
the duties, taxes and other charges due upon the requirement that there be connivance with the
articles, or secured to be paid, at a port of entry and mutilator or importer in case of uttering.
the legal permit for withdrawal shall have been
granted, or in case said articles are free of duties, Q: What is mutilation?
taxes and other charges, until they have legally left A: Mutilation is the taking off or abstracting the metal in the
the jurisdiction of the customs. coin either by filing out or substituting that for another metal
or inferior quality. It is to diminish by ingenuous means the
Q: What does ―utter‖ mean?
metal in the coin.
A: To pass counterfeited coins. It means to fabricate and to
put into circulation false coins.
 In some decisions of the Court of Spain, a PEOPLE v. TIN CHING TING
counterfeited coin is uttered when it is paid, when the G.R. No. L-4620, January 30, 1952
offender is caught counting the counterfeited coins HELD: One who mutilates a coin does not do so for the sake
preparatory to the act of delivering them, even of mutilating, but to take advantage of the metal abstracted;
though the utterer may not obtain the gain he he appropriates a part of the metal of the coin. Hence, the
intended. Hence, damage to another is not necessary. coin diminishes in intrinsic value. One who utters said
mutilated coin receives its legal value, much more than its
Q: May BSP coins already withdrawn from circulation intrinsic value.
be the subject of counterfeiting under Art. 163?
Q: What is the reason for such rule? Q: What kinds of coins are contemplated under this article?
A: The fabrication of coin is punished not only because of the A: Coins mutilated must be legal tender in the
harm that may be caused to the public in case it goes into Philippines. Hence coins already withdrawn from
circulation again, but the possibility that the counterfeiter may circulation cannot be the subject of mutilation.
later apply his trade to the making of coins in actual circulation
(People v. Kong Leon, 48 O.G. 664). Q: Can foreign coins be the subject of mutilation?
A: No. Foreign coins, whether legal tender or
Q: Does Art. 163 penalize the making, uttering, and withdrawn from circulation in a foreign country, cannot
importing of false coins whether of the Philippines or of be the subject of mutilation.
a foreign country?
A: Yes. Q: What is the penalty for violation of Art. 164?
A: Prision correcional in its minimum period and a fine
Q: What is the reason for the rule? not to exceed 2,000 pesos
A: It is intended to protect not only the coins legally minted in
said countries, but also the public in general. The only Q: Is there an act that penalizes mutilation?
requirement being if a foreign coin is the subject of A: Yes. P.D. 247.
counterfeiting, the same must be the currency of a foreign
country.
PRESIDENTIAL DECREE No. 247
July 18, 1973
NOTE: Pars. 1 and 2 uses ―coin‖ without any qualifying word,
such as ―current.‖ PROHIBITING AND PENALIZING DEFACEMENT,
MUTILATION, TEARING, BURNING OR DESTRUCTION
Q: What is the penalty for violation of Art. 163? OF CENTRAL BANK NOTES AND COINS.
A: It depends on the kinds of coins counterfeited. See Art.
163. WHEREAS, the Central Bank has the sole right and authority to
CASE: People vs. Kong Leon. issue currency within the territory of the Philippines under its
issue power, and pursuant to Section 54 of Republic Act No.
Article 164. Mutilation of coins; Importation and utterance of 265, otherwise known as the "Central Bank Act," as amended,
mutilated coins. by Presidential Decree No. 72 dated November 29, 1972, the
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-77
notes and coins issued by the Central Bank shall be fully 1) Possession;
guaranteed by the Government of the Republic of the 2) Intent to utter; and
Philippines and shall be legal tender in the Philippines for all 3) Knowledge.
debts, both public and private;
Q: What are the elements of the second act
WHEREAS, Central Bank notes and coins are issued for punishable?
circulation as medium of exchange and to utilize them for A:
other purposes does not speak well of the due respect and 1) Actually uttering; and
dignity befitting our currency; and 2) Knowledge

WHEREAS, defacing, mutilating, tearing, or partially burning or FIRST ACT: Possession

destroying our currency by any means renders it unfit for
circulation, thereby unduly shortening its lifetime, and such Q: Does possession of or uttering of false coin require
acts unfavorably reflect on the discipline of our people and that the counterfeited coin is legal tender?
create a bad image for our country; A: No. A person in possession of, with intention to put into
circulation, a false five-dollar gold coin, an imitation of the
NOW, THEREFORE, I, FERDINAND E. MARCOS, President of genuine five-dollar gold coin of the United States, is liable
the Philippines, by virtue of the powers vested in me by the under Art. 165, even if such gold coin is no longer legal tender
Constitution as Commander-in-Chief of all the Armed Forces of in the United States, and much less in the Philippines. Art.
the Philippines and pursuant to Proclamation No. 1081 dated 165 does not require that the coin be of legal tender.
September 21, 1972, Proclamation No. 1104 dated January 17, (People v. Tin Ching Ting, G.R. No. L-4620, January 30, 1952)
1973, and General Order No. 1 dated September 22, 1972, and
in order to effect the desired changes and reforms in the HOWEVER, if the coin being uttered or possess with intent to
social, economic and political structure of our society, do utter is a mutilated coin, it must be legal tender coin, because
hereby order and decree: of Art. 164 to which Art. 165 is related.

1. That it shall be unlawful for any person to willfully deface, Q: What is the kind of possession covered by Art. 165?
mutilate, tear, burn or destroy, in any manner whatsoever, A: Both actual and constructive possession (the subjection of
currency notes and coins issued by the Central Bank of the the thing to one‘s control). If the rule were otherwise,
Philippines; and offenders could easily evade the law by the mere expedient of
placing other persons in actual, physical possession of the
2. That any person who shall violate this Decree shall, upon thing although retaining constructive possession or actual
conviction, be punished by a fine of not more than twenty control thereof.
thousand pesos and/or by imprisonment of not more than five
years. NOTE: The gravamen of the offense punished here is the mere
holding of the false or mutilated coin with the intent to utter
All laws, orders and regulations, or parts thereof, inconsistent the same.
herewith are hereby modified or repealed accordingly.
SECOND ACT: Actually uttering
This Decree is hereby made part of the law of the land and
shall take effect immediately after the publication thereof in a Actually uttering false or mutilated coin, knowing it to be false
newspaper of general circulation. or mutilated, is a crime under Art. 165, even if the offender
was not in connivance with the counterfeiter or mutilator.
Done in the City of Manila, this 18th day of July, in the year of
Our Lord, nineteen hundred and seventy-three. Forging treasury or bank notes, obligations and securities;
importing and uttering false or forged notes, obligations and
Article 165. Selling of false or mutilated coin, without securities
connivance.
The person who knowingly, although without the connivance Article 166. Forging treasury or bank notes on other
mentioned in the preceding articles, shall possess false or documents payable to bearer; importing, and uttering
mutilated coin with intent to utter the same, or shall actually such false or forged notes and documents. - The forging
utter such coin, shall suffer a penalty lower by one degree or falsification of treasury or bank notes or certificates or other
than that prescribed in said articles. obligations and securities payable to bearer and the
importation and uttering in connivance with forgers or
Q: What are the acts punished under Art. 165? importers of such false or forged obligations or notes, shall be
A: punished as follows:
1) Possession of coin, counterfeited or mutilated by 1) By reclusion temporal in its minimum period and a
another person, with intent to utter the same, fine not to exceed P10,000 pesos, if the document
knowing that it is false or mutilated. which has been falsified, counterfeited, or altered, is
2) Actually uttering such false or mutilated coin, knowing an obligations or security of the United States or of
the same to be false or mutilated the Philippines Islands.

Q: What are the elements of the first act punishable? The word "obligation or security of the United States or of
A: the Philippine Islands" shall be held to mean all bonds,
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-78
 certificates of indebtedness, national bank notes, forged treasury notes. On appeal, the judgment was affirmed
fractional notes, certificates of deposit, bills, checks, or by the Court of Appeals, except insofar as the maximum of
drafts for money, drawn by or upon authorized officers of said indeterminate penalty which was increased to 10 years, 8
the United States or of the Philippine Islands, and other months and 1 day of prision mayor. The case is before us on
representatives of value, of whatever denomination, which appeal by certiorari taken by Sergio del Rosario.
have been or may be issued under any act of the
Congress of the United States or of the Philippine After showing to complainant Apolinario del Rosario
Legislature. the Philippine one-peso bills and the Philippine two-peso bill,
and inducing him to believe that the same were
2) By prision mayor in its maximum period and a fine counterfeit paper money manufactured by them, although
not to exceed P5,000 pesos, if the falsified or altered in fact they were genuine treasury notes of the Philippine
document is a circulating note issued by any banking Government one of the digits of each of which had been
association duly authorized by law to issue the same. altered and changed, the aforementioned defendants had
3) By prision mayor in its medium period and a fine not succeeded in obtaining P1,700.00 from said complainant, in
to exceed P5,000 pesos, if the falsified or the City of Davao, on June 23, 1955, for the avowed purpose
counterfeited document was issued by a foreign of financing the manufacture of more counterfeit treasury
government. notes of the Philippines.
4) By prision mayor in its minimum period and a fine not
to exceed P2,000 pesos, when the forged or altered Appellant maintains that, being genuine treasury
document is a circulating note or bill issued by a notes of our government, the possession thereof cannot be
foreign bank duly authorized therefor. illegal.

Q: What are the acts penalized under Art. 166? ISSUE: WON the possession of the forged treasury notes
A: constitutes a violation of Article 168 of the Revised Penal Code.
1) Forging or falsification of treasury or bank notes or
other documents payable to bearer; HELD: Yes.
2) Importation of such false or forged obligations or
notes; and It is not disputed that a portion of the last digit
3) Uttering of such false or forged obligations or notes in 9 of Serial No. F-79692619 of Exhibit C, had been
connivance with the forgers or importers. erased and changed so as to read 0 and that similar
erasures and changes had been made in the
First act: Forging or falsification penultimate digit 9 in Serial No. F-79692691 of Exhibit
Q: What is the difference between forgery and E, in the last digit in Serial No. D-716326 of Exhibit G,
falsification? and in the last digit 9 of Serial No.
A: D-716329 of Exhibit H.

FORGERY FALSIFICATION It is clear from Articles 168 and 169 that the
possession of genuine treasury notes of the Philippines any of
Act of giving to a treasury or The act of erasing, substituting, "the figures, letters, words or signs contained" in which had
bank note or any instrument counterfeiting or altering by been erased and or altered, with knowledge of such notes, as
payable to bearer or order any means the figures, letters, they were used by petitioner herein and his co-defendants in
the manner adverted to above, is punishable under said Article
the appearance of a true words, or signs contained
168, in relation to Article 166, subdivision (1), of the Revised
and genuine document therein Penal Code (U.S. vs. Gardner, 3 Phil., 398; U.S. vs. Solito, 36
Phil., 785).
To forge an instrument is to
make false instrument
intended to be passed for PEOPLE v. GALANO
the genuine one. 54 OG 5897
HELD:

Example of counterfeiting, falsifying or altering an The forgery committed here comes under the first
obligation or security of the Philippine Government paragraph of Art. 169. This provision does not
only contemplate situations where a spurious, false or fake
document or instrument is given the appearance of a true and
Del Rosario v. People
genuine document, but also to situations involving
G.R. No. L-16806, December 22, 1961
originally true and genuine documents which have
CONCEPCION, J.:
been withdrawn or demonetized, or have outlived their
FACTS: useful ness.The case under consideration could not come
within the second paragraph of the aforesaid article (By
Sergio del Rosario, Alfonso Araneta and Benedicto del erasing, substituting, counterfeiting or altering by any means
Pilar were accused of counterfeiting Philippine treasury notes the figures, letters, words or signs contained therein) because
and convicted by the CFI Davao of illegal possession of said no figure, letter, word, or sign contained in Exhibit A has

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-79
been erased, substituted, counterfeited or altered. The forgery Note that one of the things that may be forged under article is
consists in the addition of a word in an effort to give to the Certificates or other obligations and securities payable to
present document the appearance of the true and genuine bearer.
certificate that it used to have before it was withdrawn or has
outlived its usefulness. Q: When is an instrument payable to bearer?
A: Under the Sec. 9 of the Negotiable Instruments Law, the
Q: What may be the subject of forgery or falsification? instrument is payable to bearer:
A: a) When it is expressed to be so payable;
1) Treasury note; b) When it is payable to a person named therein or
2) Bank notes; bearer;
3) Certificates or other obligations and securities payable c) When it is payable to the order of a fictitious or non-
to bearer. existing person, and such fact was known to the
person making it so payable;
Second act: Importation of false or forged obligations or d) When the name of the payee does not purport to be
notes the name of any person;
e) When the only or last indorsement is an indorsement
Q: What does importation of false or forged obligations in blank.
or notes mean?
A: To bring them into the Philippines, which presuppose that Q: What are the penalties prescribed in Art. 166?
the obligations or notes are forged or falsified in a foreign A: The penalties depend on the kind of forged treasury or
country. bank notes or other documents.

Third act: Uttering of such false or forged obligations or notes Kind of forged, altered, or
Penalty
counterfeited document
Q: What does uttering of false or forged obligations or
notes mean? Reclusion temporal,
A: Offering obligations or notes knowing them to be false or Obligation or security issued by
minimum period
forged, whether such offer is accepted or not, with a eh Government of the
representation, by words or actions, that they are genuine and Philippines
Fine not to exceed P10,000
with an intent to defraud.
Circulating note issued by any
Q: Does uttering forged bill need to be in connivance Prison mayor, maximum
with forgers or importers to constitute a violation of banking association duly
Art. 166? authorized by law to issue the
Fine not to exceed P5,000
A: Yes. same

Example of uttering counterfeit bill or not in Document issued by a foreign Prison mayor, medium
connivance with forgers: government
Fine not to exceed P5,000
PEOPLE v. VALENCIA
59 Phil. 42 Circulating note or bill issued Prison mayor, minimum
FACTS: by a foreign bank duly
The accused Marcelino and Socorro stopped their car authorized therefor Fine does not exceed P2,000
in front of a store belonging to Maria and bought some
cigarettes and corn beef, and gave the seller a P10 bill. After
NOTE: The Code punishes forging or falsification of bank notes
receiving the change amounting to P9.55, they hurriedly left
and of documents of credit payable to bearer and issued by eh
the store. This aroused suspicion of the store owner who, upon
State more severely than it does the counterfeiting of coins
examining the bill, found it to be a counterfeit. Meanwhile, the
accused went to another store and bought cigars and some
Art. 163 Art. 166
cans of salmon, giving in payment P10 counterfeit bill. Upon
receiving the change, they again hurriedly departed. They
Making and importing and Forging treasury or bank
were apprehended.
uttering false coins notes or other documents
HELD:
By pleading guilty to the charge of having passed a Prison mayor, minimum and
Reclusion temporal, minimum
P10 counterfeit bill in a store in violation of Art. 166, the medium
accused admitted all the material allegations of the
information, including that of connivance with the authors of Silver coin of the Philippines Obligation or security issued
the forgery, which characterizes the crime defined by Art. 166 or coin of the Central Bank of by the Government of the
of the RPC. the Philippines Philippines

Q: What is the reason for the rule?

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-80
A: Forging or falsification of bank notes tends to bring such ticket so altered as a prize-winning number. So, in the
documents into discredit and the offense produces a lack of ultimate analysis appellant's real offense was the
confidence on the part of the holders of said documents to the attempt to commit estafa (punishable with eleven days
prejudice of the interests of society and of the State. of arresto menor); but technically and legally he has to
Moreover, it is easier to forge or falsify such certificates, notes, suffer for the serious crime of falsification of a
and documents of credit than to make counterfeit coins, and government obligation. We realize that the penalty is too
the profit which is derived therefrom by the forger of such severe, considering all the circumstances of the case, but we
documents is greater than the incentive for the commission of have no discretion to impose a lower penalty than authorized
such a crime more powerful. by law. The exercise of clemency and not in this court.

Example of forging obligation or security: Q: What is included in ―obligation or security‖ of the

Philippines?
PEOPLE v. BALMORES A: It shall include all bonds, certificates of indebtedness,
G.R. No. L-1896, February 16, 1950 national bank notes, fractional notes, certificates of deposit,
Ozaeta, J. bills, checks, or drafts for money, drawn by or upon authorized
FACTS: officers of the United States or of the Philippine Islands, and
other representatives of value, of whatever denomination,
The accused did teared off at the bottom in a cross- which have been or may be issued under any act of the
wise direction a portion of a genuine 1/8 unit Philippine Charity Congress of the United States or of the Philippine Legislature.
Sweepstakes ticket thereby removing the true and real
unidentified number of same and substituting and writing in NOTE: The provisions of Art. 166 relative to US obligations
ink at the bottom on the left side of said ticket the figure or were repealed upon the grant of independence to the
number 074000 thus making the said ticket bear the said Philippines, because when the RPC was enacted, the
number 074000, which is a prize-winning number in the Philippines was still a colony of the United States.
PCSO and presenting the falsified ticket PCSO for the purpose
of exchanging the same for the corresponding cash that said Q: What are examples of national bank notes?
number has won. He pretended that the said 1/8 unit of a A: The P20, P50, P100, P200, P500, and P1,000- bills issued
PCSO ticket is genuine and that he is entitled to the by the BSP are national bank notes.
corresponding amount won by said ticket. However, the
employee to whom the said accused presented said ticket 167. Counterfeiting, importing and uttering instruments not
discovered that the said ticket as presented by the said payable to bearer. - Any person who shall forge, import or
accused was falsified and immediately thereafter he called for utter, in connivance with the forgers or importers, any
a policeman who apprehended and arrested the said accused instrument payable to order or other document of credit not
right then and there. payable to bearer, shall suffer the penalties of prision
correccional in its medium and maximum pe Article 16riods
He was charged with attempted estafa through and a fine not exceeding P6,000 pesos.
falsification of a security and was convicted by the trial court
with the penalty of not less than 10 years and 1 day of prision Elements:
mayor and not more than 12 years and 1 day of reclusion 1) There is an instrument payable to order or other
temporal document of credit not payable to bearer;
2) Offender either forged, imported or uttered such
HELD: Complex crime of attempted estafa through falsification instrument;
of an obligation or security of the Philippines 3) In case of uttering, he connived with the forger or
importer.
The penalty imposed by article 166 for the forging or
falsification of "treasury or bank notes or certificates or other Q: To which instruments is the application of Art. 167
obligations and securities" is reclusion temporal in its minimum limited?
period and a fine not to exceed P10,000, if the document A: To instruments payable to order (not to bearer).
which has been falsified, counterfeited, or altered is an  Contrast this with Art. 166, which is limited to
obligation or security of the United States or of the Philippine instruments payable to bearer.
Islands. This being a complex crime of attempted estafa
through falsification of an obligation or security of the Q: When is an instrument payable to order?
Philippines, the penalty should be imposed in its A: When it is drawn payable to the order of a specified person
maximum period in accordance with article 48. Taking or to him or his order (Section 8, NIL).
into consideration the mitigating circumstance of lack of
instruction, and applying the Indeterminate Sentence Law, the This covers instruments or other documents of credit issued by
minimum cannot be lower than prision mayor in its maximum a foreign government or bank because the act punished
period, which is 10 years and 1 day to 12 years. It results, includes that of importing, without specifying the country or
therefore, that the penalty imposed by the trial court is correct. government issuing them.
Remember, Art. 166 covers documents payable to bearer
The alteration, or even destruction, of a losing
issued by a foreign government or bank under pars. 3 and 4.
sweepstakes ticket could cause no harm to anyone and would
not constitute a crime were it not for the attempt to cash the
Q: What is the reason for punishing forgery?

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-81
A: Forgery of currency is punished so as to maintain the Sendaydiego, G.R. No. L-33254 & G.R. No. L-33253
integrity of the currency and thus insure the credit standing of January 20, 1978)
the government and prevent the imposition on the public and
the government of worthless notes or obligations. Article 169. How forgery is committed. - The forgery referred
to in this section may be committed by any of the following
Connivance is not required in uttering if the utterer is
means:
the forger
The utterer should not be the forger. If the utterer was the 1) By giving to a treasury or bank note or any
one who forged the instrument payable to order, obviously instrument, payable to bearer or order mentioned
connivance is not required, for he can be held liable as a forger therein, the appearance of a true genuine document.
of the instrument. 2) By erasing, substituting, counterfeiting or altering by
any means the figures, letters, words or signs
Article 168. Illegal possession and use of false treasury or contained therein.
bank notes and other instruments of credit.
Unless the act be one of those coming under the provisions of Q: What are the ways by which forgery may be
any of the preceding articles, any person who shall knowingly
committed?
use or have in his possession, with intent to use any of the
A:
false or falsified instruments referred to in this section, shall
suffer the penalty next lower in degree than that prescribed in 1) By giving to a treasury or bank note or any
said articles. instrument, payable to bearer or order mentioned
therein, the appearance of a true genuine document.
Elements: 2) By erasing, substituting, counterfeiting or altering by
1) Any treasury or bank note or certificate or other any means the figures, letters, words or signs
obligation and security: contained therein.
a. Payable to bearer, or any instrument payable
to order or other document of credit not Q: Can forgery be presumed?
payable to bearer is
A: No. Forgery cannot be presumed. It must be proved by
b. Forged or falsified by another person;
clear, positive and convincing evidence and the burden of
2) The offender knows that any of those instruments is
forged or falsified; proof lies on the party alleging forgery (JN Development Corp.
3) He either: v. Philippine Export and Foreign Loan Guarantee Corporation,
a. Uses any of such forged or falsified G.R. No. 151060, August 31, 2005)
instruments; or
b. Possesses with intent to use any of such NOTE:
forged or falsified instruments
1) The essence of forgery is giving a document the
appearance of a true and genuine document.
NOTE:
1) Mere possession, without intent to use, of false 2) Not any alteration of a letter, number, figure or
treasury or bank notes is not punishable. There must design would amount to forgery. At most, it would
be an intent to use (People v. Digoro, G.R. No. L- only be frustrated forgery.
22032, March 4, 1966). 3) Forgery can be committed through the use of genuine
2) Alleging possession of false treasury or bank notes paper bills that have been withdrawn from circulation,
without alleging intent to use charges no offense. by giving them the appearance of some other true
3) The possession of genuine treasury notes of the and genuine document. [People vs. Galano]
Philippines with erased or altered figures, letters,
words, or signs therein and with the knowledge of Example of forgery under paragraph 1:
such erasure and alteration and with the intent to use
such notes, is punishable under Art. 168, in relation PEOPLE v. GALANO
to Art. 166(1). C.A., 54 O.G. 5899
4) The burden to explain satisfactorily the possession of
the counterfeit note falls upon the accused (People v. FACTS:
Co Pao, G.R. No. 38329, October 10, 1933). The accused admitted, during the investigation at the
Corollarily, it is incumbent upon the person in police headquarters, having written the word, ―Victory‖ in ink
possession thereof to satisfactorily explain his at the back of the one-peso bill which he gave to Cruz as
innocence for said possession, it being a fact relied payment for the four balut eggs.
upon by him as a justification or excuse and which The one-peso paper bill is a genuine pre-war treasury
lies peculiarly within his knowledge (People v. Perez, certificate ―payable to bearer on demand‖ which has been,
G.R. No. 12581-R, January 31, 1955) however, withdrawn from circulation. It is, however,
5) The accused must have knowledge of the forged redeemable at its face value if presented to the Central Bank.
character of the note (U.S. v. De Leon, 4 Phil. 496).
6) The person in possession of a falsified instrument HELD:
who used the same and profited therefrom is The forgery committed here comes under the first
presumed to be the author of falsification (People v. paragraph of Art. 169. This provision does not
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-82
only contemplate situations where a spurious, false or fake instruments payable to of making alteration), public or
document or instrument is given the appearance of a true and bearer or to order official, commercial, or private
genuine document, but also to situations involving documents, or wireless, or
originally true and genuine documents which have
telegraph messages
been withdrawn or demonetized, or have outlived their
useful ness.The case under consideration could not come
within the second paragraph of the aforesaid article (By
erasing, substituting, counterfeiting or altering by any means Article 170. Falsification of legislative documents.
the figures, letters, words or signs contained therein) because The penalty of prision correccional in its maximum period and
no figure, letter, word, or sign contained in Exhibit A has a fine not exceeding P6,000 pesos shall be imposed upon any
been erased, substituted, counterfeited or altered. The forgery person who, without proper authority therefor alters any
consists in the addition of a word in an effort to give to the bill, resolution, or ordinance enacted or approved or pending
present document the appearance of the true and genuine approval by either House of the Legislature or any provincial
certificate that it used to have before it was withdrawn or has board or municipal council.
outlived its usefulness.
Elements:
1) There is a bill, resolution or ordinance enacted or
Example of forgery under paragraph 2: approved or pending approval by either House of the
Legislature or any provincial board or municipal
U.S. v. Solito council;
36 Phil. 785 2) Offender alters the same;
3) He has no proper authority therefor;
FACTS: 4) The alteration has changed the meaning of the
A received a treasury warrant, a check issued by the documents.
Government. It was originally made payable to B, or his order.
A wrote B‘s name on the back of said treasury warrant as if B Q: What may be the subject of Art. 170?
had indorsed it, and then presented it for payment. It was paid A: Only legislative documents:
to A. 1) Bill
2) Resolution
HELD: 3) Ordinance enacted or approved or pending approval
This is forgery. When A wrote B‘s name on the back by either House of the Legislature or any provincial
of the treasury warrant which was originally made payable to B board or municipal council
or his order, he converted, by such supposed indorsement, the
treasury warrant to one payable to bearer. It had the effect of The writing must be:
erasing the phrase ―or his order‖ upon the face of the warrant. 1) complete in itself; and
There was material alteration on a genuine document. 2) capable of extinguishing an obligation or creating
rights; or
Q: What is the effect of forgery under the Negotiable 3) capable of becoming evidence of the facts stated
Instruments Law? therein.
A: See Sec. 23, NIL.
Q: Who can commit the crime of falsification of
Falsification of legislative, public, commercial, and private legislative documents?
documents, and wireless, telegraph, and telephone messages A: Any person without authority – can be private or public
Q: What are the five classes of falsification? individual.
A:
1) Falsification of legislative documents (Art. 170); Article 171. Falsification by public officer, employee or notary
2) Falsification of a document by a public officer, or ecclesiastic minister.
employee or notary public (Art. 171); The penalty of prision mayor and a fine not to exceed P5,000
3) Falsification of a public or official, or commercial pesos shall be imposed upon any public officer, employee, or
documents by a private individual (Art.172, par. 1); notary who, taking advantage of his official position, shall
4) Falsification of a private document by any person falsify a document by committing any of the following acts:
(Art. 172, par. 2); and 1. Counterfeiting or imitating any handwriting, signature
5) Falsification of wireless, telegraph and telephone or rubric;
messages (Art. 173). 2. Causing it to appear that persons have participated in
any act or proceeding when they did not in fact so
Q: Distinguish forgery from falsification. participate;
A: 3. Attributing to persons who have participated in an act
or proceeding statements other than those in fact
FORGERY FALSIFICATION made by them;
4. Making untruthful statements in a narration of facts;
Refers to the falsification and The commission of any of the 5. Altering true dates;
counterfeiting of treasury or eight acts mentioned in Art. 6. Making any alteration or intercalation in a genuine
document which changes its meaning;
bank notes or any 171 on legislative (only the act

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-83
 7. Issuing in an authenticated form a document ―public officer, employee or notary who, taking advantage of
purporting to be a copy of an original document when his official position, shall falsify a document.‖
no such original exists, or including in such a copy a
statement contrary to, or different from, that of the First element: Persons liable under Art. 171
genuine original; or
8. Intercalating any instrument or note relative to the Q: Who may commit falsification of document under
issuance thereof in a protocol, registry, or official Art. 171?
book. A:
The same penalty shall be imposed upon any ecclesiastical 1) A public officer of employee who takes advantage of
minister who shall commit any of the offenses enumerated in his position;
the preceding paragraphs of this article, with respect to any 2) A notary public who takes advantage of his official
record or document of such character that its falsification may position;
affect the civil status of persons. 3) An ecclesiastical minister who commits acts of
falsification with respect to any record or document of
Elements: such character that its falsification may affect the civil
1) The offender is a public officer, employee, or notary status of persons.
public;
2) He takes advantage of his official position;
Second element: Taking advantage of official position
3) He falsifies a document by committing any of the
Q: When does a public officer take advantage of his
following acts:
official position?
a. Counterfeiting or imitating any handwriting,
A: The offender takes advantage of his official position in
signature or rubric;
falsifying a document when:
b. Causing it to appear that persons have
1) He has the duty to make or prepare, or intervene
participated in any act or proceeding when
in the preparation of the document; or
they did not in fact so participate;
2) He has the official custody of the document he
c. Attributing to persons who have participated
falsifies.
in an act or proceeding statements other
than those in fact made by them; Most importantly, it is not enough that the falsification be
d. Making untruthful statements in a narration committed by a public officer; it is also necessary that it should
of facts; be committed by a public officer with abuse of his office, that
e. Altering true dates; is, in deeds, instrument, indentures, certificates, in the
f. Making any alteration or intercalation in a execution of which he participates by reason of his
genuine document which changes its office. (Fajelga v. Escareal, G.R. Nos. L-61017-18, November
meaning; 14, 1988)
g. Issuing in an authenticated form: (i) A do  Therefore, even if the offender was a public officer
i. A document purporting to be a copy but he did not take advantage of his official position,
of an original document he would be guilt of falsification of a document by
ii. When no such original exists, or private person under Art. 172, not under Art. 171.
iii. Including in such a copy a  See examples in Reyes, page 211-212.
statement contrary to, or different
from, that of the genuine original; Q: Is intent to gain necessary in falsification of public
h. Intercalating any instrument or note relative or official documents?
to the issuance thereof in a protocol, A: No. It is unnecessary that there be present the idea of gain
registry, or official book. or the intent to injure a third person, for the reason that, in
contradistinction to private documents, the principal thing
punished is the violation of the public faith and the destruction
Q: What is the essence of falsification? of the truth as therein solemnly proclaimed. (Suero v. People,
A: It is the act of making untruthful or false statements G.R. No. 156408, January 31, 2005)
(Batulanon v. People, G.R. No. 139857, September 15, 2006)
The purpose for which the falsification was made and whether
Q: What is a document? the offender profited or hoped to profit from such falsification
A: A document is a defined as a deed, instrument or other duly are no longer material. (Pacasum v. People, G.R. No. 180314,
authorized paper by which something is proved, evidenced or April 16, 2004)
set forth (Bernejo v. Barrios, G.R. No. L-23614, February 27,
1970) Third element: The offender falsifies a document

Q: What are the kinds of documents falsified under Art. Q: Must there be a genuine document in falsification?
171?
A: Not in all instances, only in paragraphs 6, 7, and 8 of Art.
A: Art. 171 does not specify the kind of document falsified, 171, where the intercalation or alteration is made changing the
whether public, official, commercial or private. meaning of a genuine document. However, in other
paragraphs, falsification may be committed by simulating or
Amurao submits that the term is a public or official document fabricating a document.
because the same ahs to be read together with the phrase,
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-84
 Modes of falsifying a Requires a genuine Iluminado Luague, a teacher clerk died on January
document document? 24, 1972 after being confined since January 3, 1972. The then
Bureau of Public Schools sent the deceased's salary warrants
1) Counterfeiting or imitating to the Superintendent of schools at Catarman Northern Samar
who in turn forwarded them to the District Supervisor,
any handwriting, signature No
Florencio Guillermo. A payroll-warrant register accompanied
or rubric the checks. The paychecks delivered, Florencio Guillermo
signed the payroll-warrant registers certifying that on his
2) Causing it to appear that official oath, each employee whose name appeared on the rolls
persons have participated had received the salary warrant indicated opposite his name
in any act or proceeding No on February 7, 1972, February 17, 1972 and February 25,
when they did not in fact 1972, respectively, and returned the same to Jose Figueroa,
so participate the District Administrative Officer of Northern Samar.

3) Attributing to persons who The same were personally received by Pilar S.

Luague, while Exhibit A (600) was received by Glen S. Luague.
have participated in an act
Exhibit A (601) was received by Edmundo Echano, a relative of
or proceeding statements No Iliuminado Luague and who claimed to be employed in the
other than those in fact Office of the District Supervisor.
made by them;
Florencio Guillermo claimed that upon discovering his
4) Making untruthful mistake, he asked appellant to return the treasury warrants
statements in a narration No issued in the name of her husband Iluminado Luague, further
of facts claiming that appellant promised to do so, but actually did not.
Upon the receipt of the xerox copies from the IBM Section of
5) Altering true dates No the Bureau of Public Schools, Guillermo discovered that the
treasury warrants in question had been encashed by appellant
and Glen Luague with different local stores at Laoang. Exhibit
6) Making any alteration or
A (599) was cleared on February 22, 1972, while Exhibit A
intercalation in a genuine (600) was deposited to the account of a certain Lee and/or
Yes
document which changes Nicol Chu, Jr. at Philippine Bank of Communications; and
its meaning; Exhibit A (601) was deposited to the account of Colgate-
Palmolive Philippines, Inc. Appellant admitted having endorsed
7) Issuing in an authenticated the treasury warrants by means of which she was able to
form: (i) A document encash the same.
purporting to be a copy of
an original document (ii) For signing the name of her husband Iluminado Luague as
payee on three treasury warrants for purposes of
When no such original
Yes endorsement, appellant stands charged with the crime of
exists, or (iii) Including in Estafa thru Falsification of Commercial Document.
such a copy a statement [Note: The appellant was charged with three counts of estafa
contrary to, or different thru falsification of commercial document but was convicted of
from, that of the genuine falsification only.] Appellant contends that she acted in good
original faith or had no criminal intent when she cashed her deceased
husband's paychecks.
8) Intercalating any
ISSUE: WON appellant‘s contention is correct.
instrument or note relative
to the issuance thereof in Yes
HELD: Yes.
a protocol, registry, or
official book. During the hearing, it was brought out that the government
did not sustain any financial loss due to the encashment of the
checks because the petitioner's husband had accumulated
In other words, in falsification of a public document, the vacation and sick leaves the money value of which exceeded
falsification need not be made on an official form. It is the value of the three paychecks and the value of the checks
sufficient that the document is given the appearance of, or was simply deducted from the money value of the leaves. This
made to appear similar to, the official form. (People v. Tupasi, explains why the petitioner was not convicted of estafa but of
March 221, 1937). falsification only. While we do not mean to imply that if there
is no damage there can be no falsification, We do say that the
LUAGUE v. CA absence of damage is an element to be considered to
G.R. Nos. L-55683 & 55903-04 February 22, 1982 determine whether or not there is criminal intent.

FACTS:
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-85
We notice here the lack of compassion on the part of the Branch Manager, Aurora Pigram, was the one who negotiated
prosecuting fiscal, the trial judge, and the Court of Appeals. the said treasury bill with the Gainsbo Commodities.
Even the Solicitor General who is alert in seeking to correct
improper convictions by trial courts has somehow On May 24, 1982, Cabigas and Reynes were
misappreciated the evidence in this case. investigated by NBI agents. After the investigation, Cabigas
and Reynes were arrested for having allegedly conspired
The accused is a poor widow who was obviously in a state of together in falsifying the Securities Delivery Receipt (SDR)
bewilderment due to the recent death of her husband when dated March 9, 1982.
she cashed the paychecks. She was also in dire need of money
to settle the expenses for her husband's last illness and his ISSUE: WON Article 171 of the Revised Penal Code applies in
burial. A compassionate attitude repeatedly urged by the First the case at bar
Lady, Mrs. Imelda R. Marcos, would have been highly in order
under the circumstances. HELD: NO.

"There is nothing to show the DR SDUC dated March 30, 1982,

Exh. G, for the alleged falsification of which petitioner was
convicted in Criminal Case No. 6938 is a form the submission
CABIGAS v. PEOPLE of which was or is required by law. In the petition for review,
G.R. No. L-67472. July 3, 1987 petitioner points out that as testified by him the form was not
an official form of the Land Bank. The form was his own
FACTS: initiative adopted 'for our own convenience and also for
reference purposes.' Petitioner therefore, was not under legal
Petitioner Dario Cabigas is the Securities Custodian of obligation to disclose or reveal the truth by said DR SDUC. In
the Securities Section of the Land Bank of the Philippines in its the absence of such obligation and of the alleged wrongful
Makati branch. Assisting him in his work is Benedicto Reynes, intent, defendant cannot be legally convicted of the crime of
the securities receiving clerk. On March 9, 1982, the Fund falsification of public document with which he is charged.
Management Department delivered to the Securities Section, (People vs Quasha, 93 Phil. 333)."
Makati Branch of the Land Bank of the Philippines, for
safekeeping, 112 pieces of treasury notes and treasury bills
worth P46,000,000.00 and for which a copy of the Securities
Delivery Receipt (SDR) was issued to the Fund Management
Q: What are the different modes of falsifying a
Dept. while the original was kept by the Securities Section.
document?
After receiving the securities, the accused would prepare the
A: The offender falsifies a document by committing any of the
Daily Report on Securities/Documents Under Custody (DR
following acts:
SDUC) evidencing the securities transactions and operations of
the Makati Branch of the Land Bank of the Philippines.On
Par. 1 – Counterfeiting or imitating (feigning) any
March 29, 1982, in the course of their inventory of treasury
handwriting, signature or rubric.
notes and bills deposited with them, Cabigas and Reynes
discovered the loss of six (6) treasury bills. Q: What are the ways of committing falsification
under this paragraph?
Upon verification that Securities Delivery Receipt A:
(SDR) was the source document of the missing securities (1) By counterfeiting, which is imitating any
which were delivered to them for safekeeping, accused Reynes handwriting, signature or rubric
crossed out with a red ink in the said document the last two a. There should be an intent to imitate, or
digits "82" and the addition after them of the figure "76" on an attempt to imitate
the serial numbers A-000064 to A-000082 of the 19 treasury b. Two signatures, the genuine and the
bills of the 795th series with a total maturity value of forged, should bear some resemblance
P9,500,000.00. Then at the bottom of the SDR, Cabigas placed (2) By feigning, which is simulating a signature,
the notation "For adjustment" and below it the date "3/29/82." handwriting or rubric out of one which does not
Cabigas suggested Reynes to report the incident to their actually exist.
branch manager, Aurora Pigram.
Requisites:
Instead of following the draft prepared by Reynes, 1) Intent to imitate, or an attempt to imitate;
Cabigas prepared his own report. At the bottom of DR SDUC, 2) The two signatures or handwritings, the genuine
Cabigas placed the notation "Adjustment on Erroneous Entry and the forged, bear some resemblance to each
(incoming) dated March 9, 1982" as legend of the asterisk (*) other
sign which appears after the figure "1,533."
NOTE:
a) If there is sufficient resemblance
On May 20, 1982, a certain Rosie Chua was found to
between the genuine and the forged
be authenticating with the Central Bank of the Philippines a
signatures, it can be concluded that the
treasury bill of the 795th series with Serial No. A- 000082 in
accused had the intention and
the amount of P500,000.00. Upon investigation by NBI agents,
it was discovered that the Land Bank of the Philippines Makati
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-86
 attempted to initiate the signature of 3) The offender, in making a document, attributed
the offended party. to such person/s statements other than those
b) The resemblance must be such that it is they in fact made.
likely to deceive an ordinary person
receiving or dealing with the document. PEOPLE v. ROMUALDEZ
G.R. No. 31012, September 10, 1932
PEOPLE v. SENDAYDIEGO Vicker, J.:
G.R. No. L-33254 & G.R. No. L-33253, January 20, 1978)
FACTS:
HELD: The accused Estela Romualdez was appointed the
secretary of Justice Norberto Romualdez of the Supreme Court
It is settled that if the falsification was resorted to for the who was the Chairman of the 1926 Bar examinations. The
purpose of hiding the malversation, the falsification and accused Luis Mabunay was one of the candidates duly
malversation are separate offenses. In the instant cases, the admitted to the bar examinations held in 1926. When the
provincial , as the custodian than of the money forming part of results were released, accused Luis Mabunay garnered an
the road and bridge could have malversed or misappropriated average of 75%, with the following grades: 73 in Civil Law, 77
it without falsifiying any voucher. The falsification was used as in Mercantile Law, 69 in Penal Law, 76 in Political Law, 86 in
a device to prevent detection of the malversation.The International Law, 64 in Remedial Law, 80 in Legal Ethics and
falsifications cannot be regarded as constituting one continuing Practical Exercises. However, a later revision of the
offense impelled by a single criminal impulse. Each falsification composition showed that his grades of 73 in Civil Law and 64
of a voucher constitutes one crime. The falsification of six in Remedial Law had been written on the first page of said
vouchers constitutes six separate or distinct offenses (People compositions after striking out the grades of 63 in Civil Law
vs. Madrigal-Gonzales, 117 Phil. 956). And each and 58 in Remedial Law.
misappropriation as evidenced by a provincial voucher Romualdez admitted that she was the one who
constitutes a separate crimes of malversation were committed. changed the grades, arguing that she had the authority to
Appellant Samson is a co-principal in each of the said twelve revise the compositions and to change the grades in her
offenses. capacity as secretary of the head of the Bar Exam Committee.
She claimed further that she corrected said composition
Par. 2 – Causing it to appear that persons have without knowing the identity of its owner. She testified that the
participated in an act or a proceeding chairman of the examining committee, gave her to understand
that she "was authorized to correct any composition in any
Requisites: subject" in the bar examinations of the year 1926 and that she
1) That the offender caused it to appear in a had never corrected any composition after the name of the
document that a person/s participated in an act corresponding candidate was identified.
or proceeding; and As to the accused Luis Mabunay, the prosecuting
2) Such person/s did not in fact participate. attorney maintains that the evidence for the prosecution
shows that he was in connivance with the accused Estela
PEOPLE v. ASA Romualdez in the alteration by the latter of his grades in Civil
HELD: Law and Remedial Law for the purpose of raising to 75% the
The placing by the accused of their thumbmarks in the general average of 72.8 which he had obtained.
list of voters opposite the names of the electors who have not
actually voted, thereby making it appear that those electors
case their votes when they did not in fact vote, is falsification HELD:
under paragraph 2 of Art. 171, and the offenders who are The acts of the accused are covered by paragraphs 2,
private individuals are liable under Art. 172. 3, and 6. She made the alterations in the grades in such a way
as to make it appear that the "correctors" had participated
Q: Is an allegation of intent to gain material? therein, because she blotted out the grades of the "correctors"
A: At any rate, the allegation of intent to gain, the party and wrote new and increased grades opposite their initials,
benefited or prejudiced by the falsification, or tarnishing without indicating by her own initials that she had made the
of a documents integrity, is not essential to maintain a alterations. She in that way attributed to the "correctors"
charge for falsification of official documents. Such charge statements other than those in fact made by them. Her only
stands if the facts alleged in the Information fall under explanation of why she altered the grades in that way was that
any of the modes of committing falsification under Article it pleased her to do so.
171 of the RPC. (Bustillo v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No.
146217, April 7, 2006) Par. 4 – Making untruthful statements in a
narration of facts
Par. 3 – Attributing to persons who have
participated in an act or proceeding statements Requisites:
other than those in fact made by them 1) Offender makes in a document statements in a
narration of facts;
Requisites: 2) He has a legal obligation to disclose truth of
1) Person/s participated in an act or proceeding; facts;
2) Such person/s made statements in that act or
proceeding;
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-87
  There must be a legal obligation on the should make the document speak something false.
part of the accused to disclose the truth Otherwise, it would merely be a correction.
of the facts narrated
3) Facts narrated are absolutely false; Par. 7 – Issuing in an authenticated form a
4) Perversion of truth in the narration was made document purporting to be a copy of an original
with the wrongful intent of injuring a third document when no such original exists, or
person. including in such a copy a statement contrary
to, or different from, that of the genuine
Example: original

ENEMECIO v. OMBUDSMAN
G.R. No. 146731, January 13, 2004
Article 172. Falsification by private individual and use of
Petitioner Agustina failed to point to any law imposing upon falsified documents. - The penalty of prision correccional in its
private respondent Servando the legal obligation to disclose medium and maximum periods and a fine of not more
where he was going to spend his leave of absence. Servando than P5,000 pesos shall be imposed upon:
may not be convicted of the crime of falsification of public
document by making false statements in a narration of facts 1) Any private individual who shall commit any of
absent any legal obligation to disclose where he would spend the falsifications enumerated in the next
his vacation leave and forced leave. preceding article in any public or official
document or letter of exchange or any other kind
NOTE: of commercial document; and
1) There must be narration of facts, not conclusion 2) Any person who, to the damage of a third party,
of law. There should be a legal obligation to or with the intent to cause such damage, shall in
disclose the truth. [Beradio vs. CA] any private document commit any of the acts of
2) The person making the narration of facts must be falsification enumerated in the next preceding
aware of the falsity of facts narrated by him. The article.
narration of facts must be absolutely false. If
Any person who shall knowingly introduce in evidence in any
there is some colorable truth in such statements,
judicial proceeding or to the damage of another or who, with
crime of falsification is not deemed to have been
the intent to cause such damage, shall use any of the false
committed.
documents embraced in the next preceding article, or in any of
3) The existence of a wrongful intent to injure a
the foregoing subdivisions of this article, shall be punished by
third person is immaterial in falsification of a
the penalty next lower in degree.
public document. [Siquian vs. People]
4) There can be falsification by omission. An
Mode 1: Falsification of public, official or commercial
assistant bookkeeper is guilty of falsification by
document by a private individual;
intentionally not putting a record in his personal
account of chits and destroyed them so he could Elements:
avoid paying the same. [People vs. Dizon]
1) Offender is a Private individual OR Public officer
Par. 5 – Altering true dates or employee who did not take advantage of his
official position;
Requisites: 2) He committed any act of Falsification (Art. 171);
1) The date must be essential; 3) The falsification was committed in a public,
2) The alteration of the date must affect the official, or commercial document or letter of
veracity of the documents or the effects thereof exchange.
(such as dates of birth, marriage, or death).
Mode 2: Falsification of private document by any
Par. 6 – Making any alteration or intercalation person;
in a genuine document which changes its
meaning Elements:
Requisites: 1) Offender committed any of the acts of
Falsification except Article 171(7), that is, (1)
1. There be an alteration (change) or Issuing in an authenticated form a document
intercalation (insertion) on a document. purporting to be a copy of an original document
2. It was made on a genuine document. when no such original exists, or (2) Including in
3. Alteration or intercalation has changed the such a copy a statement contrary to, or different
meaning of the document. from, that of the genuine original;
4. Change made the document speak 2) Falsification was committed in any Private
something false. document;
NOTE: Change or insertion must affect the integrity or
effects of the document. Furthermore, the alteration
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-88
 3) Falsification causes Damage to a third party or at The public officer, to be liable, must be engaged in the service
least the falsification was committed with intent of sending or receiving wireless, cable, telegraph or telephone
to cause such damage. message.

Mode 3: Use of falsified document. A private individual cannot be a principal by direct participation
in falsification of telegraphic dispatches under Article 173,
Elements in introducing in a judicial proceeding: unless he is an employee of a corporation engaged in the
1) Offender Knew that the document was falsified business of sending or receiving wireless, telegraph or
by another person; telephone messages. But a private individual can be held
2) The False document is in Articles 171 or 172 (1 criminally liable as principal by inducement. in
or 2);
3) He Introduced said document in evidence in any
judicial proceeding.
SECTION FIVE: Falsification of medical certificates,
Elements in use in any other transaction
1) Offender Knew that a document was falsified by certificates of merit or service, and the like.
another person;
2) The False document is embraced in Articles 171 Art. 174- False medical ceritificates, false certificates
or 172 (1 or 2); of merit or service, etc. 3
3) He Used such document;
4) The use caused Damage to another or at least Persons liable for falsification of certificates
used with intent to cause damage
1. Physician or surgeon who, in connection with the
Article 173. Falsification of wireless, cable, telegraph and practice of his profession, issued a false certificate.
telephone messages, and use of said falsified messages. - The (art. 174 par. 1, RPC)
penalty of prision correccional in its medium and maximum - False Medical Certificate by a physician.
periods shall be imposed upon officer or employee of the - The certificate must refer to the illness or injury
Government or of any private corporation or concern engaged
of a person
in the service of sending or receiving wireless, cable or
telephone message who utters a fictitious wireless, telegraph 2. Public officer4 who issued a false certificate of merit
or telephone message of any system or falsifies the same. or service, good conduct or similar circumstances.
(art. 174 par. 2, RPC)
Any person who shall use such falsified dispatch to the - False Certificate of Merit or Service a public
prejudice of a third party or with the intent of cause such officer.
prejudice, shall suffer the penalty next lower in degree. - Merit or service, good conduct, or similar
circumstances. (ejusdem generis)
Mode 1: Uttering fictitious wireless, telegraph or - Property, no longer included.
telephone message; - The falsification of the certificate of large cattle is
not now covered by Art. 174; certificate of large
Elements: (a) Offender is an officer or employee of the
government or an officer or employee of a private corporation, cattle is a public document and its falsification is
engaged in the service of sending or receiving wireless, cable covered by Art. 171 or Art. 172, depending on
or telephone message; (b) He utters fictitious wireless, cable, whether the offender is a public officer or a
telegraph or telephone message. private individual. The ruling in the cases of U.S.
v. Sayson (6 Phil. 382), and U.S. v. Dumandan,
Mode 2: Falsifying wireless, telegraph or telephone
message;
3
Article 174. False medical certificates, false certificates of merits or service,
Elements: (a) Offender is an officer or employee of the etc. - The penalties of arresto mayor in its maximum period to prision
government or an officer or employee of a private corporation, correccional in its minimum period and a fine not to exceed P1,000 pesos
engaged in the service of sending or receiving wireless, cable shall be imposed upon:
or telephone message; (b) He falsifies wireless, cable, 1. Any physician or surgeon who, in connection, with the practice of his
telegraph or telephone message. profession, shall issue a false certificate; and
2. Any public officer who shall issue a false certificate of merit of service,
Mode 3: Using such falsified message. good conduct or similar circumstances.
The penalty of arresto mayor shall be imposed upon any private person who
Elements: (a) Offender knew that wireless, cable, telegraph, or shall falsify a certificate falling within the classes mentioned in the two
preceding subdivisions.
telephone message (1) Was falsified by an officer or employee 4
Article 203. Who are public officers. - For the purpose of applying the
of the government or an officer or employee of a private
provisions of this and the preceding titles of this book, any person who, by
corporation engaged in the service of sending or receiving direct provision of the law, popular election or appointment by competent
wireless, cable or telephone message; (b) He used such authority, shall take part in the performance of public functions in the
falsified dispatch; (c) The use resulted in the prejudice of a Government of the Philippine Islands, of shall perform in said Government or
third party or at least there was intent to cause such prejudice. in any of its branches public duties as an employee, agent or subordinate
official, of any rank or class, shall be deemed to be a public officer.
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-89
 (8 Phil. 61), was based on Art. 310 of the old SECTION SIX: Manufacturing, importing, and
Penal Code, which punished ― a public official possession of instruments or implements intended for
who shall issue a false certificate of merit or the commission of falsification
service or good conduct of property,‖etc. In view
of the omission of the words ―of property‖ in par. Art. 176- Manufacturing and possession of instruments
2 of Art. 174, it is doubted that certificates of or implements for falsification.6
large cattle are covered by Art. 174. The phrase
Acts punished under Art. 176 of RPC:
―or similar circumstances‖ in Art. 174 dies not
seem to cover property, because the
1. Making or introducing into the Philippines any stamps,
circumstance contemplated must be similar to
dies, marks or other instruments or implements for
―merit‖, ―service‖, or ―good conduct.‖
counterfeiting or falsification.
- Intent to gain is immaterial. But if the public
officer issued the false certificate in consideration Illustrative case:
of a promise, gift or reward, he will also be liable A person who manufactured a seal in imitation of the
for bribery. seal of Lipa, Batangas, for making false certificates for
3. Private individual who falsified a certificate falling in the transfer of livestock, is guilty of making
the classes mentioned in Nos. 1 and 2. (art. 174 par. instrument for falsification of certificates. (U.S. v.
3, RPC) Angeles, 6 Phil. 435)
- False Medical Certificate by a private individual,
or False Certificate of Merit or Service by a 2. Possessing with intent to use the instruments or
private individual implements for counterfeiting or falsification made in
- Certificate of Residence for voting purposes is or introduced into the Philippines by another person
certificate of ―similar circumstances.‖; Thus, a
person who falsely stated under oath that he was Illustrative case:
a resident of the town of Jimenez for the A person who possessed an iron brand to be used in
required period of time, so as to be able to take falsifying the official brand of a municipality for cattle
part in the municipal elections, was found guilty branding is guilty of illegal possession of instrument
of falsification of a certificate, not of falsification for falsification. (People v. Magpale, 70 Phil. 177)
of a public document. (U.S. v. Deloso, 11 Phil.
180)
-The implements confiscated need not form a
5 complete set; In order to secure a conviction for
Art. 175- Using false certificates
possession of instruments for falsification (Art. 176,
Elements: par. 2), it is not necessary that the implements
confiscated form a complete set for counterfeiting, it
1. That a physician or surgeon had issued a false being enough that they may be employed by
medical certificate, or a public officer had issued a themselves or together with other implements to
false certificate of merit or service, good conduct, or commit the crime of counterfeiting or falsification.
similar circumstances, or a private person had (People v. Santiago, et al., C.A. 48 O.G. 4401)
falsified any of said certificates -Art. 165 and 176 of RPC also punish
constructive possession; The possession
2. That the offender knew that the certificate was false. prohibited in Art. 165, and 176 of RPC is possession in
general, that is, not only actual physical possession,
3. That he used the same.
but also constructive possession or the subjection of
NOTE: When any of the false certificates mentioned in Art. the thing to one‘s control.
174 is used in the judicial proceeding, Art. 172 does not apply, Illustrative case:
because the use of false document in judicial proceeding under
Art. 172 is limited to those false documents embraced in Arts.
6
171 and 172. Such use of the false certificates falls under Art. Article 176. Manufacturing and possession of instruments or implements
for falsification. - The penalty of prison correctional in its medium and
175. maximum periods and a fine not to exceed P10,000 pesos shall be imposed
upon any person who shall make or introduce into the Philippine Islands any
stamps, dies, marks, or other instruments or implements intended to be used
in the commission of the offenses of counterfeiting or falsification mentioned
in the preceding sections of this Chapter. Any person who, with the intention
5
Article 175. Using false certificates. - The penalty of arresto menor shall be of using them, shall have in his possession any of the instruments or
imposed upon any one who shall knowingly use any of the false certificates implements mentioned in the preceding paragraphs, shall suffer the penalty
mentioned in the next preceding article. next lower in degree than that provided therein.
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-90
 Where the sale of counterfeiting paraphernalia is 2. Usurpation of official functions- By performing any act
made subject to the condition that the vendor must pertaining to any person in authority10 or public
demonstrate how counterfeiting is done, and, on the officer of the Philippine Government or of a foreign
way to the place where the demonstration is to be government or any agency thereof, under pretense or
done, the vehicle carrying the paraphernalia is official position, and without being lawfully lawfully
intercepted and tits cargo is confiscated, the vendor, entitled to do so
although not in the vehicle, is nonetheless in NOTE: It is essential that the offender
constructive possession of the articles and the same should have performed an act pertaining to a
still legally subject to his control(People v. Andrada, person in authority or public officer, in
C.A., 65 O.G. 5751, citing 1502, Civil Code7) addition to other requirements.

CHAPTER TWO-OTHER FALSITIES Illustrative cases:

People v. Hilvano (99 Phil 655)
SECTION ONE - Usurpation of authority, rank, title, and DOCTRINE: Art. 177 may be violated by a public
improper use of names, uniforms and insignia. officer
FACTS: When the Mayor of Villareal, Samar, departed for
Art. 177- Usurpation of authority or official functions.8 Manila on official business on Sept. 22, 1952, he
Two ways of committing the crime under Art. 177: designated defendant councillor to discharge the duties of
1. Usurpation of authority- By knowingly and falsely his office. Later, during office hours of the same day, the
representing oneself to be an officer9, agent, or Vice-Mayor went to the municipal building; and having
representative of any department or agency of the found the defendant acting in the place of the Mayor, he
Philippine Government or any foreign government. served written notice to the corresponding municipal
NOTE: the mere act of knowingly and falsely officers, including the defendant that he as Vice-Mayor
representing oneself to be an officer, etc. is was assuming the duties of the absent Mayor. However,
sufficient. It is not necessary that he the defendant refused to yield, arguing that he had been
performs an act pertaining ot a public officer designated by the Mayor. Under Sec. 2195 of the Revised
-There must be positive, express and Administrative Code, it was the Vice-mayor who should
explicit representation; The law demands discharge the duties of the Mayor during the latter‘s
positive, express and explicit representation temporary absence (as shown by the Executive Secretary
on the part of the offender before he can be and opined by the provincial fiscal). This notwithstanding,
convicted of usurpation of authority. The which was exhibited to him, the defendant declined to
crime is not committed if the accused merely vacate the post, he held for about a month.
did not deny that he was an agent of the He was charged with usurpation of authority and official
Philippine Government when introduced as functions under Art. 177 of the RPC. The defendant
such by public officials who responded to the contended that he committed no usurpation of authority
intrigues of one Jose B. Lazaro. (People v. because he was a councillor, an official of the
Calinisan, 8 C.A. Rep. 20) government, and that such crime may only be committed
by private individuals
HELD: There is actually no reason to restrict the
operation of Art. 177 to private individuals. For one thing,
it applies to ―any person‖; and when the law does not
distinguish, the Court should not distinguish. Furthermore,
7
By constructive possession or proper acts and legal formalities contrary to appellant‘s assumption that Art. 238-241 of
a. Constititom possessorium exists when a person who possessed the RPC penalize all kinds of usurpation of official function
property as an owner now possesses it in
some other capacity other than owner by public officers, said articles merely punish interference
b. Traditio brevi manu is the opposite of constitutom possessorium by officers of one of the three departments of government
c. Traditio longa manu is delivery by consent or mere pointing (legislative, executive, and judiciary) with functions of
d. Traditio symbolica by delivery of a symbol representing the thing which
officials of another department. Said articles do not cover
is delivered, such as the key to a warehouse.
8
Usurpation of authority or official functions. - Any person who shall
knowingly and falsely represent himself to be an officer, agent or
10
representative of any department or agency of the Philippine Government or Article 152. Persons in authority and agents of persons in authority; Who
of any foreign government, or who, under pretense of official position, shall shall be deemed as such. - In applying the provisions of the preceding and
perform any act pertaining to any person in authority or public officer of the other articles of this Code, any person directly vested with jurisdiction,
Philippine Government or any foreign government, or any agency thereof, whether as an individual or as a member of some court or governmental
without being lawfully entitled to do so, shall suffer the penalty of prision corporation, board, or commission, shall be deemed a person in authority. A
correccional in its minimum and medium periods. barrio captain and a barangay chairman shall also be deemed a person in
9
Art. 203, RPC authority. xxxx
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-91
usurpation of one officer or employee of a given kidnapping case, and requested that he be shown the PAL
department of the powers of another officer in the same records. To further convince the PAL officials of his
department. For instance, the exercise by a bureau supposed mission, Gigantoni exhibited his Identification
employee of the power of his director. There is no excuse card purporting to show that he was a PC-CIS agent.
for the defendant. In the beginning he might have Thereupon, his aforesaid request was granted. When
pleaded food faith, invoking the designation by the Mayor; Gigantoni was no longer around, PAL then became
but after he had been shown the letter of the Executive suspicious of the accused" real identity prompting them to
Secretary and the opinion of the Provincial Fiscal, he has conduct verification from the PC-CIS office. They
no right thereafter stubbornly to stick to the position. subsequently learned from General Uy of PC-CIS that
Gigantoni was no longer a CIS agent since June 30, 1980
People v. Cortez, (73 OG 10056) as he had been dismissed from the service for gross
FACTS: Elizabeth Z. Reyes was in her Malate store. misconduct. Petitioner admitted that he received a notice
Appellant Augusto Cortez entered and introduced himself of his suspension from the CIS effective June 20, 1980.
as a BIR agent, showing an ID card in the name of S. However, as to petitioner's alleged dismissal effective June
Begunia together with other BIR papers. He told Mrs. 20, 1980, he denied having been informed thereof.
Reyes that he was authorized to examine the latter‘s Petitioner Melencio Gigantoni y Javier, was charged before
books and receipts. Appellant then asked for a fee ofP400 the Regional Trial Court of Rizal, Pasig, with the crime of
so that he would not inspect the books and receipts, usurpation of authority in violation of Article 17711 of the
claiming that he was sent to collect and raise funds or the Revised Penal Code
BIR director. Mrs. Reyes went to the BIR and learned that ISSUE: WON petitioner knowingly and falsely represented
the appellant was merely an impostor. The BIR agents himself as an agent of the CIS, Philippine Constabulary
apprehended the appellant in an entrapment operation HELD: NO, the failure of the prosecution to prove that
with the help of Mrs. Reyes. He was then charged with petitioner was duly notified of his dismissal from the
complex crime of robbery through use and falsification of service negatives the charge that he "knowingly and
public and/or official document and with usurpation of falsely" represented himself to be a CIS agent. The
authority. constitutional presumption of innocence can only be
ISSUE: Whether or not appellant committed the complex overturned by competent and credible proof and never by
crime of robbery through use and falsification of public mere disputable presumptions, as what the lower and
and/or official document and with usurpation of authority. appellate courts did when they presumed that petitioner
HELD: No, the crime committed was a complex crime of was duly notified of his dismissal by applying the
usurpation of authority under Art 177 through falsification disputable presumption "that official duty has been
of a public document by a private individual under Art. regularly performed." It was not for the accused to prove
172, and not Robbery since there was neither violence nor a negative fact, namely, that he did not receive the order
intimidation. The falsification was the means employed to of dismissal. In criminal cases, the burden of proof as to
perpetrate the crime of usurpation. Cortez knowingly and the offense charged lies on the prosecution. Hence, it was
falsely represented himself as an officer or agent (BIR incumbent upon the prosecution to establish by positive
agent) through the use of ID cards and BIR papers. The evidence the allegation that the accused falsely
penalty for falsification should be imposed in its maximum represented himself as a CIS agent, by presenting proof
period, falsification being the most serious offense that he knew that he was no longer a CIS agent, having
been duly notified of his dismissal. It is essential to
present proof that he actually knew at the time of the
Gigantoni v. People (G.R. No. 74727, June 16,
alleged commission of the offense that he was already
1988)
dismissed from the service. A mere disputable
DOCTRINE: A suspended public officer who
presumption that he received notice of his dismissal would
represented himself as such during the period of
not be sufficient.
his suspension is not liable of usurpation of
authority. Nonetheless, he is liable of usurpation of
ARGUMENT2: The Solicitor General has argued in his
official functions if he exercised the functions of
memorandum, that it makes no difference whether the
the office despite being suspended.
accused was suspended or dismissed from the service,
FACTS: On May 14, 1981, accused-appellant Melencio
Gigantoni, who was then a suspended Philippine 11
That on or about the 14th and 15th day of May, 1981, in the Municipality
Constabulary- CIS agent, went to the office of the of Makati, Metro Manila, Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this
Philippine Air Lines (PAL), allegedly to conduct verification Honorable Court, the above-named accused, who is not a bonafide agent of
of some travels made by Black Mountain's officials. Upon the CIS, Philippine Constabulary, did then and there willfully, unlawfully,
knowingly and falsely represented himself as a bonafide agent of the CIS,
reaching the said PAL office, he represented himself to the Philippine Constabulary, said accused, knowing fully well his representation
PAL legal officer as a PC-CIS agent investigating a to be false.
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-92
 "for both imply the absence of power to represent oneself is public using a fictitious name. (US v. To Lee Piu, 35
as vested with authority to perform acts pertaining to an Phil. 4)
office to which he knowingly was deprived of " 3)That the purpose of the offender is-
ISSUE2: WON it is immaterial whether the accused was a. To conceal a crime
merely suspended and not dismissed from the service b. To evade the execution of a judgment; or
since both implye the absence of power to represent - When a person takes the place of another who
oneself as vested with authority to perform acts pertaining has been convicted by final judgment, he is guilty
to an office of using a fictitious name punishable under Art.
HELD2: No, petitioner is accused of usurpation of 178, and not of evasion of the service of the
authority and not of usurpation of official functions. That sentence under Art. 157,13 because the real
he knowingly and falsely represented himself to be a CIS convict alone is guilty thereof. It seems that such
agent was the only offense with which he was charged in person is also liable for delivering prisoners from
the information. jail under Art. 156,14 by helping the escape of the
NOTE: The observation of the Solicitor General is correct real convict by other means. The prisoner who is
if the accused were charged with usurpation of official replaced must necessarily use the name of
function (second part of Article 177), but not if he is another, and in this case he is also guilty of using
charged merely with usurpation of authority (first part of a fictitious name to evade the execution of the
Article 177). The information charges the accused with the judgement against him (in addition to evasion of
crime of usurpation of authority for "knowingly and falsely sentence). And the one who takes his place has
representing himself to be an officer, agent or to use a fictitious name to conceal the crime of
representative of any department or agency of the delivering a person from jail. (REYES)
Philippine Government." c. To cause damage to public interest.
- If it is damage to private interest, the crime will
Additional penalty for usurping the authority of be estafa under Art. 315, subdivision 2, par. (a)15
diplomatic or consular or any other official of a foreign 2. Concealing true name
government (RA 75, Sec. 1) Elements:
- Section 1. Any person who shall falsely assume and 1) That the offender conceals-
take upon himself to act as a diplomatic, consular, or a. His true name; and
any other official of a foreign government duly b. All other personal circumstances
accredited as such to the Government of the Republic 2) That the purpose is only to conceal his identity.
of the Philippines with intent to defraud such foreign
government or the Government of the Philippines xxx Using Fictitious name Concealing true name
shall be fined not more than five thousand pesos, or
shall be imprisoned for not more than five years, or
both, in addition to the penalties that may be
Element of publicity must Element is not necessary
imposed under the Revised Penal Code.
NOTE: the offender must have the intent to defraud
either government. 13
Article 157. Evasion of service of sentence. - The penalty of prision
correccional in its medium and maximum periods shall be imposed upon any
Art. 178- Using fictitious name and concealing true convict who shall evade service of his sentence by escaping during the term
of his imprisonment by reason of final judgment.
name12
However, if such evasion or escape shall have taken place by means of
1. Using Fictitious name unlawful entry, by breaking doors, windows, gates, walls, roofs, or floors, or
Elements: by using picklocks, false keys, deceit, violence or intimidation, or through
1) That the offender uses a name other than his real connivance with other convicts or employees of the penal institution, the
penalty shall be prision correccional in its maximum period.
name. 14
Article 156. Delivery of prisoners from jails. - The penalty of arresto mayor
2) That he uses that fictitious name publicly. in its maximum period of prision correccional in its minimum period shall be
- The signing of a fictitious name, i.e., Toribio Jalijali, imposed upon any person who shall remove from any jail or penal
establishment any person confined therein or shall help the escape of such
instead of To Lee Piu, in an application for passport,
person, by means of violence, intimidation, or bribery. If other means are
used, the penalty of arresto mayor shall be imposed.
If the escape of the prisoner shall take place outside of said establishments
by taking the guards by surprise, the same penalties shall be imposed in their
12
Article 178. Using fictitious name and concealing true name. - The penalty minimum period.
15
of arresto mayor and a fine not to exceed 500 pesos shall be imposed upon 2. By means of any of the following false pretenses or fraudulent acts
any person who shall publicly use a fictitious name for the purpose of executed prior to or simultaneously with the commission of the fraud:
concealing a crime, evading the execution of a judgment or causing damage. (a) By using fictitious name, or falsely pretending to possess power,
Any person who conceals his true name and other personal circumstances influence, qualifications, property, credit, agency, business or imaginary
shall be punished by arresto menor or a fine not to exceed 200 pesos. transactions, or by means of other similar deceits. xxx
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-93
be present purposes and in athletic events where the use of
pseudonym is a normally accepted practice.
Purpose is any of those Purpose is merely to NOTE: Any person desiring to use an alias shall
three enumerated (viz., conceal indentity apply for authority therefor in proceedings like those
for the purpose of legally provided to obtain judicial authority for a
concealing a crime, change of name, and no person shall be allowed to
evading the execution of secure such judicial authority for more than one alias
a judgment or causing
public damage) Illustrative case:
Legamia v. IAC, G.R. No. L-63817, August 28,
1984
3. Use of unregistered aliases (Commonwealth Act No.
DOCTRINE: CA 142(as amended by RA 6085)
142 as amended by RA 6085)16
is not applicable to live-in partners who used
-No person shall use any name different from the one with
their partner’s surname without any sinister
which he was registered at birth in the office of the local
purpose or personal material gain in mind.
civil registry, or with which he was baptized for the first
FACTS: Corazon Legamia lived with Emilio N. Reyes
time, or, in case of an alien, with which he was registered
for 19 years until when Emilio died. During their live-
in the bureau of immigration upon entry; or such
in arrangement they produced a boy who was
substitute name as may have been authorized by a
named Michael Raphael Gabriel L. Reyes. From the
competent court
time Corazon and Emilio lived together until the
XPN: Except as a pseudonym solely for literary,
latter's death, Corazon was known as Corazon L.
cinema, television, radio or other entertainment
Reyes; she styled herself as Mrs. Reyes; and Emilio
16 introduced her to friends as Mrs. Reyes. Emilio was
REPUBLIC ACT No. 6085
Sec. 1. Except as a pseudonym solely for literary, cinema, television, radio or Branch Claim Manager Naga Branch, of the
other entertainment purposes and in athletic events where the use of Agricultural Credit Administration when he died.
pseudonym is a normally accepted practice, no person shall use any name Shortly after Emilio's death, Corazon filed a letter in
different from the one with which he was registered at birth in the office of
the local civil registry, or with which he was baptized for the first time, or, in
behalf of Michael with the Agricultural Credit
case of an alien, with which he was registered in the bureau of immigration Administration for death benefits. The letter was
upon entry; or such substitute name as may have been authorized by a signed "Corazon L. Reyes." The voucher evidencing
competent court: Provided, That persons, whose births have not been
payment of Michael's claim was also signed "Corazon
registered in any local civil registry and who have not been baptized, have
one year from the approval of this act within which to register their names in L. Reyes."
the civil registry of their residence. The name shall comprise the patronymic
name and one or two surnames. For using the name Reyes although she was not
Sec. 2. Any person desiring to use an alias shall apply for authority therefor in
married to Emilio, Felicisima Reyes who was married
proceedings like those legally provided to obtain judicial authority for a
change of name, and no person shall be allowed to secure such judicial to Emilio filed a complaint which led to Corazon's
authority for more than one alias. The petition for an alias shall set forth the prosecution. Corazon Legamia was accused of using
person's baptismal and family name and the name recorded in the civil an alias in violation of Commonwealth Act No. 142.
registry, if different, his immigrant's name, if an alien, and his pseudonym, if
he has such names other than his original or real name, specifying the reason ISSUE: WON accused Corazon Legamia violated CA
or reasons for the use of the desired alias. The judicial authority for the use 142
of alias the Christian name and the alien immigrant's name shall be recorded HELD: NO. It is not uncommon in Philippine society
in the proper local civil registry, and no person shall use any name or names
for a woman to represent herself as the wife and use
other, than his original or real name unless the same is or are duly recorded
in the proper local civil registry. the name of the man she is living with despite the
Sec. 3. No person having been baptized with a name different from that with fact that the man is married to another woman. The
which he was registered at birth in the local civil registry, or in case of an practice, to be sure, is not encouraged but neither is
alien, registered in the bureau of immigration upon entry, or any person who
obtained judicial authority to use an alias, or who uses a pseudonym, shall it unduly frowned upon. A number of women can be
represent himself in any public or private transaction or shall sign or execute Identified who are living with men prominent in
any public or private document without stating or affixing his real or original political, business and social circles. The woman
name and all names or aliases or pseudonym he is or may have been
publicly holds herself out as the man's wife and uses
authorized to use.
Sec. 4. Six months from the approval of this act and subject to the provisions his family name blithely ignoring the fact that he is
of section 1 hereof, all persons who have used any name and/or names and not her husband. And yet none of the women has
alias or aliases different from those authorized in section one of this act and been charged of violating the C.A. No. 142 because
duly recorded in the local civil registry, shall be prohibited to use such other
name or names and/or alias or aliases.
ours is not a bigoted but a tolerant and
Sec. 5. Any violation of this Act shall be punished with imprisonment of from understanding society. It is in the light of our
one year to five years and a fine of P5,000 to P10,000. cultural environment that the law must be
xxx construed. In the case at bar, Corazon had been
Approved: August 4, 1969.
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-94
 living with Emilio for almost 20 years. He introduced government with which the Republic of the Philippines
her to the public as his wife and she assumed that is at peace, or any uniform, decoration or regalia so
role and his name without any sinister purpose or nearly resembling the same as to be calculated to
personal material gain in mind. She applied for deceive, xxx shall upon conviction, be punished by a
benefits upon his death not for herself but for fine not exceeding two hundred pesos or
Michael who as a boy of tender years was under her imprisonment not exceeding six months, or by both
guardianship. Surely, the lawmakers could not such fine and imprisonment.
have meant to criminalize what Corazon had XPN: Unless such wearing thereof be authorized by
done especially because some of them such State, nation, or government.
probably had their own Corazons.
Wearing insignia, badge, or emblem of rank of the
Art. 179- Illegal use of uniforms or insignia17 members of the Armed Forces of the Philippines or
Elements: Constabulary is punished by RA 493. 19
1) Offender makes Use of insignia, uniforms or dress; - It shall be unlawful for any person not in the service
2) The insignia, uniforms or dress pertains to an Office of the Armed Forces of the Philippines or the
not held by such person or a class of persons of Philippine Constabulary, except those excluded from
which he is not a member; the prohibition in section one20 of this Act, to use or
-Wearing the uniform of an imaginary office, wear the duly prescribed insignia, badge or emblem
not punishable; if the insignia, uniform or dress or rank of the members of the Armed Forces of the
pertains to an office which does not originally exist, Philippines or the Philippine Constabulary, or any
this provision is not violated. colorable imitation thereof
-An exact imitation of a uniform or dress is XPNs:
unnecessary (1) using or wearing any military or naval
Illustrative case: insignia, badge or emblem of rank in any
People v. Romero (CA., 58 OG 4402)
FACTS: In November 1955, information reached the 19
Sec. 2. Hereafter it shall be unlawful for any person not in the service of
Mother Superior of the religious order, Daughters of the Armed Forces of the Philippines or the Philippine Constabulary, except
St. Paul, that a woman was roaming around alone those excluded from the prohibition in section one of this Act, to use or wear
asking for alms for orphans in the name of said the duly prescribed insignia, badge or emblem or rank of the members of the
Armed Forces of the Philippines or the Philippine Constabulary, or any
organization. The woman was wearing the habit of
colorable imitation thereof: Provided, That the foregoing shall not be
the Daughters of St. Paul. construed as prohibiting any person from using or wearing any military or
HELD: To bring a culprit within the coverage of Art. naval insignia, badge or emblem of rank in any play-house or theater or in
179 of RPC, on the illegal use of uniforms and moving-picture films while actually engaged in representing therein a military
or naval character not tending to bring discredit or reproach upon the Armed
insignia, an exact imitation of a uniform is
Forces of the Philippines, the Philippine Constabulary or the Bureau of Coast
unnecessary and Geodetic Survey: Provided, further, That the use or wearing of any
3) Said insignia, uniform or dress is used publicly and military or naval insignia, badge or emblem of rank while engaged in
improperly. representing a military or naval character as hereinabove described, shall be
subject to supervision and regulation by the Secretary of National Defense.
The phrase "duly prescribed insignia, badge or emblem of rank" shall, for the
Using uniform, decoration, or regalia of foreign State is purpose of this Act, mean any insignia, badge or emblem of rank which is, or
punished by RA 7518 may hereafter be, prescribed by Congress, the Secretary of National Defense
or the Chief of Constabulary.
- Any person, who with intent to deceive or mislead, 20
Section 1. Hereafter it shall be unlawful for any person or association or
within the jurisdiction of the Republic, wear any persons not in the service of the Armed Forces of the Philippines of the
naval, military, police, or other official uniform, Philippine Constabulary to use, or confer upon himself or another who is not
decoration, or regalia of any foreign State, nation or in the service of the said Armed Forces or Constabulary, any military or naval
grade or title which is, or may hereafter be, prescribed by laws and
regulations for the use of the Armed Forces or Constabulary: Provided, That
17
Article 179. Illegal use of uniforms or insignia. - The penalty of arresto the foregoing shall not be construed as prohibiting the use of such military or
mayor shall be imposed upon any person who shall publicly and improperly naval grades or title by personnel or persons now authorized by law and by
make use of insignia, uniforms or dress pertaining to an office not held by the following persons:
such person or to a class of persons of which he is not a member. (a) All veterans of any war when recognized by the Philippine or United
18
Section 3. Any person, who with intent to deceive or mislead, within the States Government and only for the ranks for which they are recognized;
jurisdiction of the Republic, wear any naval, military, police, or other official (b) Commissioned officers and personnel, retired or in active duty, of the
uniform, decoration, or regalia of any foreign State, nation or government Bureau of Coast and Geodetic Survey, of the quarantine service, and of the
with which the Republic of the Philippines is at peace, or any uniform, customs service;
decoration or regalia so nearly resembling the same as to be calculated to (c) Commissioned and enlisted reservists including recognized guerrilla
deceive, unless such wearing thereof be authorized by such State, nation, or officers on inactive status when using their authorized grades for a purely
government, shall upon conviction, be punished by a fine not exceeding two military purposes;
hundred pesos or imprisonment not exceeding six months, or by both such (d) Trainees in the Armed Forces while undergoing any period of trainee
fine and imprisonment.1awphil-itc-alf instruction pursuant to law.
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-95
 play-house or theater or in moving-picture 2) Offender Testifies falsely under oath against the
films while actually engaged in representing defendant therein;
therein a military or naval character not 3) Offender who gives false testimony knows that it is
tending to bring discredit or reproach upon false.
the Armed Forces of the Philippines, the 4) Defendant against whom the false testimony is given
Philippine Constabulary or the Bureau of is either acquitted or convicted in a final judgment.
Coast and Geodetic Survey -Penalty depends upon the sentence of the defendant
(2) All veterans of any war when recognized by against whom false testimony was given.
the Philippine or United States Government NOTE: The four cases enumerated under Art. 180
and only for the ranks for which they are presupposes a final judgement.
recognized; CAVEAT: Defendant must be sentenced at least to
(3) Commissioned officers and personnel, retired (1) a correctional penalty, or (2) a fine, or (3) must
or in active duty, of the Bureau of Coast and be acquitted.
Geodetic Survey, of the quarantine service, -implication: If defendant was sentenced to a
and of the customs service; light penalty(viz. Arresto menor, public
22
(4) Commissioned and enlisted reservists censure), the falsehood is not punishable
including recognized guerrilla officers on NOTE: The witness who gave false testimony is liable
inactive status when using their authorized even if his testimony was not considered by the court.
grades for a purely military purposes; (Reyes)
(5) Trainees in the Armed Forces while
undergoing any period of trainee instruction Art. 181-False Testimony to the defendant23
pursuant to law. Elements:
1) A person gives false testimony;
SECTION TWO – False Testimony 2) In favor of the defendant;
False testimony, defined 3) In a Criminal case.
- False testimony is committed by a person who, being - The contention of the defense that the acquittal of
under oath and required to testify as to the truth of a Jemenia was due to the failure of the fiscal to call
certain matter at a hearing before a competent other witnesses (than the defendant in this case who
authority, shall deny the truth or say something testified that he could not remember anymore the
contrary to it. (Reyes) face of Jemenia) who could have property identified
Three forms of false testimony Jemenia, is irrelevant. It is not necessary that the
1. False testimony in criminal case (article 180-against testimony should directly influence the
the defendant, and 181- favourable to the defendant) decision of acquittal, it being sufficient that it was
2. False testimony in civil cases (article 182) given with the intent to favor the accused (in this
3. False testimony in other cases (article 183) case, Jemenia). (People v. Reyes, CA 48 OG 1837)
Nature of the crime of false testimony - The false testimony favourable to the
- Falsehood is ever reprehensible; but it is particularly defendant need not benefit the defendant;
odious when committed in judicial proceedings, as it Tupas was convicted in spite of the favourable
constitutes an imposition upon the court and seriously testimony given by the accused. It was held that the
exposes it to a miscarriage of justice. (People v. person who falsely testified was guilty, even if his
Reyes C.A., 48 O.G. 1837) testimony did not benefit Tupas. (U.S. v. Adolfo, 12
Phil 296)
Art. 180-False Testimony against a defendant21 - A statement by a witness that he is an expert
Elements: in handwriting is a statement of a mere
1) There is a Criminal proceeding;
22
Art. 25-xxx Light penalties:Arresto menor, Public censure. xxx
21 23
Article 180. False testimony against a defendant. - Any person who shall Article 180. False testimony against a defendant. - Any person who shall
give false testimony against the defendant in any criminal case shall suffer: give false testimony against the defendant in any criminal case shall suffer:
1. The penalty of reclusion temporal, if the defendant in said case shall have 1. The penalty of reclusion temporal, if the defendant in said case shall have
been sentenced to death; been sentenced to death;
2. The penalty of prision mayor, if the defendant shall have been sentenced 2. The penalty of prision mayor, if the defendant shall have been sentenced
to reclusion temporal or reclusion perpetua; to reclusion temporal or reclusion perpetua;
3. The penalty of prision correccional, if the defendant shall have been 3. The penalty of prision correccional, if the defendant shall have been
sentenced to any other afflictive penalty; and sentenced to any other afflictive penalty; and
4. The penalty of arresto mayor, if the defendant shall have been sentenced 4. The penalty of arresto mayor, if the defendant shall have been sentenced
to a correctional penalty or a fine, or shall have been acquitted. to a correctional penalty or a fine, or shall have been acquitted.
In cases provided in subdivisions 3 and 4 of this article the offender shall In cases provided in subdivisions 3 and 4 of this article the offender shall
further suffer a fine not to exceed 1,000 pesos. further suffer a fine not to exceed 1,000 pesos.
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-96
 opinion, the falsity of which is not sufficient to
convict him (US v. McGovern, 4 Phil 451); If it his Art. 182-False Testimony in civil cases24
testimony relative to his experience which is false, Elements:
this not being a statement of mere opinion, he may 1) Testimony given in a civil case
be liable. (Reyes) 2) Testimony relates to the issues presented in said
- Conviction or acquittal of defendant in principal case;
case, not necessary; under Art. 181, it is sufficient 3) Testimony is false;
that the defendant in the principal case is prosecuted 4) Offender knows that testimony is false;
for a felony. 5) Testimony is malicious
- The defendant who falsely testified in his own 6) And given with intent to affect the issues presented in
behalf in a criminal case is guilty of false said case.
testimony favorable to the defendant. -Falsity of testimony must first be established; ―The
falsity of the subject testimonies of private respondents is
Illustrative case: yet to be established. It is noted that at the time of the
US v. Soliman, G.R. No. L-11555, January 6, filing of the criminal complaints, the civil case filed by Ark
1917 Travel is still pending decision.[23] Ark Travel has yet to
FACTS: The evidence of record conclusively discloses prove the validity of its monetary claims and damages
that the defendant and appellant in this case, Gabino against NFMAI. It is only after trial that the RTC can
Soliman, testifying in his on behalf in the course of assess the veracity or falsity of the testimony and
another criminal case in which he, with several correspondingly render a decision. Thus, the civil case is
others, was charged with estafa, swore falsely to so intimately connected with the subject crime that it is
certain material allegations of fact. On that occasion determinative of the guilt or innocence of the respondents
he testified falsely that a sworn statement offered in in the criminal cases. In other words, whether or not the
evidence in support of the charge of estafa, which testimonies of private respondents in the civil cases are
was in effect an extrajudicial confession of his guilt, false is a prejudicial question. Xxx Hence, pending
had not been executed voluntarily, and that its determination of the falsity of the subject testimonies of
execution had not been procured by the police by the private respondents in the civil case, the criminal action
use of force, intimidation and prolonged torture. for false testimony must perforce be suspended. As such,
HELD: It must not be forgotten that the right of an under the attendant circumstances, although there is no
accused person to testify under oath in his own behalf motion to suspend proceedings on the part of the private
is secured to him, not that he may be enabled to respondents, orderly administration of justice dictates that
introduce false testimony into the record, but to the criminal cases should be suspended.‖ (Ark Travel v.
enable him to spread upon the record the truth as to Hon. Abrogar, G.R. No. 137010. August 29, 2003)
any matter within his knowledge which will tend to -Penalty depends on the amount of the controversy
establish his innocence.
NOTE: It would seem that the ruling in Soliman Art. 183-False Testimony in other cases and perjury in
should apply only when, as in that case, ―an accused solemn affirmation25
voluntarily goes upon the witness stand and falsely ACTS PUNISHED:
imputes some other person the commission of a (1) By falsely Testifying under oath;
grave offense.‖ If he merely denies the commission of (2) By Making a false affidavit.
the crime or his participation therein, he should not
be prosecuted for false testimony. (Reyes) 24
Article 182. False testimony in civil cases. - Any person found guilty of false
testimony in a civil case shall suffer the penalty of prision correccional in its
minimum period and a fine not to exceed 6,000 pesos, if the amount in
- Rectification made spontaneously after
controversy shall exceed 5,000 pesos, and the penalty of arresto mayor in its
realizing the mistake is not false testimony. maximum period to prision correccional in its minimum period and a fine not
Illustrative case: to exceed 1,000 pesos, if the amount in controversy shall not exceed said
People v. Ambal, 69 Phil. 710 amount or cannot be estimated.
25
Article 183. False testimony in other cases and perjury in solemn
FACTS: On direct examination, the witness stated affirmation. - The penalty of arresto mayor in its maximum period to prision
that the accused told him to get up for he had killed a correccional in its minimum period shall be imposed upon any person, who
person. On cross-examination, the witness changed knowingly makes untruthful statements and not being included in the
provisions of the next preceding articles, shall testify under oath, or make an
his testimony and stated he did not hear clearly what affidavit, upon any material matter before a competent person authorized to
the accused said. administer an oath in cases in which the law so requires.
HELD: The witness is not liable, there being no Any person who, in case of a solemn affirmation made in lieu of an oath,
shall commit any of the falsehoods mentioned in this and the three
sufficient evidence that he acted with malice or with
preceding articles of this section, shall suffer the respective penalties
criminal intent to testify falsely provided therein.
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-97
 petitioner's claim, he was never enrolled at the
Elements: Cosmopolitan Colleges. Likewise, petitioner was never a
1) That the accused made a statement under oath, or student at the Harvardian Colleges. Accordingly, petitioner
executed an affidavit upon a material matter; Reolandi Diaz was charged with the crime of Falsification
- ―Oath‖: Any form of attestation by which a of Official Document26 After petitioner was found guilty as
person signifies that he is bound by conscience to charged of the crime of falsification of official document
perform an act faithfully and truthfully. penalized under Article 171, paragraph 4, of the Revised
- ―Affidavit‖:Sworn statement in writing; Penal Code.
declaration in writing, made upon oath before an ISSUE: WON the conviction of the accused of the crime
authorized magistrate or officer. of falsification of official document penalized under Article
2) That the statement or affidavit was made before a 171, paragraph 4, of the Revised Penal Code is correct.
competent officer, authorized to receive and HELD: NO, Following the doctrine laid down, however, in
administer oath; the case of People v. Rufo B. Cruz,27 the crime committed
- Means a person who has a right to inquire into under the foregoing facts, is perjury. 28 In that case of
the questions presented to him upon matters People v. Cruz, supra, the accused Rufo B. Cruz failed up
under his jurisdiction. (US v. Go Chanco, 23 Phil an application form (Civil Service Form No. 2) for the
641) patrolman examination. He stated therein that he had
3) That in that statement or affidavit, the accused made never been accused, indicted or tried for violation of any
a willful and deliberate assertion of a falsehood; and law, ordinance or regulation before any court, when in
- There could be no perjury through negligence or truth and in fact, as the accused well knew, he had been
imprudence. This is because of the requirement prosecuted and tried before the Justice of the Peace of
that the assertion of a falsehood be made Cainta, Rizal, for different crimes. The application was
willfully and deliberately. Hence, good faith or signed and sworn to by him before the municipal mayor of
lack of malice is a defense in perjury. Cainta, Rizal. This Court in that case held: This article is
4) That the sworn statement or affidavit containing the similar to Section 3 of Act No. 1697 of the Philippine
falsity is required by law. Commission, which was formerly the law punishing
- It is not necessary that there be a law requiring perjury. Under said section 3 of that Act, this Court, in the
the statement to be made under oath, as long as case of United States v. Tupasi Molina (29 Phil. 119), held
it is made for a legal purpose. (People v. that a person, who stated under oath in his application to
Angangco, GR 47693, October 12 1943)- take police examination that he had never been convicted
unpublished decision of any crime, when as a matter of fact he has previous
-Not being included in the provisions of the next preceding convictions, committed perjury. The facts in that case are
articles. Perjury is an offense which covers false oaths other almost exactly analogous to those in the present, and we
than those taken in the course of judicial proceedings. (US v, find no reason, either in law or in the arguments of the
Estrana, 16 Phil. 521) Solicitor General to modify or reverse the conclusion of
Illustrative case: this Court therein. More so, because all the elements of
Diaz v. People, G.R. No. L-65006, October 31, 1990 the offense of perjury defined in Art. 183 of the Revised
DOCTRINE: Making false statements in a civil Penal Code concur in the present case.
service form under oath is perjury, and not
26
falsification of official document. That on or about the 5th day of December 1972, in the Municipality of San
Fernando, Province of Pampanga, Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of
FACTS: In 1972, accused Diaz sought appointment as
this Honorable Court, the above-named accused, Reolandi M. DIAZ, then a
School Administrative Assistant I of the same school Jose Senior Clerk at the Jose Abad Santos High School and, therefore, a public
Abad Santos High School in San Fernando, Pampanga and employee, did then and there willfully, unlawfully and feloniously commit
as one of the requirements for appointment to said falsification of official documents, to wit: by executing and filing in the office
of the Civil Service Commission of said municipality a Personal Data Sheet, CS
position, filled up the prescribed personal information Form No. 212(65), an official document, stating and malting it appear therein
sheet, Civil Service Form 212, and swore to the truth that he was a fourth year Bachelor of Arts student in 1950-54 at the
and veracity of the data and information therein furnished Cosmopolitan and Harvardian Colleges which document is a requirement for
his reappointment as School Administrative Assistant I of the Jose Abad
by him before the proper administering officer. As one of
Santos High School and wherein the academic requirement to said Position is
the required information, he indicated in Exh "A" that his at least a fourth year college undergraduate, when in truth and in fact, the
highest educational attainment was Fourth Year A.B. said accused well knew that the statement is false and he did not reach the
(Liberal Arts) allegedly pursued or obtained at the fourth year in a Bachelor of Arts degree course, and consequently, by reason
of said untruthful narration of facts, his appointment to the said position was
Cosmopolitan and Harvardian Colleges, respectively, approved by the Civil Service Commission.
during the years 1950 to 1954 inclusive. On the basis All contrary to law.
thereof, he was extended an appointment as School
27
No. L-15132, May 25,1960
28
Administrative Assistant I (Exh. "B"). Contrary to Perjury is the willful and corrupt assertion of a falsehood under oath or
affirmation administered by authority of law on a material matter.
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-98
 3) Importation and disposition of falsely marked articles
NOTE: Subornation of perjury is committed by a person or merchandise made of gold, silver or other precious
who knowingly and willfully procures another to swear falsely metals (art. 187)
and the witness suborned does testify under circumstances 4) Substituting and altering trademarks and tradenames
rendering him guilty of perjury. [US vs. Ballena] or service marks. (art. 188)
5) Unfair competition, fraudulent registration of
NOTE: Subornation of perjury is not expressly penalized in tradename, trademark, or service mark; fraudulent
the RPC; but the direct induction of a person by another to designation of origin and false description. (art. 189)
commit perjury may be punished under Article 183 in relation
to Article 17 (principal by inducement). (People v. Pudol, et al., SECTION ONE: MACHINATIONS, MONOPOLIES AND
66 Phil. 365) COMBINATIONS

Art. 184-Offering false testimony in evidence29 Art. 185- Machinations in public auctions.31
Elements: Acts punished:
1) Offender Offers in evidence a false witness or 1. Soliciting any gift or promise as a consideration for
testimony; refraining from taking part in any public auction;
2) He Knows that the witness or the testimony was Elements:
false; 1) There is a Public auction;
3) The offer is made in any Judicial OR Official 2) Offender Solicits any gift or a promise from
proceeding. any of the bidders;
3) Such gift or promise is the Consideration for
- Offer of evidence under Sec. 35, Rule 13230 of rules of his refraining from taking part in that public
court, in so far as testimonial evidence is concerned, auction;
begins at the moment a witness is called to the stand and 4) Offender has the Intent to cause the
interrogated by counsel. The witness must testify. reduction of the price of the thing auctioned.
NOTE: Consummated by mere solicitation; It is
- If the false witness did not testify on any material matter not required that the person making the proposal
because he desisted from testifying, the person who called actually refrains from taking part in any public
him to stand is merely liable for attempted offering false auction. If the person to whom the solicitation is
testimony. Art. 184 requires that the testimony must be made agrees, he will be a principal in the crime. His
offered in evidence. act will be similar to the second way of committing
the crime.
CAVEAT: Art. 184 Applies when the offender does not induce 2. Attempting to cause bidders to stay away from an
a witness to testify falsely; If there is an inducement, Art. 180, auction by threats, gifts, promises or any other
181, 182, or 183 in relation to Art. 17(2) will apply. artifice
NOTE: Mere attempt consummates the crime.
NOTE: Penalty is that for false testimony if committed in a
judicial proceeding or that for perjury if committed in other Illustrative case:
official proceeding. Ouano v. CA, G.R. No. L-40203.August 21, 1990
DOCTRINE: The agreement therefore being criminal in
CHAPTER THREE: FRAUDS character, the parties not only have no action against
each other but are both liable to prosecution and the
Crimes Classified As Frauds: things and price of their agreement subject to disposal
1) Machinations in public auctions. (Art. 185) according to the provisions of the criminal code.
2) Monopolies and combinations in restraint of trade FACTS: The subject property was offered for sale by public
(Art. 186) bidding by the RFC. Prior to the second bidding, Ouano and
Echavez orally agreed that only Echavez would make a bid,
and that if it was accepted, they would divide the property in
29
Article 184. Offering false testimony in evidence. - Any person who shall
knowingly offer in evidence a false witness or testimony in any judicial or
31
official proceeding, shall be punished as guilty of false testimony and shall Article 185. Machinations in public auctions. - Any person who shall solicit
suffer the respective penalties provided in this section. any gift or promise as a consideration for refraining from taking part in any
30
Section 35. When to make offer. — As regards the testimony of a public auction, and any person who shall attempt to cause bidders to stay
witness, the offer must be made at the time the witness is called to away from an auction by threats, gifts, promises, or any other artifice, with
testify.Documentary and object evidence shall be offered after the intent to cause the reduction of the price of the thing auctioned, shall suffer
presentation of a party's testimonial evidence. Such offer shall be done orally the penalty of prision correccional in its minimum period and a fine ranging
unless allowed by the court to be done in writing. (n) from 10 to 50 per centum of the value of the thing auctioned.
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-99
proportion to their adjoining properties. To ensure success of Code provisions just referred to.31 Article 1411 also
their enterprise, they also agreed to induce the only other dictates the proper disposition of the land involved,
party known to be interested in the property-a group headed i.e., "the forfeiture of the proceeds of the crime and the
by a Mrs. Bonsucan to desist from presenting a bid.4They instruments or tools with which it was committed," as
broached the matter to Mrs. Bonsucan's group. The latter mandated by the provisions of Article 4532 of the
agreed to withdraw, as it did in fact withdraw from the sale; Revised Penal Code, this being obviously the provision
and Ouano's wife paid it P2,000 as reimbursement for its "of the Penal Code relative to the disposal of effects or
expenses. As expected, the highest bid submitted, and thus instruments of a crime" that Article 1411 makes
accepted by the RFC, was that of Francisco Echavez. A week "applicable to the things or the price of the contract."
later, Echavez sent a letter to Ouano regarding the P2,000.00 DISPOSTIVE: WHEREFORE, the appealed decision of the
paid by the latter's wife to the Bonsucan group. However, the Court of Appeals is MODIFIED, so that in addition to affirming
RFC never approved the sharing agreement between Echavez the Trial Court's judgment dismissing Ouano's complaint and
and Ouano concerning Lot. It approved the sale of the lot to Echavez's counterclaim in Civil Case No. R-8011, Lot No. 3-A-1
Echavez only. Apparently Echavez found great initial difficulty subject of said case is ordered FORFEITED in its entirety in
in complying with this condition. Ultimately, Ouano, in his turn, favor of the Government of the Philippines. No pronouncement
tried to have DBP either accept and implement his sharing as to costs. Let copy of this Decision be furnished the Solicitor
agreement with Echavez, or allow him to pay the full price of General.
the lot in Echavez's behalf. Shortly after his representation with
the DBP were rebuffed. Accordingly, Paterno J. Ouano filed suit Art. 186- Monopolies and combinations in restraint of
for "specific performance and reconveyance" in the Court of trade.33 (REPEALED BY Republic Act No. 10667)
First Instance of Cebu against Francisco Echavez and the
Development Bank of the Philippines.
32
ISSUE: WON the action of Ouano can prosper Article 45. Confiscation and forfeiture of the proceeds or instruments of
the crime. - Every penalty imposed for the commission of a felony shall carry
HELD: NO. Ouano and Echavez had promised to share in the with it the forfeiture of the proceeds of the crime and the instruments or
property in question as a consideration for Ouano's refraining tools with which it was committed.
from taking part in the public auction, and they had attempted Such proceeds and instruments or tools shall be confiscated and forfeited in
favor of the Government, unless they be property of a third person not liable
to cause and in fact succeeded in causing another bidder to
for the offense, but those articles which are not subject of lawful commerce
stay away from the auction in order to cause reduction of the shall be destroyed.
price of the property auctioned. In so doing, they committed 33
Article 186. Monopolies and combinations in restraint of trade. - The
the felony of machinations in public auctions defined and penalty of prision correccional in its minimum period or a fine ranging from
200 to 6,000 pesos, or both, shall be imposed upon:
penalized in Article 185 of the Revised Penal Code. The 1. Any person who shall enter into any contract or agreement or shall take
agreement therefore being criminal in character, the part in any conspiracy or combination in the form of a trust or otherwise, in
parties not only have no action against each other but restraint of trade or commerce or to prevent by artificial means free
are both liable to prosecution and the things and price competition in the market;
2. Any person who shall monopolize any merchandise or object of trade or
of their agreement subject to disposal according to the commerce, or shall combine with any other person or persons to monopolize
provisions of the criminal code. This, in accordance with and merchandise or object in order to alter the price thereof by spreading
the so-called pari delicto principle set out in the Civil Code. false rumors or making use of any other article to restrain free competition in
the market;
Article 1409 of said Code declares as "inexistent and void from
3. Any person who, being a manufacturer, producer, or processor of any
the beginning" those contracts, among others, "whose cause, merchandise or object of commerce or an importer of any merchandise or
object or purpose is contrary to law, morals, good customs, object of commerce from any foreign country, either as principal or agent,
public order or public policy," or "expressly prohibited ... by wholesaler or retailer, shall combine, conspire or agree in any manner with
any person likewise engaged in the manufacture, production, processing,
law." Such contracts "cannot be ratified "the right to set up the assembling or importation of such merchandise or object of commerce or
defense of illegality (cannot) be waived;" and, Article 1410 with any other persons not so similarly engaged for the purpose of making
adds, the "action or defense for the declaration of the transactions prejudicial to lawful commerce, or of increasing the market
price in any part of the Philippines, of any such merchandise or object of
inexistence ... (thereof) does not prescribe." Furthermore,
commerce manufactured, produced, processed, assembled in or imported
according to Article 1411 of the same Code 30 ... When the into the Philippines, or of any article in the manufacture of which such
nullity proceeds from the illegality of the cause or object of the manufactured, produced, or imported merchandise or object of commerce is
contract, and the act constitutes a criminal offense, both used.
If the offense mentioned in this article affects any food substance, motor fuel
parties being in pari delicto, they shall have no action against or lubricants, or other articles of prime necessity, the penalty shall be that of
each other, and both shall be prosecuted. Moreover, the prision mayor in its maximum and medium periods it being sufficient for the
provisions of the Penal Code relative to the disposal of imposition thereof that the initial steps have been taken toward carrying out
effects or instruments of a crime shall be applicable to the purposes of the combination.
Any property possessed under any contract or by any combination
the things or the price of the contract. The dismissal of mentioned in the preceding paragraphs, and being the subject thereof, shall
Ouano's action by both the Trial Court and the Court of be forfeited to the Government of the Philippines.
Appeals was thus correct, being plainly in accord with the Civil Whenever any of the offenses described above is committed by a
corporation or association, the president and each one of its agents or
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-100
NOTE: Sec. 19, Art. XII, 1987 Constitution provides that ―The periods it being sufficient for the imposition thereof that the
State shall regulate or prohibit monopolies when the public initial steps have been taken toward carrying out the purposes
interest so requires. No combination in restraint of trade or of the combination.
unfair competitions shall be allowed.‖ -When offense is committed by a corporation or
Theory of law: competition, not combination, should be the association, the president and directors or managers
law of trade are liable; Art. 186 provides that whenever any of the
Acts punished as monopolies and combinations in offenses described above is committed by a corporation or
restraint of trade: association, the president and each one of its agents or
1. Combination to prevent free competition in the representatives in the Philippines in case of a foreign
market corporation or association, who shall have knowingly permitted
ELEMENTS: or failed to prevent the commission of such offense, shall be
1) Entering into any contract or agreement or taking held liable as principals thereof
part in any conspiracy or combination in the form NOTE: This is the exception to the rule that a director or
of a trust or otherwise; officer of a corporation is not liable criminally for the
2) In restraint of trade or commerce or to prevent corporate acts performed by other officers or agents
by artificial means free competition in the market hereof.
2. Monopoly to restrain free competition in the Market CAVEAT: But they are liable only when they (1)
ELEMENTS: knowingly permitted, or (2) failed to prevent the
1) Monopolizing any merchandise or object of trade commission of such offenses
or commerce; OR
2) Combining with any other person or persons to Monopoly, defined
monopolize said merchandise or object in order - It is a privilege or peculiar advantage vested in one or
to alter the prices thereof by spreading false more persons or companies, consisting in the
rumors or making use of any other artifice to exclusive right or power to carry on a particular article
restrain free competition in the market or control the sale or the whole supply of a particular
3. Manufacturer, producer, or processor or importer commodity.
combining, conspiring or agreeing with any person to Combination in restraint of trade, defined
make transactions prejudicial to lawful commerce or - Combination in restraint of trade is an agreement or
to increase the market price of merchandise. understanding between two or more persons, in the
ELEMENTS: form of contract, trust, pool, holding company or
1) Person liable: (1) manufacturer, (2) producer, (3) other form of association, for the purpose of unduly
processor, or (4) importer of any merchandise or restricting competition, monopolizing trade and
object of commerce commerce in a certain commodity, controlling its
2) Crime committed by: (1) combining, (2) production, distribution and price, or otherwise
conspiring, or (3) agreeing with any person interfering with freedom of trade without authority.
3) Purpose: (1) to make transactions prejudicial to NOTE: Monopoly refers to end while combination in restraint
lawful commerce, or (2) to increase the market of trade refers to means.
price of any merchandise or object of commerce
manufactured, produced, processed, assembled, PHILIPPINE COMPETITION ACT (Republic Act
or imported into the Philippines. No. 10667)
-Property is forfeited to the Government; Art. 186
provides that any property possessed under any contract or by Pertinent provisions:
any combination mentioned in the preceding paragraphs, and
―Section 2. Declaration of Policy. – The efficiency
being the subject thereof, shall be forfeited to the Government
of market competition as a mechanism for allocating
of the Philippines.
goods and services is a generally accepted precept.
-Mere conspiracy or combination is punished.
The State recognizes that past measures undertaken
-If the offense affects any food substance or other
article of prime necessity, it is sufficient that initial to liberalize key sectors in the economy need to be
steps are taken.; Art. 186 provides that if the offense reinforced by measures that safeguard competitive
mentioned in this article affects any food substance, motor fuel conditions. The State also recognizes that the
or lubricants, or other articles of prime necessity, the penalty provision of equal opportunities to all promotes
shall be that of prision mayor in its maximum and medium entrepreneurial spirit, encourages private
investments, facilitates technology development and
transfer and enhances resource productivity.
representatives in the Philippines in case of a foreign corporation or
association, who shall have knowingly permitted or failed to prevent the Unencumbered market competition also serves the
commission of such offense, shall be held liable as principals thereof.
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-101
interest of consumers by allowing them to exercise ―CHAPTER III
their right of choice over goods and services offered
in the market. PROHIBITED ACTS

Pursuant to the constitutional goals for the national

economy to attain a more equitable distribution of
Section 14. Anti-Competitive Agreements34. –
opportunities, income, and wealth; a sustained
increase in the amount of goods and services
produced by the nation for the benefit of the people;
and an expanding productivity as the key to raising (a) The following agreements, between or among
the quality of life for all, especially the underprivileged competitors, are per se prohibited:
and the constitutional mandate that the State shall
regulate or prohibit monopolies when the public
interest so requires and that no combinations in
restraint of trade or unfair competition shall be (1) Restricting competition as to price, or
allowed, the State shall: components thereof, or other terms of trade;

(a) Enhance economic efficiency and promote free

and fair competition in trade, industry and all
(2) Fixing price at an auction or in any form of
commercial economic activities, as well as establish a
bidding including cover bidding, bid suppression,
National Competition Policy to be implemented by the
bid rotation and market allocation and other
Government of the Republic of the Philippines and all
analogous practices of bid manipulation;
of its political agencies as a whole;

(b) Prevent economic concentration which will control

the production, distribution, trade, or industry that
(b) The following agreements, between or among
will unduly stifle competition, lessen, manipulate or
competitors which have the object or effect of
constrict the discipline of free markets; and
substantially preventing, restricting or lessening
competition shall be prohibited:
(c) Penalize all forms of anti-competitive agreements,
abuse of dominant position and anti-competitive
mergers and acquisitions, with the objective of
protecting consumer welfare and advancing domestic (1) Setting, Kmiting, or controlling production,
and international trade and economic development‖ markets, technical development, or investment;

―Section 3. Scope and Application. — This Act (2) Dividing or sharing the market, whether by
shall be enforceable against any person or entity volume of sales or purchases, territory, type of
engaged in any trade, industry and commerce in the goods or services, buyers or sellers or any other
Republic of the Philippines. It shall likewise be means;
applicable to international trade having direct,
substantial, and reasonably foreseeable effects in
trade, industry, or commerce in the Republic of the
Philippines, including those that result from acts done (c) Agreements other than those specified in (a) and
outside the Republic of the Philippines. (b) of this section which have the object or effect of
substantially preventing, restricting or lessening
This Act shall not apply to the combinations or competition shall also be prohibited: Provided, Those
activities of workers or employees nor to agreements which contribute to improving the production or
or arrangements with their employers when such distribution of goods and services or to promoting
combinations, activities, agreements, or arrangements technical or economic progress, while allowing
are designed solely to facilitate collective bargaining
in respect of conditions of employment.‖
34
Agreement refers to any type or form of contract, arrangement,
understanding, collective recommendation, or concerted action, whether
formal or informal, explicit or tacit, written or oral; Section 4, RA 10667

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-102
consumers a fair share of the resulting benefits, may customers or sellers are contemporaneously trading
not necessarily be deemed a violation of this Act. on similar terms and conditions, where the effect may
be to lessen competition substantially: Provided, That
the following shall be considered permissible price
differentials:
An entity that controls, is controlled by, or is under
common control with another entity or entities, have
common economic interests, and are not otherwise
able to decide or act independently of each other, (1) Socialized pricing for the less fortunate sector
shall not be considered competitors for purposes of of the economy;
this section.

(2) Price differential which reasonably or

Section 15. Abuse of Dominant Position35. – It approximately reflect differences in the cost of
shall be prohibited for one or more entities to abuse manufacture, sale, or delivery resulting from
their dominant position by engaging in conduct that differing methods, technical conditions, or
would substantially prevent, restrict or lessen quantities in which the goods or services are sold
competition: or delivered to the buyers or sellers;

(a) Selling goods or services below cost with the (3) Price differential or terms of sale offered in
object of driving competition out of the relevant response to the competitive price of payments,
market: Provided, That in the Commission‘s services or changes in the facilities furnished by a
evaluation of this fact, it shall consider whether the competitor; and
entity or entities have no such object and the price
established was in good faith to meet or compete
with the lower price of a competitor in the same
(4) Price changes in response to changing market
market selling the same or comparable product or
conditions, marketability of goods or services, or
service of like quality;
volume;

(b) Imposing barriers to entry or committing acts that

(e) Imposing restrictions on the lease or contract for
prevent competitors from growing within the market
sale or trade of goods or services concerning where,
in an anti-competitive manner except those that
to whom, or in what forms goods or services may be
develop in the market as a result of or arising from a
sold or traded, such as fixing prices, giving
superior product or process, business acumen, or
preferential discounts or rebate upon such price, or
legal rights or laws;
imposing conditions not to deal with competing
entities, where the object or effect of the restrictions
is to prevent, restrict or lessen competition
(c) Making a transaction subject to acceptance by the substantially: Provided, That nothing contained in this
other parties of other obligations which, by their Act shall prohibit or render unlawful:
nature or according to commercial usage, have no
connection with the transaction;

(1) Permissible franchising, licensing, exclusive

merchandising or exclusive distributorship
(d) Setting prices or other terms or conditions that agreements such as those which give each party
discriminate unreasonably between customers or the right to unilaterally terminate the agreement;
sellers of the same goods or services, where such or

35
Dominant position refers to a position of economic strength that an entity
or entities hold which makes it capable of controlling the relevant market (2) Agreements protecting intellectual property
independently from any or a combination of the following: competitors,
customers, suppliers, or consumers; Section 4, RA 10667
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-103
 rights, confidential information, or trade secrets; Provided, finally, That the foregoing shall not
constrain the Commission or the relevant regulator
from pursuing measures that would promote fair
competition or more competition as provided in this
(f) Making supply of particular goods or services
Act.‖
dependent upon the purchase of other goods or
services from the supplier which have no direct
connection with the main goods or services to be
supplied; ―CHAPTER V

DISPOSITION OF CASES

(g) Directly or indirectly imposing unfairly low xxx

purchase prices for the goods or services of, among
others, marginalized agricultural producers, fisherfolk, Section 26. Determination of Anti-Competitive
micro-, small-, medium-scale enterprises, and other Agreement or Conduct. – In determining whether
marginalized service providers and producers; anti-competitive agreement or conduct has been
committed, the Commission shall:

(h) Directly or indirectly imposing unfair purchase or

selling price on their competitors, customers, (a) Define the relevant market allegedly affected by
suppliers or consumers, provided that prices that the anti-competitive agreement or conduct, following
develop in the market as a result of or due to a the principles laid out in Section 24 of this Chapter;
superior product or process, business acumen or legal
rights or laws shall not be considered unfair prices;
and
(b) Determine if there is actual or potential adverse
impact on competition in the relevant market caused
by the alleged agreement or conduct, and if such
(i) Limiting production, markets or technical impact is substantial and outweighs the actual or
development to the prejudice of consumers, provided potential efficiency gains that result from the
that limitations that develop in the market as a result agreement or conduct;
of or due to a superior product or process, business
acumen or legal rights or laws shall not be a violation
of this Act:
(c) Adopt a broad and forward-looking perspective,
recognizing future market developments, any
overriding need to make the goods or services
Provided, That nothing in this Act shall be construed available to consumers, the requirements of large
or interpreted as a prohibition on having a dominant investments in infrastructure, the requirements of
position in a relevant market or on acquiring, law, and the need of our economy to respond to
maintaining and increasing market share through international competition, but also taking account of
legitimate means that do not substantially prevent, past behavior of the parties involved and prevailing
restrict or lessen competition: market conditions;

Provided, further, That any conduct which contributes (d) Balance the need to ensure that competition is not
to improving production or distribution of goods or prevented or substantially restricted and the risk that
services within the relevant market, or promoting competition efficiency, productivity, innovation, or
technical and economic progress while allowing development of priority areas or industries in the
consumers a fair share of the resulting benefit may general interest of the country may be deterred by
not necessarily be considered an abuse of dominant overzealous or undue intervention; and
position:

(e) Assess the totality of evidence on whether it is

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-104
more likely than not that the entity has engaged in
anti-competitive agreement or conduct including
whether the entity‘s conduct was done with a The Commission shall from time to time determine
reasonable commercial purpose such as but not and publish the threshold for dominant position or
limited to phasing out of a product or closure of a minimum level of share in the relevant market that
business, or as a reasonable commercial response to could give rise to a presumption of dominant position.
the market entry or conduct of a competitor. In such determination, the Commission would
consider the structure of the relevant market, degree
of integration, access to end-users, technology and
financial resources, and other factors affecting the
Section 27. Market Dominant Position. – In control of a market, as provided in subsections (a) to
determining whether an entity has market dominant (g) of this section.
position for purposes of this Act, the Commission shall
consider the following:

The Commission shall not consider the acquiring,

maintaining and increasing of market share through
(a) The share of the entity in the relevant market and legitimate means not substantially preventing,
whether it is able to fix prices unilaterally or to restrict restricting, or lessening competition in the market
supply in the relevant market; such as but not limited to having superior skills,
rendering superior service, producing or distributing
quality products, having business acumen, and the
enjoyment and use of protected intellectual property
(b) The existence of barriers to entry and the
rights as violative of this Act. xxxx‖
elements which could foreseeably alter both said
barriers and the supply from competitors;

―CHAPTER VI
(c) The existence and power of its competitors;
FINES AND PENALTIES

Section 29. Administrative Penalties. –

(d) The possibility of access by its competitors or
other entities to its sources of inputs;
(a) Administrative Fines. – In any investigation under
Chapter III, Sections 14 and 15, and Chapter IV,
Sections 17 and 20 of this Act, after due notice and
(e) The power of its customers to switch to other
hearing, the Commission may impose the following
goods or services;
schedule of administrative fines on any entity found
to have violated the said sections:

(f) Its recent conducts; and

First offense: Fine of up to one hundred million pesos

(P100,000,000.00);
(g) Other criteria established by the regulations of
this Act.

Second offense: Fine of not less than one hundred

million pesos (P100,000,000.00) but not more than
There shall be a rebuttable presumption of market two hundred fifty million pesos (P250,000,000.00).
dominant position if the market share of an entity in
the relevant market is at least fifty percent (50%),
unless a new market share threshold is determined by
In fixing the amount of the fine, the Commission shall
the Commission for that particular sector.
have regard to both the gravity and the duration of

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-105
the violation. officers, and directors of the entity.

(b) Failure to Comply With an Order of the When the entities involved are juridical persons, the
Commission. – An entity which fails or refuses to penalty of imprisonment shall be imposed on its
comply with a ruling, order or decision issued by the officers, directors, or employees holding
Commission shall pay a penalty of not less than fifty managerial positions, who are knowingly and
thousand pesos (P50,000.00) up to two million pesos willfully responsible for such violation.‖
(P2,000,000.00) for each violation and a similar
amount of penalty for each day thereafter until the
said entity fully complies. Provided that these fines
xxx
shall only accrue daily beginning forty-five (45) days
from the time that the said decision, order or ruling
was received.
NOTE: Sec. 14(c) ―Other Agreements‖, and Sec. 15
―Abuse of Dominant Position‖, although prohibited and
administratively punished, are not criminally punishable/
(c) Supply of Incorrect or Misleading Information. –
The Commission may likewise impose upon any entity SECTION TWO- FRAUDS IN COMMERCE AND INDUSTRY
fines of up to one million pesos (PI,000,000.00)
where, intentionally or negligently, they supply Art. 187-Importation and disposition of falsely marked
incorrect or misleading information in any document, articles or merchandise made of gold, silver or other
application or other paper filed with or submitted to precious metals or their alloys36
the Commission or supply incorrect or misleading
information in an application for a binding ruling, a ELEMENTS:
proposal for a consent judgment, proceedings relating 1. Offender imports, sells or disposes of any of those
to a show cause order, or application for modification articles or merchandise (i.e. gold, silver, other
of the Commission‘s ruling, order or approval, as the precious metals or their alloys)
case may be. - Selling the misbranded articles is not
necessary; Since one of the acts penalized in
Art. 187 is knowingly importing misbranded
articles, which includes possession thereof after
(d) Any other violations not specifically penalized importing the same, it is not necessary that they
under the relevant provisions of this Act shall be be sold and the public be actually deceived. Buth
penalized by a fine of not less than fifty thousand there must be evidence showing that the articles
pesos (P50,000.00) up to two million pesos were imported
(P2,000,000.00).
2. The stamps, brands, or marks of those articles of
merchandise fail to indicate the actual fineness or
Provided that the schedule of fines indicated in this quality of said metals or alloys
section shall be increased by the Commission every
five (5) years to maintain their real value from the
time it was set. 36
Article 187. Importation and disposition of falsely marked articles or
merchandise made of gold, silver, or other precious metals or their alloys. -
The penalty of prision correccional or a fine ranging from 200 to 1,000 pesos,
or both, shall be imposed on any person who shall knowingly import or sell
Section 30. Criminal Penalties. – An entity that or dispose of any article or merchandise made of gold, silver, or other
enters into any anti-competitive agreement as precious metals, or their alloys, with stamps, brands, or marks which fail to
indicate the actual fineness or quality of said metals or alloys.
covered by Chapter III, Section 14(a) and 14(b) Any stamp, brand, label, or mark shall be deemed to fail to indicate the
under this Act shall, for each and every violation, be actual fineness of the article on which it is engraved, printed, stamped,
penalized by imprisonment from two (2) to seven (7) labeled or attached, when the rest of the article shows that the quality or
fineness thereof is less by more than one-half karat, if made of gold, and less
years, and a fine of not less than fifty million pesos
by more than four one-thousandth, if made of silver, than what is shown by
(P50,000,000.00) but not more than two hundred fifty said stamp, brand, label or mark. But in case of watch cases and flatware
million pesos (P250,000,000.00). The penalty of made of gold, the actual fineness of such gold shall not be less by more than
imprisonment shall be imposed upon the responsible three one-thousandth than the fineness indicated by said stamp, brand,
label, or mark.
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-106
 3. Offender knows that the stamps, brands, or marks fail to fraudulently use the same, knowing the fraudulent
to indicate the actual fineness or quality of the metals purpose for which it is to be used.
or alloys. Art. 189-Unfair competition and fraudulent registration
of trade mark or trade name or service mark;
CAVEAT: Article 187 does not apply to manufacturer of fraudulent designation of origin, and false
misbranded articles made of gold, silver, etc.; The description.39 (REPEALED RA by 8293)
manufacturer who alters the quality or fineness of anything Acts punishable under Art. 189:
pertaining to his art or business is liable for estafa under Art. 1. By selling his goods, giving them the general
315(2)(b).37 appearance of another manufacturer or dealer.
(unfair competition)
Art. 188- Substituting and altering trademarks and 2. By (1) affixing to his goods or using in connection
trade names or service marks38 (REPEALED by RA wihy his services a false designation of origin, or any
8293) false description or representation, and (2) selling
Acts punishable under Art. 188: such oggs or services. (Fraudulent designation of
1. By (1) substituting the tradename or trademark of origin; False description
some other manufacturer or dealer, or a colourable 3. By procuring fraudulently from the patent office the
imitation thereof, for the trade name or trademark of registration of tradename, trademark or service mark.
the real manufacturer or dealer upon any article of (Fraudulent Registration)
commerce, and (2) selling the same
2. By selling or by offering for sale such articles of NOTE: RA 8293, OTHERWISE KNOWN AS THE
commerce, knowing that the tradename or trademark INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY CODE OF THE PHILIPPINES,
has been fraudulently used. REPEALED THE PROVISIONS OF ART. 188 AND 189 OF
3. By using or substituting the service mark of some THE RPC WHICH ARE INCONSISTENT THEREWITH
other person, or a colourable imitation of such mark,
in the sale or advertising of his services Republic Act No. 8293, June 6, 1997: AN ACT
4. By priniting, lithographing, or reproducing tradename, PRESCRIBING THE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY
trademark, or servicemark of one person, or a CODE AND ESTABLISHING THE INTELLECTUAL
colourable imitation thereof, to enable another person PROPERTY OFFICE, PROVIDING FOR ITS
POWERS AND FUNCTIONS, AND FOR OTHER
PURPOSES
37
2. By means of any of the following false pretenses or fraudulent acts ("Intellectual Property Code of the Philippines.")
executed prior to or simultaneously with the commission of the fraud: (b) By
altering the quality, fineness or weight of anything pertaining to his art or PART I
business. THE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY OFFICE
38
Article 188. Subsisting and altering trade-mark, trade-names, or service
marks. - The penalty of prision correccional in its minimum period or a fine Section 4. Definitions. - 4.1. The term "intellectual
ranging from 50 to 2,000 pesos, or both, shall be imposed upon:
1. Any person who shall substitute the trade name or trade-mark of some
39
other manufacturer or dealer or a colorable imitation thereof, for the Article 189. Unfair competition, fraudulent registration of trade-mark,
trademark of the real manufacturer or dealer upon any article of commerce trade-name or service mark, fraudulent designation of origin, and false
and shall sell the same; description. - The penalty provided in the next proceeding article shall be
2. Any person who shall sell such articles of commerce or offer the same for imposed upon:
sale, knowing that the trade-name or trade- mark has been fraudulently used 1. Any person who, in unfair competition and for the purposes of deceiving
in such goods as described in the preceding subdivision; or defrauding another of his legitimate trade or the public in general, shall
3. Any person who, in the sale or advertising of his services, shall use or sell his goods giving them the general appearance of goods of another
substitute the service mark of some other person, or a colorable imitation of manufacturer or dealer, either as to the goods themselves, or in the
such mark; or wrapping of the packages in which they are contained or the device or words
4. Any person who, knowing the purpose for which the trade-name, trade- thereon or in any other features of their appearance which would be likely to
mark, or service mark of a person is to be used, prints, lithographs, or in any induce the public to believe that the goods offered are those of a
way reproduces such trade-name, trade-mark, or service mark, or a colorable manufacturer or dealer other than the actual manufacturer or dealer or shall
imitation thereof, for another person, to enable that other person to give other persons a chance or opportunity to do the same with a like
fraudulently use such trade-name, trade-mark, or service mark on his own purpose.
goods or in connection with the sale or advertising of his services. 2. Any person who shall affix, apply, annex or use in connection with any
A trade-name or trade-mark as herein used is a word or words, name, title, goods or services or any container or containers for goods a false designation
symbol, emblem, sign or device, or any combination thereof used as an of origin or any false description or representation and shall sell such goods
advertisement, sign, label, poster, or otherwise, for the purpose of enabling or services.
the public to distinguish the business of the person who owns and uses said 3. Any person who by means of false or fraudulent representation or
trade-name or trade-mark. declarations orally or in writing or by other fraudulent means shall procure
A service mark as herein used is a mark used in the sale or advertising of from the patent office or from any other office which may hereafter be
services to identify the services of one person and distinguish them from the established by law for the purposes the registration of a trade-name, trade-
services of others and includes without limitation the marks, names, mark or service mark or of himself as the owner of such trade-name, trade-
symbols, titles, designations, slogans, character names, and distinctive mark or service mark or an entry respecting a trade-name, trade-mark or
features of radio or other advertising. service mark.
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-107
property rights" consists of: common characteristic, including the quality of goods
a) Copyright and Related Rights; or services of different enterprises which use the sign
b) Trademarks and Service Marks; under the control of the registered owner of the
c) Geographic Indications;
collective mark; (Sec. 40, R.A. No. 166a)
d) Industrial Designs;
e) Patents;
f) Layout-Designs (Topographies) of Integrated
Circuits; and
g) Protection of Undisclosed Information (n, TRIPS). 121.3. "Trade name" means the name or
designation identifying or distinguishing an enterprise;
PART II (Sec. 38, R.A. No. 166a)
THE LAW ON PATENTS

Section 21. Patentable Inventions. - Any technical

solution of a problem in any field of human activity 121.4. "Bureau" means the Bureau of Trademarks;
which is new, involves an inventive step and is
industrially applicable shall be Patentable. It may be,
or may relate to, a product, or process, or an
improvement of any of the foregoing. (Sec. 7, R.A. 121.5. "Director" means the Director of
No. 165a) Trademarks;

Section 84. Criminal Action for Repetition of

Infringement. - If infringement is repeated by
the infringer or by anyone in connivance with him
121.6. "Regulations" means the Rules of Practice
after finality of the judgment of the court against the
infringer, the offenders shall, without prejudice to the in Trademarks and Service Marks formulated by the
institution of a civil action for damages, be criminally Director of Trademarks and approved by the Director
liable therefor and, upon conviction, shall suffer General; and
imprisonment for the period of not less than six (6)
months but not more than three (3) years and/or a
fine of not less than One hundred thousand pesos
(P100,000) but not more than Three hundred 121.7. "Examiner" means the trademark examiner.
thousand pesos (P300,000), at the discretion of the (Sec. 38, R.A. No. 166a)
court. The criminal action herein provided shall
prescribe in three (3) years from date of the
commission of the crime. (Sec. 48, R.A. No. 165a)
Section 122. How Marks are Acquired. - The rights
in a mark shall be acquired through registration made
PART III
validly in accordance with the provisions of this law.
THE LAW ON TRADEMARKS, SERVICE MARKS (Sec. 2-A, R A. No. 166a)
AND TRADE NAMES

Section 155. Remedies; Infringement. - Any person

who shall, without the consent of the owner of the
Section 121. Definitions. - As used in Part III, the
registered mark:
following terms have the following meanings: 155.1. Use in commerce any reproduction,
counterfeit, copy, or colorable imitation of a
registered mark or the same container or a dominant
feature thereof in connection with the sale, offering
121.1. "Mark" means any visible sign capable of for sale, distribution, advertising of any goods or
distinguishing the goods (trademark) or services services including other preparatory steps necessary
(service mark) of an enterprise and shall include a to carry out the sale of any goods or services on or in
stamped or marked container of goods; (Sec. 38, R.A. connection with which such use is likely to cause
No. 166a) confusion, or to cause mistake, or to deceive; or
155.2. Reproduce, counterfeit, copy or colorably
imitate a registered mark or a dominant feature
thereof and apply such reproduction, counterfeit,
copy or colorable imitation to labels, signs, prints,
121.2. "Collective mark" means any visible sign
packages, wrappers, receptacles or advertisements
designated as such in the application for registration intended to be used in commerce upon or in
and capable of distinguishing the origin or any other connection with the sale, offering for sale,

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-108
distribution, or advertising of goods or services on or 166)
in connection with which such use is likely to cause
confusion, or to cause mistake, or to deceive, shall be Section 168. Unfair Competition, Rights,
liable in a civil action for infringement by the Regulation and Remedies. - 168.1. A person who has
registrant for the remedies hereinafter set forth: identified in the mind of the public the goods he
Provided, That the infringement takes place at the manufactures or deals in, his business or services
moment any of the acts stated in Subsection 155.1 or from those of others, whether or not a registered
this subsection are committed regardless of whether mark is employed, has a property right in the goodwill
there is actual sale of goods or services using the of the said goods, business or services so identified,
infringing material. (Sec. 22, R.A. No 166a) which will be protected in the same manner as other
Section 156. Actions, and Damages and Injunction property rights.
for Infringement. - 156.1. The owner of a registered 168.2. Any person who shall employ deception or
mark may recover damages from any person who any other means contrary to good faith by which he
infringes his rights, and the measure of the damages shall pass off the goods manufactured by him or in
suffered shall be either the reasonable profit which which he deals, or his business, or services for those
the complaining party would have made, had the of the one having established such goodwill, or who
defendant not infringed his rights, or the profit which shall commit any acts calculated to produce said
the defendant actually made out of the infringement, result, shall be guilty of unfair competition, and shall
or in the event such measure of damages cannot be be subject to an action therefor.
readily ascertained with reasonable certainty, then 168.3. In particular, and without in any way limiting
the court may award as damages a reasonable the scope of protection against unfair competition,
percentage based upon the amount of gross sales of the following shall be deemed guilty of unfair
the defendant or the value of the services in competition:
connection with which the mark or trade name was (a) Any person, who is selling his goods and
used in the infringement of the rights of the gives them the general appearance of goods of
complaining party. (Sec. 23, first par., R.A. No. 166a) another manufacturer or dealer, either as to the
156.2. On application of the complainant, the court goods themselves or in the wrapping of the packages
may impound during the pendency of the action, in which they are contained, or the devices or words
sales invoices and other documents evidencing sales. thereon, or in any other feature of their appearance,
(n) which would be likely to influence purchasers to
156.3. In cases where actual intent to mislead the believe that the goods offered are those of a
public or to defraud the complainant is shown, in the manufacturer or dealer, other than the actual
discretion of the court, the damages may be doubled. manufacturer or dealer, or who otherwise clothes the
(Sec. 23, first par., R.A. No. 166) goods with such appearance as shall deceive the
156.4. The complainant, upon proper showing, may public and defraud another of his legitimate trade, or
also be granted injunction. (Sec. 23, second par., R.A. any subsequent vendor of such goods or any agent of
No. 166a) any vendor engaged in selling such goods with a like
Section 157. Power of Court to Order Infringing purpose;
Material Destroyed. - 157.1 In any action arising (b) Any person who by any artifice, or device, or
under this Act, in which a violation of any right of the who employs any other means calculated to induce
owner of the registered mark is established, the court the false belief that such person is offering the
may order that goods found to be infringing be, services of another who has identified such services in
without compensation of any sort, disposed of outside the mind of the public; or
the channels of commerce in such a manner as to (c) Any person who shall make any false
avoid any harm caused to the right holder, or statement in the course of trade or who shall commit
destroyed; and all labels, signs, prints, packages, any other act contrary to good faith of a nature
wrappers, receptacles and advertisements in the calculated to discredit the goods, business or services
possession of the defendant, bearing the registered of another.
mark or trade name or any reproduction, counterfeit, 168.4. The remedies provided by Sections 156, 157
copy or colorable imitation thereof, all plates, molds, and 161 shall apply mutatis mutandis. (Sec. 29, R.A.
matrices and other means of making the same, shall No. 166a)
be delivered up and destroyed. Section 169. False Designations of Origin; False
157.2. In regard to counterfeit goods, the simple Description or Representation. - 169.1. Any
removal of the trademark affixed shall not be person who, on or in connection with any goods or
sufficient other than in exceptional cases which shall services, or any container for goods, uses in
be determined by the Regulations, to permit the commerce any word, term, name, symbol, or device,
release of the goods into the channels of commerce. or any combination thereof, or any false designation
(Sec. 24, R.A. No. 166a) of origin, false or misleading description of fact, or
false or misleading representation of fact, which:
Section 163. Jurisdiction of Court. - All actions (a) Is likely to cause confusion, or to cause
under Sections 150, 155, 164, and 166 to 169 shall mistake, or to deceive as to the affiliation, connection,
be brought before the proper courts with appropriate or association of such person with another person, or
jurisdiction under existing laws. (Sec. 27, R.A. No. as to the origin, sponsorship, or approval of his or her

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-109
goods, services, or commercial activities by another (l) Audiovisual works and cinematographic works and
person; or works produced by a process analogous to
(b) In commercial advertising or promotion, cinematography or any process for making audio-
misrepresents the nature, characteristics, qualities, or visual recordings;
geographic origin of his or her or another person's (m) Pictorial illustrations and advertisements;
goods, services, or commercial activities, shall be (n) Computer programs; and
liable to a civil action for damages and injunction (o) Other literary, scholarly, scientific and artistic
provided in Sections 156 and 157 of this Act by any works.
person who believes that he or she is or is likely to be 172.2. Works are protected by the sole fact of their
damaged by such act. creation, irrespective of their mode or form of
169.2. Any goods marked or labelled in expression, as well as of their content, quality and
contravention of the provisions of this Section shall purpose. (Sec. 2, P.D. No. 49a)
not be imported into the Philippines or admitted entry Section 177. Copyright or Economic Rights. -
at any customhouse of the Philippines. The owner, Subject to the provisions of Chapter VIII, copyright or
importer, or consignee of goods refused entry at any economic rights shall consist of the exclusive right to
customhouse under this section may have any carry out, authorize or prevent the following acts:
recourse under the customs revenue laws or may 177.1. Reproduction of the work or substantial portion
have the remedy given by this Act in cases involving of the work;
goods refused entry or seized. (Sec. 30, R.A. No. 177.2. Dramatization, translation, adaptation,
166a) abridgment, arrangement or other transformation of
Section 170. Penalties. - Independent of the the work;
civil and administrative sanctions imposed by 177.3. The first public distribution of the original and
law, a criminal penalty of imprisonment from two each copy of the work by sale or other forms of
(2) years to five (5) years and a fine ranging from transfer of ownership;
Fifty thousand pesos (P50,000) to Two hundred 177.4. Rental of the original or a copy of an
thousand pesos(P200,000), shall be imposed on any audiovisual or cinematographic work, a work
person who is found guilty of committing any of the embodied in a sound recording, a computer program,
acts mentioned in Section 155, Section 168 and a compilation of data and other materials or a musical
Subsection 169.1. (Arts. 188 and 189, Revised work in graphic form, irrespective of the ownership of
Penal Code) the original or the copy which is the subject of the
rental; (n)
PART IV 177.5. Public display of the original or a copy of the
THE LAW ON COPYRIGHT work;
177.6. Public performance of the work; and
Section 172. Literary and Artistic Works. - 177.7. Other communication to the public of the
172.1. Literary and artistic works, hereinafter referred work. (Sec. 5, P. D. No. 49a)
to as "works", are original intellectual creations in the
literary and artistic domain protected from the Section 216. Remedies for Infringement. -
moment of their creation and shall include in 216.1. Any person infringing a right protected under
particular: this law shall be liable:
(a) Books, pamphlets, articles and other writings; (a) To an injunction restraining such infringement.
(b) Periodicals and newspapers; The court may also order the defendant to desist
(c) Lectures, sermons, addresses, dissertations from an infringement, among others, to prevent the
prepared for oral delivery, whether or not reduced in entry into the channels of commerce of imported
writing or other material form; goods that involve an infringement, immediately after
(d) Letters; customs clearance of such goods.
(e) Dramatic or dramatico-musical compositions; (b) Pay to the copyright proprietor or his assigns or
choreographic works or entertainment in dumb heirs such actual damages, including legal costs and
shows; other expenses, as he may have incurred due to the
(f) Musical compositions, with or without words; infringement as well as the profits the infringer may
(g) Works of drawing, painting, architecture, have made due to such infringement, and in proving
sculpture, engraving, lithography or other works of profits the plaintiff shall be required to prove sales
art; models or designs for works of art; only and the defendant shall be required to prove
(h) Original ornamental designs or models for articles every element of cost which he claims, or, in lieu of
of manufacture, whether or not registrable as an actual damages and profits, such damages which to
industrial design, and other works of applied art; the court shall appear to be just and shall not be
(i) Illustrations, maps, plans, sketches, charts and regarded as penalty.
three-dimensional works relative to geography, (c) Deliver under oath, for impounding during the
topography, architecture or science; pendency of the action, upon such terms and
(j) Drawings or plastic works of a scientific or conditions as the court may prescribe, sales invoices
technical character; and other documents evidencing sales, all articles and
(k) Photographic works including works produced by their packaging alleged to infringe a copyright and
a process analogous to photography; lantern slides; implements for making them.

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-110
(d) Deliver under oath for destruction without any amended; and Articles 188 and 189 of the Revised
compensation all infringing copies or devices, as well Penal Code; Presidential Decree No. 49, including
as all plates, molds, or other means for making such Presidential Decree No. 285, as amended, are hereby
infringing copies as the court may order.
repealed.
(e) Such other terms and conditions, including the
payment of moral and exemplary damages, which the
court may deem proper, wise and equitable and the
destruction of infringing copies of the work even in Trademark, defined
the event of acquittal in a criminal case. - A ―mark‖ is any visible sign (such as a word, group of
216.2. In an infringement action, the court shall also words, name, symbol or device or other source
have the power to order the seizure and impounding indicator or any combination of these) which can
of any article which may serve as evidence in the distinguish the goods (trademark) or services (service
court proceedings. (Sec. 28, P.D. No. 49a)
mark) of an enterprise. (sec. 121.1., RA 8293)
Section 217. Criminal Penalties. - 217.1. Any
person infringing any right secured by provisions of
Part IV of this Act or aiding or abetting such Trademark infringement- remedy if a registered
infringement shall be guilty of a crime punishable by: trademark is used by another
(a) Imprisonment of one (1) year to three (3) years - A trademark infringement case presupposes that the
plus a fine ranging from Fifty thousand pesos mark involved is covered by an active registration
(P50,000) to One hundred fifty thousand pesos with the IPO. The IP Code expressly provides that an
(P150,000) for the first offense.
action for trademark infringement is filed by the
(b) Imprisonment of three (3) years and one (1) day
to six (6) years plus a fine ranging from One hundred registrant or the owner of the registered mark.
fifty thousand pesos (P150,000) to Five hundred - Under the Intellectual Property Code (IP Code), the
thousand pesos (P500,000) for the second offense. owner of a registered mark has the exclusive right to
(c) Imprisonment of six (6) years and one (1) day to prevent all third parties not having the owner‘s
nine (9) years plus a fine ranging from five hundred consent from using in the course of trade identical or
thousand pesos (P500,000) to One million five
similar signs or containers for identical goods or
hundred thousand pesos (P1,500,000) for the third
services which are identical with or similar to those in
and subsequent offenses.
(d) In all cases, subsidiary imprisonment in cases of respect of which the trademark is registered where
insolvency. such use would result in a likelihood of confusion.
217.2. In determining the number of years of Elements:
imprisonment and the amount of fine, the court shall 1. The trademark being infringed is registered with
consider the value of the infringing materials that the the IPO;
defendant has produced or manufactured and the
2. The trademark is copied by the infringer;
damage that the copyright owner has suffered by
reason of the infringement. 3. The infringing mark is used in the sale or offering
217.3. Any person who at the time when copyright for sale of any goods;
subsists in a work has in his possession an article 4. The use is likely to cause confusion as to the
which he knows, or ought to know, to be an infringing origin of such goods; and
copy of the work for the purpose of: NOTE: The essential element in an action for
(a) Selling, letting for hire, or by way of trade offering trademark infringement is the likelihood of
or exposing for sale, or hire, the article;
confusion on the part of the purchasing public
(b) Distributing the article for purpose of trade, or for
any other purpose to an extent that will prejudice the resulting from the colorable imitation of the
rights of the copyright owner in the work; or registered trademark
(b) Trade exhibit of the article in public, shall be guilty 5. The use of the infringing mark is without the
of an offense and shall be liable on conviction to consent of the trademark owner.
imprisonment and fine as above mentioned. (Sec. 29,
P.D. No. 49a) Trade mark-Unfair Competition- Remedy if an
unregistered trademark is used by another
PART V - Unfair Competition involves the ―passing-off‖ of one‘s
goods for those of a competitor. ―Passing-off‖ takes
FINAL PROVISIONS place where the offender, by imitative devices on the
general appearance of the goods, misleads
prospective purchasers into buying his merchandise
under the impression that they are buying those of
Section 239. Repeals. - 239.1. All Acts and parts of his competitors.
Acts inconsistent herewith, more particularly Republic
Act No. 165, as amended; Republic Act No. 166, as

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-111
 - In a case for unfair competition, it must be proven TITLE V- CRIMES RELATIVE TO OPIUM AND OTHER
that your company has established its goodwill and PROHIBITED DRUGS
reputation in the Philippines through the sale of their
products, which are identified by the general TITLE V: CRIMES RELATED TO OPIUM AND OTHER
appearance of the goods, including their registered RELATED DRUGS
marks.
REPUBLIC ACT NO. 916540
―THE COMPREHENSIVE DANGEROUS DRUGS ACT OF
- Unfair competition consists in employing deception or 2002‖
any other means contrary to good faith by which any
person shall pass off the goods manufactured by him
or in which he deals, or his business, or services for PART 141
one already having established goodwill or
committing any act calculated to produce the result I. CLASSIFICATION OF DRUGS
(Sec. 168.2, R.A. 8293).
1. ―Dangerous Drugs‖
- Test of unfair competition- the test is whether certain Dangerous Drugs. (DD) – Include those listed in the
goods have been clothed with the appearance which Schedules annexed to the 1961 Single Convention on Narcotic
is likely to deceive the ordinary purchaser exercising Drugs, as amended by the 1972 Protocol, and in the Schedules
ordinary care. annexed to the 1971 Single Convention on Psychotropic
Substances as enumerated in the attached annex which is an
Elements: integral part of this Act
1. The offender gives his goods the general
There is no exact definition provided for in the law.
appearance of the goods of another Instead, it uses an enumeration. In which case, the legal
manufacturer; maxim expressio unius est exclusio alterius shall apply. If the
2. There is confusing similarity in the appearance of drug involved in the case is one not included in the list, no
the goods; and criminal liability under this law shall attach.

2. ―Controlled Precursors and Essential Chemicals‖

3. There is intent to deceive the public and defraud
Controlled Precursors and Essential Chemicals. (CP/EC)
a competitor. – Include those listed in Tables I and II of the 1988 UN
Convention Against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and
In sum, this Court finds that there is sufficient evidence to Psychotropic Substances as enumerated in the attached annex,
warrant the prosecution of petitioners for trademark which is an integral part of this Act.
infringement and unfair competition, considering that
petitioner Republic Gas Corporation, being a corporation, Q: Why is there a need to classify?
A: There is a need to classify because there are
possesses a personality separate and distinct from the person
unlawful acts which provide for different penalty
of its officers, directors and stockholders.12 Petitioners, being depending on the classification of drugs involved.
corporate officers and/or directors, through whose act, default
or omission the corporation commits a crime, may themselves Additional Offenders
be individually held answerable for the crime.13 Veritably, the 1. ―Financier‖
CA appropriately pointed out that petitioners, being in direct A Financier is any person who pays for, raises or
control and supervision in the management and conduct of the supplies money for, or underwrites any of the illegal activities
prescribed under this Act.
affairs of the corporation, must have known or are aware that
the corporation is engaged in the act of refilling LPG cylinders 2. ―Protector/coddler‖
bearing the marks of the respondents without authority or A Protector/Coddler is any person who knowingly
consent from the latter which, under the circumstances, could and willfully consents to the unlawful acts provided for in
probably constitute the crimes of trademark infringement and this Act and uses his/her influence, power or position in
unfair competition. The existence of the corporate entity does shielding, harboring, screening or facilitating the
escape of any person he/she knows, or has reasonable
not shield from prosecution the corporate agent who
grounds to believe on or suspects, has violated the provisions
knowingly and intentionally caused the corporation to commit of this Act in order to prevent the arrest, prosecution and
a crime. Thus, petitioners cannot hide behind the cloak of the conviction of the violator.
separate corporate personality of the corporation to escape
criminal liability. A corporate officer cannot protect himself 40 AN ACT INSTITUTING THE COMPREHENSIVE DANGEROUS
behind a corporation where he is the actual, present and DRUGS ACT OF 2002, REPEALING REPUBLIC ACT NO. 6425,
efficient actor (Republic Gas Corporation v. Patron Corporation, OTHERWISE KNOWN AS THE DANGEROUS DRUGS ACT OF 1972,
G.R. No. 194062, June 17, 2013, 698 SCRA 666 [Per J. Peralta, AS AMENDED, PROVIDING FUNDS THEREFOR, AND FOR OTHER
Second Division].) PURPOSES
41 Reported by Cornelio Pangilinan

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-112
 In Article 19 (3) of the Revised Penal Code, an - if the introduction MAXIMUM penalty be
accessory is one who harbours, conceals, or assists in the or bringing into of imposed
escape of the principal of the crime, provided the he acts with the drug shall be
abuse of his public functions xxx.‖ This person as defined in
through the use of
R.A. No. 9165 is similar to that of the accessory but such is
specifically punished because the provisions of the RPC shall a diplomatic
not apply to this law. Hence, absent a provision in R.A. No. passport,
9165, such acts will not be made punishable. diplomatic facilities
or any other means
involving his official
II. UNLAWFUL ACTS AND PENALTIES status intended to
facilitate the
1) Importation of Dangerous Drugs and/or Controlled
unlawful entry of
Precursors and Essential Chemicals.
the same.
2) Sale, Trading, Administration, Dispensation,
Delivery, Distribution and Transportation of DD
- There must be proof that the ship came from a
and/or CP/EC foreign port to be convicted of illegal importation of
3) Maintenance of a Den, Dive or Resort opium
4) Being Employees and Visitors of a Den, Dive or - Possession of opium on board a foreign vessel is
Resort punishable when Philippine port is its destination
5) Manufacture of DD and/or CP/EC. (U.S. v. Ah Sing, G.R. No. L-13005, October 10, 1917 ) If
6) Illegal Chemical Diversion of CP/EC the vessel is in transit, mere possession of opium therein
is not punishable
7) Manufacture or Delivery of Equipment,
Instrument, Apparatus, and Other Paraphernalia 2. Sale, Trading, Administration, Dispensation,
for DD and/or CP/EC. Delivery, Distribution and Transportation of
8) Possession of Dangerous Drugs. Dangerous Drugs and/or Controlled Precursors
9) Possession of Equipment, Instrument, Apparatus and Essential Chemicals.
and Other Paraphernalia for Dangerous Drugs.
HOW COMMITTED:
10) Possession of Dangerous Drugs during Parties,
a. shall sell, trade, administer, dispense, deliver,
Social Gatherings or Meetings. give away to another, distribute dispatch in
11) Possession of Equipment, Instrument, Apparatus transit or transport any dangerous drug,
and Other Paraphernalia for Dangerous Drugs including any and all species of opium poppy
During Parties, Social Gatherings or Meetings regardless of the quantity and purity
12) Use of Dangerous Drugs. involved, or
13) Cultivation or Culture of Plants Classified as b. shall act as a broker in any of such transactions.
PENALTY: LP to death and fine ranging from
Dangerous Drugs or are Sources Thereof.
P500,000 to P10,000,000
14) Maintenance and Keeping of Original Records of c. same acts, involving any CP/EC, or shall act as a
Transactions on DD and/or CP/EC. broker in such transactions.
15) Unnecessary Prescription of Dangerous Drugs. PENALTY: 12 years and 1 day to 20 years and a
16) Unlawful Prescription of Dangerous Drugs. fine ranging from P100,000 to P500,000

- if this act transpires MAXIMUM penalty be

1. Importation of Dangerous Drugs and/or within 100m from imposed
Controlled Precursors and Essential Chemicals. the school
- for drug pushers MAXIMUM penalty be
HOW COMMITTED:
who use minors or imposed:
a. shall import or bring into the Philippines
mentally
any dangerous drug, regardless of the quantity
and purity involved, including any and all species incapacitated
of opium poppy or any part thereof or substances individuals as
derived therefrom even for floral, decorative and runners, couriers
culinary purpose. and messengers, or
PENALTY: life imprisonment to death and a fine in any other
ranging from P500,000.00 to P10,000,000.00
capacity directly
b. shall import any controlled precursor and
essential chemical connected to the
PENALTY: 12 years and 1 day to 20 years and a drugs
fine ranging P100,000.00 to P500,000.00 - organizes, MAXIMUM penalty be
manages, or acts as

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-113
 a ―financier‖ imposed February 14, 1994) If the delivery was proved, then there
is presumption of knowledge. It is the same presumption
- ―Protector/ coddler‖ 12 years and 1 day to in possession re animus possidendi, as knowledge cannot
of any violator 20 years and a fine really be proved. Burden is shifted to accused to prove
ranging from that he did not have knowledge.
- The crime of unlawful possession is necessarily
P100,000.00 to
included in the crime of unlawful sale thereof. (People v.
P500,000.00 Dischoso, G.R. Nos. 101215-18, June 4, 1993) It was
further held that accused cannot evade liability for illegal
- The penalty for the sale of dangerous drugs is imposed possession of dangerous drugs by his admission that he
regardless of the quantity involved. sometimes uses shabu.
- The law defines selling as any act of giving away any
dangerous drug and/or controlled precursor and essential 3. Maintenance of a Den, Dive or Resort
chemical whether for money or any other
consideration. A pusher is any person who sells, DEFINITION: Den, Dive or Resort. – A place where
trades, administers, dispenses, delivers or gives any dangerous drug and/or controlled precursor and
away to another, on any terms whatsoever, or essential chemical is administered, delivered,
distributes, dispatches in transit or transports stored for illegal purposes, distributed, sold or
dangerous drugs or who acts as a broker in any of such used in any form. (Section 3, (l))
transactions, in violation of this Act.
- He is a broker in the broad definition of the term HOW COMMITTED:
a. Shall maintain a den, drive, or resort where any
dangerous drug is used or sold in any form
ELEMENTS FOR PROSECUTION FOR ILLEGAL SALE PENALTY: LP to death and fine ranging from
OF DANGEROUS DRUGS: P500,000 to P10,000,000
1. Proof that the transaction or sale took place, and b. Same acts, involving any controlled precursor
1. Identities of the buyer and the seller, the and essential chemical
object, the consideration; and PENALTY: 12 years and 1 day to 20 years and a
2. Delivery of the thing sold and the payment fine ranging from P100,000 to P500,000
for it
NOTE: such dangerous drug or any controlled
2. Presentation in court of the corpus delicti or the
precursor and essential chemical be USED or
illicit drug as evidence
SOLD in any form in such den, dive or resort
- To sustain conviction for selling prohibited drugs, the - If the den, dive, or resort is owned by a 3rd person, the
element of sale must be unequivocally established. same shall be confiscated and escheated in favour of
- The law requires sale which presupposes that there is the government. Prosecution must:
consummation. The commission of illegal sale of 1) Specifically allege that such place is
prohibited drugs requires merely the consummation intentionally used in furtherance of the
of the selling transaction. crime;
2) Burden to prove such specific intent on
- When is there consummation? the part of the owner to use the
o Consummation happens the moment the buyer property for such purpose lies on the
receives the drug from the seller. (People v. prosecution;
Simon, 53 SCAD) What is important is that the 3) Said owner be included as an accused
poseur-buyer received the marijuana from the
accused. (People v. Ponferada, G.R. No. 31049, 4. Being Employees42 and Visitors of a Den, Dive
November 29, 1929) or Resort
o Jurisprudence is to the effect that even though
payment has not yet been made but there was HOW COMMITTED:
delivery already of the dangerous drugs, there is a. Any employee of a den, dive or resort, who is
already consummation. If there is no delivery just aware of the nature of the place as such;
yet, then, the sale not yet complete, instead, and
there is only an attempt. And this mere attempt
is punishable already, penalty of which provided
for in the law is the same as the principal of the
unlawful act. 42 Employee of Den, Dive or Resort. – The caretaker, helper,
watchman, lookout, and other persons working in the den, dive
- DELIVERY means any act of knowingly passing a or resort, employed by the maintainer, owner and/or operator
dangerous drug to another, personally or otherwise, and where any dangerous drug and/or controlled precursor and
by any means, with or without consideration. Delivery essential chemical is administered, delivered, distributed, sold or
necessarily involves knowledge on the part of the one used, with or without compensation, in connection with the
delivering. If no evidence of this knowledge, accused must operation thereof.
be acquitted. (People v. Jumao-As, G.R. No. 101334,
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-114
 b. Any person who, not being included in the under circumstances where one reasonably
provisions of the next preceding, paragraph, is should know the usage of the dangerous drug
aware of the nature of the place as such and i. If it will be used to plant, propagate,
shall knowingly visit the same cultivate, grow, harvest, manufacture,
PENALTY: 12 years and 1 day to 20 years and a compound, convert, produce, process,
fine ranging from P100,000 to P500,000 prepare, test, analyze, pack, repack,
store, contain or conceal any dangerous
5. Manufacture of Dangerous Drugs and/or drug,
Controlled Precursors and Essential Chemicals. PENALTY: 12 years and 1 day to 20
years and a fine ranging from P100,000
HOW COMMITTED: to P500,000
a. shall engage in the manufacture of any ii. a.2 IF it will be used to inject, inhale, or
dangerous drug. any introduction into the human body,
PENALTY: PENALTY: LP to death and fine ranging PENALTY: 6 months and 1 day to 4
from P500,000 to P10,000,000 years and a fine ranging from P10,000
b. Same acts, involving any controlled precursor to P50,000
and essential chemical
PENALTY: 12 years and 1 day to 20 years and a Here, the critical act is the delivery, or intent
fine ranging from P100,000 to P500,000 to deliver, and that such delivery will be used for a
NOTE: the presence of any controlled precursor specific purpose.
and essential chemical or laboratory equipment in
the clandestine laboratory is prima facie proof of 8. Possession of Dangerous Drugs.
manufacture of any dangerous drug.
WHO: Any person, unless lawfully authorized
The following are considered aggravating if the HOW COMMITTED:
clandestine laboratory is undertaken or a) Shall possess any dangerous drug in the
established under the following circumstance: following quantities, regardless of the degree
(a) Any phase of the manufacturing process was of purity thereof:
conducted in the presence or with the (1) 10 grams or more of opium;
help of minor/s: (2) 10 grams or more of morphine;
(b) Any phase or manufacturing process was (3) 10 grams or more of heroin;
established or undertaken within one (4) 10 grams or more of cocaine or cocaine
hundred (100) meters of a residential, hydrochloride;
business, church or school premises; (5) 50 grams or more of methamphetamine
(c) Any clandestine laboratory was secured or hydrochloride or "shabu";
protected with booby traps; (6) 10 grams or more of marijuana resin or
(d) Any clandestine laboratory was concealed marijuana resin oil;
with legitimate business operations; or (7) 500 grams or more of marijuana; and
(e) Any employment of a practitioner, (8) 10 grams or more of other dangerous
chemical engineer, public official or drugs such as, but not limited to,
foreigner. methylenedioxymethamphetamine
If any of these shall be present, the graver (MDA) or "ecstasy", and those
penalty will be imposed. similarly designed or newly
introduced drugs and their
6. Illegal Chemical Diversion of Controlled derivatives, without having any
Precursors and Essential Chemicals therapeutic value or if the quantity
possessed is far beyond therapeutic
HOW COMMITTED: requirements, as determined and
a. shall illegally divert any controlled precursor promulgated by the Board
and essential chemical
PENALTY: 12 years and 1 day to 20 years and a - In possession of dangerous drugs, quantity is material in
fine ranging from P100,000 to P500,000 order to know the penalty to be imposed; moreover,
purity is immaterial, so long as quantity is met
7. Manufacture or Delivery of Equipment, - There is graduation of penalties in Possession of
Instrument, Apparatus, and Other Dangerous Drugs (compare this with Sale of Dangerous
Paraphernalia for Dangerous Drugs and/or Drugs wherein quantity is immaterial) depending on the
Controlled Precursors and Essential Chemicals. quantity possessed43

HOW COMMITTED:
a. shall deliver, possess with intent to deliver, 43 (1) Life imprisonment and a fine ranging from Four hundred
or manufacture with intent to deliver thousand pesos (P400,000.00) to Five hundred thousand pesos
equipment, instrument, apparatus and other (P500,000.00), if the quantity of methamphetamine
paraphernalia for dangerous drugs, knowing, or hydrochloride or "shabu" is ten (10) grams or more but less than
fifty (50) grams;
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-115
 of knowledge on his part to the
presence of the drugs in his premises
ELEMENTS OF POSSESSION OF DANGEROUS DRUGS (U.S. v. Gan Lian Po, G.R. No. L-11772,
(PEOPLE v. BONGCARAWAN, 2002): August 31, 1916)
o A person who visited another who was smoking
1. That the accused is in possession of the object opium is not liable, if the place is not a drug den,
identified as a prohibited or a regulated drug; dive, or resort. No constructive knowledge shall
be imputed here. (U.S. v. Sy Bun Kue, G.R. No.
2. That possession is unlawful/ unauthorized
11321, March 8, 1916)
That the accused freely and consciously possessed
- What the law punishes is the present possession of
the said drug
dangerous drugs.
o One who is found with stains only of opium or its
- One element is that possession must be unlawful or
derivatives upon the hands or clothing cannot be
unauthorized, thus, it must be alleged in the Information.
convicted of having in his possession opium or its
Generally, when there is a negative allegation which is an
derivatives. Stains indicate merely past
essential element of a crime, the prosecution has the
possession thereof. What the law punishes
burden of proving the charge. However, an exception to
is the present possession of opium.
this is where the negative of an issue does not permit of
- ―shall possess‖
direct proof, or where the facts are more immediately
o This is not limited to manual touch or personal
within the knowledge of the accused, the onus probandi
custody
rests upon him. For example, where the accused is
o A principal acting through an agent comes within
charged with the selling of a regulated drug without
the purview of this expression
authority, the fact that he has a license is a matter which
o The words ―shall possess‖ that is, the relation
is peculiarly within his knowledge and he must establish
between the owner of the drug and the drug
that fact or suffer conviction. (People v. Macalaba, G.R.
itself, when the owner is not in actual physical
Nos. 146284-86, 20 January 2003.)
possession, but when it is still under his control
and management and subject to his disposition.
- Constructive knowledge
(U.S. v. Chan Guy Juan, G.R. No. 6612, August
o The finding of opium in the house or upon
31, 1912)
premises of the accused is prima facie
- To warrant conviction, possession of dangerous drugs
evidence of knowledge or animus
must be with knowledge of the accused, or that
possidendi and is sufficient to sustain a
animus possidendi existed together with the possession or
conviction in the absence of satisfactory
control of such articles. (U.S. v. Masa, G.R. No. L-6255,
explanation (People v. Lagman, G.R. No.
December 9, 1910) Possession of dangerous drugs
168695, December 8, 2008)
constitutes prima facie evidence of knowledge or
 The accused may rebut the presumption
animus possidendi sufficient to convict an accused
of knowledge and establish the absence
in the absence of a satisfactory explanation of such
possession.
(2) Imprisonment of twenty (20) years and one (1) day to life
9. Possession of Equipment, Instrument,
imprisonment and a fine ranging from Four hundred thousand
Apparatus and Other Paraphernalia for
pesos (P400,000.00) to Five hundred thousand pesos
(P500,000.00), if the quantities of dangerous drugs are five (5) Dangerous Drugs.
grams or more but less than ten (10) grams of opium, morphine,
heroin, cocaine or cocaine hydrochloride, marijuana resin or HOW COMMITTED:
marijuana resin oil, methamphetamine hydrochloride or "shabu", a. shall possess or have under his/her control
or other dangerous drugs such as, but not limited to, MDMA or any equipment, instrument, apparatus and other
"ecstasy", PMA, TMA, LSD, GHB, and those similarly designed or paraphernalia
newly introduced drugs and their derivatives, without having any PURPOSE OF THE PARAPHERNALIA: fit or
therapeutic value or if the quantity possessed is far beyond intended for
therapeutic requirements; or three hundred (300) grams or more  smoking, consuming,
but less than five (hundred) 500) grams of marijuana; and administering, injecting,
(3) Imprisonment of twelve (12) years and one (1) day to twenty ingesting, or introducing
(20) years and a fine ranging from Three hundred thousand any dangerous drug into
pesos (P300,000.00) to Four hundred thousand pesos the body
(P400,000.00), if the quantities of dangerous drugs are less than PENALTY: 6 months and 1 day to 4 years and a
five (5) grams of opium, morphine, heroin, cocaine or cocaine fine ranging from P10,000 to P50,000
hydrochloride, marijuana resin or marijuana resin oil, EFFECT of mere possession of such paraphernalia
methamphetamine hydrochloride or "shabu", or other dangerous fit or intended for any of the purpose:
drugs such as, but not limited to, MDMA or "ecstasy", PMA, TMA, i. shall be prima facie evidence that
LSD, GHB, and those similarly designed or newly introduced the possessor has smoked,
drugs and their derivatives, without having any therapeutic value consumed, administered to himself,
or if the quantity possessed is far beyond therapeutic injected, ingested, or used a
requirements; or less than three hundred (300) grams of dangerous drug and
marijuana.
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-116
 ii. shall be presumed to have violated the provisions of this Act shall be subjected to
Section 15 of the Act which is the screening laboratory examination or test within 24
Use of Dangerous Drug hours, if the apprehending or arresting officer
has reasonable ground to believe that the
- If the policemen found opium and opium paraphernalia on person apprehended or arrested, on account of
the table in the house, it was held that the accused are physical signs or symptoms or other visible or
presumed the possessors thereof, and such illegal outward manifestation, is under the influence of
possession of such prohibited article is prima facie dangerous drugs.
evidence that they have used the prohibited drug. PENALTY: shall depend on the repetition of the
(People v. Lian, G.R. No. 115988, March 29, 1996) offense
- The finding of illicit drugs and paraphernalia in a house or i. First offense: minimum 6 month
building owned or occupied by a particular person raises rehabilitation in a government
the presumption of knowledge and possession center
thereof which, standing alone, is sufficient to ii. Second offense: imprisonment from
convict. (People v. Lagman, supra, citing People v. 6 years and 1 day to 12 years and a
Torres, G.R. No. 170837, September 12, 2006) fine from P50,000 to P200,000.
- Possession of instruments for administering drugs is - If person tested is found to be in possession of such
punished separately. quantity as provided in Unlawful Act no. 8 (Section 11,
o But if possession of pipe is when he is smoking Possession of Dangerous Drugs), then graduated penalties
the same, possession of pipe is absorbed. under said Section shall apply
o If he is found possessing the pipe and opium and
he is not smoking, two crimes are committed: 13. Cultivation or Culture of Plants Classified as
Illegal Possession of Opium, and Illegal Dangerous Drugs or are Sources Thereof.
Possession of Opium Pipe.
HOW COMMITTED:
10. Possession of Dangerous Drugs During Parties, a. shall plant, cultivate or culture marijuana,
Social Gatherings or Meetings. opium poppy or any other plant regardless of
quantity, which is or may hereafter be classified
HOW COMMITTED: possession of any dangerous as a dangerous drug or as a source from which
drug any dangerous drug may be manufactured or
WHERE: derived
 during a party, or PENALTY: LP to death and fine ranging from
 at a social gathering, P500,000 to P10,000,000
meeting, or
 in the proximate company - medical laboratories and medical research centers shall
of at least 2 persons have proper guidelines
PENALTY: shall suffer the maximum penalties - Land and/or greenhouses used shall be confiscated and
provided for in Section 11 of this Act, regardless of escheated in favour of the State
the quantity and purity of such dangerous drugs. o Absolutory cause: the owner can prove lack of
knowledge of such cultivation or culture despite
11. Possession of Equipment, Instrument, diligence on his part
Apparatus and Other Paraphernalia for
Dangerous Drugs During Parties, Social 14. Maintenance and Keeping of Original Records
Gatherings or Meetings of Transactions on Dangerous Drugs and/or
Controlled Precursors and Essential Chemicals.
HOW COMMITTED: possession of aforementioned
paraphernalia fit or intended for the WHO: any practitioner, manufacturer, wholesaler,
aforementioned purpose/s importer, distributor, dealer or retailer
WHERE: HOW COMMITTED:
 during a party, or a. who violates or fails to comply with the
 at a social gathering, maintenance and keeping of the original records
meeting, or of transactions on any dangerous drug and/or
 in the proximate company controlled precursor and essential chemical
of at least 2 persons PENALTY: 1 year and 1 day to 6 years and a fine from
PENALTY: MAXIMUM of 6 months and 1 day to 4 P10,000 to P50,000 AND the revocation of the license
years and a fine ranging from P10,000 to P50,000 to practice profession or of the business

12. Use of Dangerous Drugs. 15. Unnecessary Prescription of Dangerous Drugs.

WHO: A person apprehended or arrested, who is WHO: upon the practitioner

found to be positive for use of any dangerous drug, HOW COMMITTED:
after a confirmatory test. Under Section 38 of this a. shall prescribe any dangerous drug to any
law, any person apprehended or arrested for violating person whose physical or physiological

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-117
 condition does not require the use or in the NON-COMPLIANCE: noncompliance of these
dosage prescribed therein requirements under justifiable grounds, as long as the
PENALTY: PENALTY: LP to death and fine ranging integrity and the evidentiary value of the seized items
from P500,000 to P10,000,000 AND the are properly preserved by the apprehending
revocation of the license to practice profession officer/team, shall not render void and invalid such
seizures and custody over said items.
16. Unlawful Prescription of Dangerous Drugs.

WHO: any person PROCEDURE FOR THE CUSTODY OF SEIZED OR

HOW COMMITTED: CONFISCATED ITEMS: (People v. Habana, G.R. No. 188900,
a. Shall make or issue a prescription or any other March 5, 2010 as cited in Reyes, 2012, page. 329)
writing purporting to be a prescription for any
dangerous drug
1. If in a plastic container, marking of the officer
PENALTY: LP to death and fine ranging from
who seized the substance must be placed therein
P500,000 to P10,000,000
and then seal the same
2. If not in a plastic container, substance be put in
III. CHAIN OF CUSTODY IN DRUG CASES one and seal the same.
3. If sealing has not been made, prosecution must
CHAIN OF CUSTODY establishes the identity of the subject present every police officer, personnel who took
substance. It requires that testimony be presented about every possession of the same, no matter how brief.
link in the chain – from the moment item is seized up to
the time it is offered in evidence. When nagging doubts
persist on whether the item confiscated is the same specimen STEP 2:
examined and established to be prohibited drug, there can be WHEN: Within twenty-four (24) hours upon
no crime of illegal possession of a prohibited drug. confiscation/seizure of dangerous drugs, plant
ELEMENT OF CORPUS DELICTI: (Section 21, CDDA of sources of dangerous drugs, controlled precursors
2002, as amended by R.A. No. 1064044) and essential chemicals, as well as
SEC. 21. Custody and Disposition of Confiscated, instruments/paraphernalia
Seized, and/or Surrendered Dangerous Drugs, Drug ACTION: the same shall be submitted to the PDEA
Paraphernalia. – Forensic Laboratory for a qualitative and quantitative
examination;
STEP 1:
WHO: The apprehending team having initial STEP 3:
custody and control of the dangerous drugs, ACTION: A certification of the forensic laboratory
equipment examination results shall be issued immediately
WHEN: immediately after seizure and WHEN: upon the receipt of the subject item/s
confiscation, WHO: shall be done by the forensic laboratory
ACTION: shall conduct a PHYSICAL INVENTORY examiner,
of the seized items and PHOTOGRAPH the same PROVIDED when the volume of dangerous drugs, etc.
does not allow the completion of testing within the
REQUIREMENTS: must be done in the presence of time frame, then a partial laboratory examination
i. the accused or the person/s from whom report shall be provisionally issued stating therein the
such items were confiscated and/or seized, quantities of dangerous drugs still to be examined by
or his/her representative or counsel, the forensic laboratory: Provided, however, That a
ii. with an elected public official and final certification shall be issued immediately upon
iii. a representative of the National Prosecution completion of the said examination and certification;
Service or the media who shall be required
to sign the copies of the inventory and be Q: What is the effect on non-compliance with Section
given a copy thereof: 21’s requirements? (PEOPLE v. DELA CRUZ, 2014)
- Non-compliance is tantamount to failure in
WHERE: a) at the place where the search warrant is establishing identity of corpus delicti, an essential
served; b) or at the nearest police station c) or at the element of the offenses of illegal sale and illegal
nearest office of the apprehending officer/team, possession of dangerous drugs. It "produce[s] doubts
whichever is practicable, in case of warrantless as to the origins of the [seized paraphernalia]." By
seizures: failing to establish an element of these offenses, non-
compliance will, thus, engender the acquittal of an
accused.
o Stated otherwise: ―Worse, the Prosecution
44AN ACT TO FURTHER STRENGTHEN THE ANTI-DRUG failed to establish the identity of the
CAMPAIGN OF THE GOVERNMENT, AMENDING FOR THE prohibited drug that constituted the corpus
PURPOSE SECTION 21 OF REPUBLIC ACT NO. 9165, OTHERWISE delicti itself. The omission naturally raises
KNOWN AS THE “COMPREHENSIVE DANGEROUS DRUGS ACT OF grave doubt about any search being actually
2002”
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-118
 conducted and warrants the suspicion that - Even the doing of acts which ostensibly approximate
the prohibited drugs were planted evidence.‖ compliance but do not actually comply with the
(People v. Dela Cruz, G.R. No. 200748, July requirements of Section 21 does not suffice.
23, 2014)
- What is emphasized is the significance of ensuring the 4 links which should be established in the chain of
integrity of drugs and drug paraphernalia. custody of the confiscated item: (PEOPLE v. NANDI)
- In every criminal prosecution for possession of illegal 1. first, the seizure and marking, if practicable, of the
drugs, the Prosecution must account for the custody illegal drug recovered from the accused by the
of the incriminating evidence from the moment of apprehending officer;
seizure and confiscation until the moment it is 2. second, the turnover of the illegal drug seized by the
offered in evidence. apprehending officer to the investigating officer;
- RATIO FOR THE PROCEDURE: 3. third, the turnover by the investigating officer of the
o Indeed, the likelihood of tampering, loss or illegal drug to the forensic chemist for laboratory
mistake with respect to an exhibit is greatest examination; and
when the exhibit is small and is one that has 4. fourth, the turnover and submission of the marked
physical characteristics fungible in nature illegal drug seized from the forensic chemist to the
and similar in form to substances familiar to court."
people in their daily lives. - "[e]ven the doing of acts which ostensibly
o A unique characteristic of narcotic approximate compliance but do not actually comply
substances is that they are not readily with the requirements of Section 21 does not suffice."
identifiable as in fact they are subject to - MERE MARKING WITHOUT PHYSICAL INVENTORY
scientific analysis to determine their AND PHOTOGRAPH WILL NOT SUFFICE: the mere
composition and nature. marking of seized paraphernalia, unsupported by a
physical inventory and taking of photographs,
Compliance with the chain of custody requirement and in the absence of the persons required by
ensures the integrity of confiscated, seized, and/or Section 21 to be present, does not suffice.
surrendered drugs and/or drug paraphernalia in four
(4) respects: Q: Is there an instance when compliance with Section 21 may
1. first, the nature of the substances or items seized; be dispensed with?
2. second, the quantity (e.g., weight) of the A: YES, under justifiable grounds, as long as the
substances or items seized; integrity and the evidentiary value of the seized items
3. third, the relation of the substances or items seized are properly preserved by the apprehending officer/team.
to the incident allegedly causing their seizure; and (Section 21)
4. fourth, the relation of the substances or items seized EFFECT: shall not render void and invalid such
to the person/s alleged to have been in possession seizures and custody over said items.
of or peddling them.
- Compliance with this requirement forecloses - HOWEVER, there are also rulings stating that non-
opportunities for planting, contaminating, or compliance with the provision is not fatal, such that is
tampering of evidence in any manner. does not render the accused‘s arrest illegal or make the
items seized inadmissible (PEOPLE v. DEL MONTE (2008).
SUMMARY OF THE EFFECT: In both illegal sale and illegal Non-compliance does not necessarily result in the
possession of prohibited drugs, conviction cannot be sustained conclusion that identity of the seized drugs has been
if there is a persistent doubt on the identity of the drug. The compromised so that an acquittal should follow.
identity of the prohibited drug must be established with moral
certainty. Apart from showing that the elements of possession
or sale are present, the fact that the substance illegally IV. LIABILITY OF PUBLIC OFFICER OR EMPLOYEE,
possessed and sold in the first place is the same substance ELECTIVE OFFICIAL, GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL
offered in court as exhibit must likewise be established with OR EMPLOYEE
the same degree of certitude as that needed to sustain a guilty
verdict 1. WHO: any public officer or employee (Section 27)
ACT: misappropriates, misapplies or fails to
Q: Will the presumption of regularity in the performance of account for confiscated, seized or surrendered
official duties suffice? dangerous drugs, other paraphernalia including the
- NO. The prosecution‘s sweeping guarantees as to the proceeds or properties obtained from the unlawful
identity and integrity of seized drugs and drug acts
paraphernalia will not secure a conviction. Not even PENALTY: LP to death and fine ranging from
the presumption of regularity in the performance of P500,000 to P10,000,000 AND absolute perpetual
official duties will suffice. In fact, whatever disqualification from any public office
presumption there is as to the regularity of the
manner by which officers took and maintained 2. WHO: any elective local or national official (Section
custody of the seized items is "negated." Republic Act 27)
No. 9165 requires compliance with Section 21. ACT: found to have benefited from the proceeds
of the trafficking of dangerous drugs, or have

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-119
 received any financial or material contributions or drug dependent, he shall be ordered by the court to undergo
donations from natural or juridical persons found treatment and rehabilitation in a Center for a period not less
guilty of trafficking dangerous drugs than 6 months, but confinement shall not exceed 1 year, after
PENALTY: removed from office and perpetually which time the Court, as well as the Board, shall be apprised
disqualified from holding any elective or appointive by the head of the treatment and rehabilitation center of the
positions in the government status of said drug dependent and determine whether further
confinement will be for the welfare of the drug dependent and
3. WHO: government official and employees (Section his/her family or the community. This is the Voluntary
28) Submission Program. (Section 54)
ACT: found guilty of such unlawful acts - He may then be exempt from criminal liability after
PENALTY: MAXIMUM penalty, AND absolute perpetual finally being discharged from confinement under
disqualification Section 15 provided he meets the following
conditions: 1) complied with the rules and regulations of
the Center including the after-care and follow-up program
V. CONFISCATION AND FORFEITURE for at least 18 months; 2) he has never been charged of
any offense; 3) he has no record of escape from a Center;
Confiscation and Forfeiture of the Proceeds or Instruments of 4) he poses no serious danger to himself or the
the Unlawful Act, Including the Properties or Proceeds Derived community by his exemption from criminal liability.
from the Illegal Trafficking of Dangerous Drugs and/or 1. If he is discharged from the program but does
Precursors and Essential Chemicals not qualify for exemption (for instance, he does
WHEN PROPER: not meet one of the conditions mentioned), he
a. unlawful importation, (UA1) sale, trading, may be charged, but shall be placed on
administration, dispensation, delivery, distribution, probation and shall undergo community
transportation (UA2) or manufacture of any service in lieu of imprisonment and/or fine in
dangerous drug and/or controlled precursor and the discretion of the court (Section 57)
essential chemical (UA4), 2. TWO SITUATIONS during the period of after-care
b. the cultivation or culture of plants which are sources and follow-up:
of dangerous drugs, (UA14) and the possession of a. He is certified to be
any equipment, instrument, apparatus and other rehabilitated, then he be
paraphernalia for dangerous drugs (UA9) discharged. Such discharge is
EFFECT: the confiscation and forfeiture, in favor of the without prejudice to the
government, of all the proceeds and properties derived from outcome of any pending case
the unlawful act, including, but not limited to: filed in court.
 money and other assets obtained thereby, and b. He is found to still require
 the instruments or tools with which the particular further rehabilitation, then he
unlawful act was committed, shall be recommitted.
If they are the property of a third person not liable for the 3. A drug dependent who is not rehabilitated
unlawful act – no confiscation or forfeiture after the second commitment to the Center
- Those which are not of lawful commerce shall be ordered under the voluntary submission program, shall
destroyed without delay upon recommendation of the Board, be charged
for violation of Section 15 and prosecuted.
If convicted, period of confinement shall be
VI. TREATMENT AND REHABILITATION OF DRUG credited.
DEPENDENTS 4. There is also a Compulsory Confinement, petition
of which be filed by the Board or any of its
Voluntary Submission Program (Section 54, 55) authorized representative (Section 61)

WHO: A Drug Dependent45 or any person who violates Section Compulsory Submission Program:
15 (use of dangerous drug)
ACTION: may apply to the Board for treatment and WHO: a person charged with an offense where the imposable
rehabilitation of the drug dependency. Examination will then penalty is imprisonment of less than six (6) years and one (1)
ensue upon lawful order of the Court. If he is found to be a day, and is found by the prosecutor or by the court, at
any stage of the proceedings, to be a drug dependent,
ACTION: the prosecutor or the court as the case may be,
45 Drug Dependence. – As based on the World Health shall suspend all further proceedings and transmit copies
Organization definition, it is a cluster of physiological, behavioral of the record of the case to the Board. (Section 62)
and cognitive phenomena of variable intensity, in which the use
of psychoactive drug takes on a high priority thereby involving, Q: What is the effect of the compulsory submission program to
among others, a strong desire or a sense of compulsion to take the prescription of the offense charged against a Drug
the substance and the difficulties in controlling substance-taking Dependent?
behavior in terms of its onset, termination, or levels of use. A: Such prescription shall not run during the time of
(Section 3,n) confinement in a Center. Upon certification of the Center that
NOTE: occasional “use” of a dangerous drug is not the same as he may temporarily be discharged, the court shall order his
“drug dependence” (PEOPLE v. DICHOSO)
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-120
 release on condition that he shall report for after-care and Offender. –Court shall discharge the accused
follow-up treatment for a period not exceeding 18 and dismiss all proceedings. (Section 67)
months. b. Minor violates any of the conditions
imposed on him including the applicable
Two situations may arise at any time during the after-care rules and regulations of the Center, court
period: shall pronounce judgment of conviction and he
a. the Board certifies to his complete rehabilitation - shall serve sentence as any other convicted
court shall order his final discharge from confinement person (Section 69)
and order for the immediate resumption of the trial of  In case of conviction, upon
the case for which he is originally charged. promulgation of the sentence, the court
b. the Board find that he requires further treatment and may, in its discretion, place the
rehabilitation, it shall report to the court, which shall accused under probation, even if the
order his recommitment to the Center sentence provided under this Act is
higher than that provided under existing
Q: What if the drug dependent committed to a Center upon law on probation, or impose
petition by the Board escape therefrom? community service in lieu of
TWO situations may arise: imprisonment
a. He may resubmit himself for confinement within 1
week from the date of his escape, or his relative may, - If discharged, all official records be expunged, and
within said period, surrender him for recommitment. accused shall be restored his status prior to the case
b. If he does not resubmit himself or not surrendered, - Privilege of suspended sentence shall be availed only once
the Board may apply with the Court for the issuance by an accused drug dependent
of recommitment order. If during his - A parent, spouse, guardian who refuses to cooperate with
recommitment, he should escape again, he shall no the proper agencies in the treatment and rehabilitation of
longer be exempt from criminal liability. the minor drug dependent without valid reason may be
cited for contempt.
-
VII. MINOR OFFENDERS VIII. APPLICABLE RPC PROVISIONS TO R.A. NO.
9165
WHO: (Section 66)
1) Accused who over 15 years old at the time of the - Limited applicability. General rule is that the provisions
commission of the offense of Possession of of the RPC shall not apply to the provisions of R.A. No.
Dangerous Drugs (Section 11) but not more than 18 7659, notwithstanding any law, rule, or regulation to the
years of age at the time when judgment should contrary. Exception is in case of minor offenders wherein
have been promulgated46 after having been found the penalty for acts punishable by life imprisonment to
guilty of said offense. death shall be reclusion perpertua to death.

EFFECT: may be given the benefits of a suspended - Nomenclatures of the RPC were deleted from the law
sentence, in which case, he shall be under the - When the offender is a MINOR and the violation is
supervision and rehabilitative surveillance of BOARD, punishable with Life Imprisonment to Death, the penalty
under such conditions that Board may impose for 6- shall be Reclusion Perpetua to Death and consequently
18 months the first part of Section 1 of the Indeterminate Sentence
Law (crimes punishable under the RPC) shall become
REQUISITES: operative.
1) He has not been previously convicted of
violating any law - The penalty is no longer based on the quantity involved
2) He has not been previously committed except in the case of possession.
to a Center
3) Favorable recommendation of BOARD IX. PROBATION LAW AND PLEA BARGAINING
that his sentence be suspended
2) Accused under 15 at the time of commission of any - Any person convicted for drug trafficking or pushing under
offense under this Act, ―Article 192 of Presidential this Act, regardless of the penalty imposed by the Court,
Decree No. 603, otherwise known as the Child and cannot avail of the privilege granted by the Probation
Youth Welfare Code, as amended by Presidential Law or Presidential Decree No. 968, as amended.
Decree No. 1179 shall apply, without prejudice to the - Exeption: Minor Offenders
application of the provisions of this Section.‖
- Any person charged under any provision of this Act
TWO SITUATIONS MAY ARISE: regardless of the imposable penalty shall not be
a. Minor complies with Conditions of allowed to avail of the provision on plea-
Suspended Sentence of a First-Time Minor bargaining.
- Deemed unconstitutional.

46 Section 6, Rule 120, Rules of Court

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-121
 - In a resolution by the Supreme Court en banc in its Republic Act No. 9165, as amended is malum
Decision in G.R. No. 226679, Estipona, Jr. vs. Hon. Lobrigo prohibitum.
which rendered whereby Section 23 of RA 9165, was
declared as unconstitutional for being contrary to the rule The Supreme Court held in the case of People v. Lo Ho Wing48,
making authority of the Supreme Court under Section ―the act of transporting a prohibited drug is a malum
5(5), Arcticle VIII of the Constiution. (April 10, 2018) prohibitum because it is punished as an offense under a
special law. It is a wrong because it is prohibited by law.
X. ATTEMPT OR CONSPIRACY Without the law punishing the act, it cannot be considered a
- Attempt or Conspiracy to commit the following unlawful wrong. As such, the mere commission of said act is what
acts shall be penalized by the same penalty prescribed for constitutes the offense punished and suffices to validly charge
the commission of the offense: and convict an individual caught committing the act so
punished, regardless of criminal intent.‖
o Importation of any dangerous drug and/or
controlled precursor and essential chemical; In the case of People v. Mariacos49, the Court reiterated that
o Sale, trading, administration, dispensation, Appellant‘s alleged lack of knowledge does not constitute a
delivery, distribution and transportation of any valid defense. Lack of criminal intent and good faith are not
dangerous drug and/or controlled precursor and exempting circumstances where the crime charged is malum
essential chemical; prohibitum, as in this case. Mere possession and/or delivery of
o Maintenance of a den, dive or resort where any a prohibited drug, without legal authority, is punishable under
dangerous drug is used in any form; the Dangerous Drugs Act. In this case, appellant Belen
o Manufacture of any dangerous drug and/or Mariacos was caught with a bag filled with bricks of marijuana.
controlled precursor and essential chemical; She contended that she did not own the bags as they were
o Cultivation or culture of plants which are just requested to be carried by an acquaintance. Moreover, she
sources of dangerous drugs. alleged that she had no knowledge of the contents of the
bags.
XI. USE OF DRUGS AS AN AGGRAVATING
CIRCUMSTANCE
Warrantless searches in drug cases (Moving vehicle
- It shall be a qualifying aggravating circumstance if and Consented Search)
the offender tested positive for the use of dangerous
drugs in the commission of a crime, and the application of Though a search lacks warrant, it is still valid if it falls under
the penalty provided for in the RPC shall be applicable. the exceptions. In People v. Lo Ho Wing, the Supreme Court
stressed that a warrantless search of a moving vehicle is
- If the crime committed cannot be qualified, it shall be justified on the ground that "it is not practicable to secure
considered as a special aggravating circumstance, to a warrant because the vehicle can be quickly moved
give meaning to the intent of the congress to punish more out of the locality or jurisdiction in which the warrant
severely those users who commit crimes must be sought.‖ Moreover, It explained:

XII. WHEN COMMITTED BY A JURIDICAL ENTITY The rules governing search and seizure have
OR ALIEN over the years been steadily liberalized
whenever a moving vehicle is the object of
- If the violation is committed by a partnership, corporation, the search on the basis of practicality. This is
association, or any juridical entity. so considering that before a warrant could
be obtained, the place, things and persons to
- The partner, president, director, manager, trustee, estate be searched must be described to the
administrator, or officer who consents to or knowingly satisfaction of the issuing judge—a
tolerates such violation shall be criminally liable as a requirement which borders on the impossible
co-principal. Even the mere act of knowingly in the case of smuggling effected by the use
authorizing, tolerating, or consenting to the use of a of a moving vehicle that can transport
vessel or facility as an instrument in the commission of the contraband from one place to another with
unlawful act IF such instrument/ facility is owned or under impunity.
the control or supervision of the juridical entity is
punishable, such criminal liability to be imposed to the A consented search, especially in the airport, is a valid
aforementioned persons. warrantless search. In the case of People v. Suzuki50, appellant
Hedishi Suzuki walked through the metal detector in the pre-
- If the violation is committed by an alien. In addition to departure area of the Bacolod Airport Terminal. the detector
the penalty prescribed, he shall, after service of sentence, turned on. PO1 Casugod asked for Suzuki‘s consent in opening
be deported immediately without further the box which contained dried marijuana leaves. The Court
proceedings, unless the penalty is death. elucidated the issue, to wit:
PART 247
48 G.R. No. 88017, January 21, 1991
49 G.R. No. 188611, June 16, 2010
47 Reported by Francis Guinoo 50 G.R. No. 120670, October 23, 2003

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-122
 crime proved, to wit:
Clearly, the PASCOM agents have the right
under the law to conduct search of
prohibited materials or substances. To simply
refuse passengers carrying suspected illegal Sec. 4. Judgment in case of variance
items to enter the pre-departure area, as between allegation and proof. – When there
claimed by appellant, is to deprive the
is variance between the offense charged in
authorities of their duty to conduct search,
thus sanctioning impotence and ineffectivity the complaint or information and that
of the law enforcers, to the detriment of proved, and the offense as charged is
society. included in or necessarily includes the
offense proved, the accused shall be
It should be stressed, however, that convicted of the offense proved which is
whenever the right against unreasonable included in the offense charged, or of the
search and seizure is challenged, an
offense charged which is included in the
individual may choose between invoking the
constitutional protection or waiving his right offense proved.
by giving consent to the search or seizure.

That appellant gave his consent when

PO1 Casugod asked him to open the Well-settled in jurisprudence that the crime of illegal
box was confirmed by SPO1 Linda and sale of dangerous drugs necessarily includes the crime
PO3 Poyugao. As succinctly found by of illegal possession of dangerous drugs. The same ruling
the trial court, appellant cannot deny may also be applied to the other acts penalized under Article
that he consented by feigning II, Section 5 of Republic Act No. 9165 because for the accused
ignorance of the English language.
to be able to trade, administer, dispense, deliver, give away to
another, distribute, dispatch in transit, or transport any
Presumption of regularity in the performance of official dangerous drug, he must necessarily be in possession of said
duties drugs. (People v. Maongco, G.R. No. 196966, October 23,
2013)
In People v. Collado51, the Court reminded the appellant that
mere allegations and self-serving statements will not overcome
the presumption of regularity in the performance of official
duties accorded to police officers. There must be a showing of
clear and convincing evidence to successfully rebut this
presumption. Elements to establish violation of Sec. 5, RA 9165
1. Proof that the transaction or sale took place
a. Identities of the buyer, seller, the object and
consideration
Question: Can the accused be charged with violation of Sec. b. Delivery of the thing sold
5 but be convicted of Sec. 11? 2. The presentation in court of the corpus delicti or the
illicit drug as evidence
Answer: Yes, the accused can be charged with violation of
Sec. 5 but be convicted of Sec. 11. Elements to establish violation of Sec. 11, RA 9165
1. The accused was in possession of an item or an
object identified to be a prohibited or regulated drug
2. Such possession is not authorized by law
But can accused-appellant Bandali be convicted for illegal 3. The accused was freely and consciously aware of
being in possession of the drug. (People v. Dela
possession of dangerous drugs under Article II, Section 11 of
Cruz52)
Republic Act No. 9165 when he was charged with illegal
dispensation, delivery, transportation, distribution or acting as
broker of dangerous drugs under Article II, Section 5 of the Chain of Custody Rule (Sec. 21 of RA 9165)
same statute? The Court answers in the affirmative.
Observance of the Chain of Custody Rule is mandatory. In the
case of People v. Montevirgen53, the Supreme Court explained
the proviso in Sec. 21(1). As said by the Court, ―failure to
Rule 120, Section 4 of the Rules of Court governs situations physically inventory and photograph the shabu seized from an
where there is a variance between the crime charged and the accused in the manner prescribed by law do not invalidate his

52 G.R. No. 205821, October 1, 2014

51 G.R. No. 185719, June 17, 2013 53 G.R. No. 189840, December 11, 2013
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-123
arrest or render said drug inadmissible in evidence if its The case of People v. Sumili54 is very illustrative of the
integrity and evidentiary value remain intact. It could importance of chain of custody. According to the prosecution,
still be utilized in determining the guilt or innocence of the NUP Ong failed to turn over the illegal drugs on the same day
accused.‖ as the PNP Crime Laboratory was already closed. It was only
two (2) days after the buy-bust operation that NUP Ong was
After the buy-bust operation, this was how PO3 Ruiz, officer- able to bring and turn over the seized sachet to the PNP Crime
in-charge, was able to preserve the integrity and evidentiary Laboratory. It was a Friday. This excuse was not believed by
value of the shabu: the Supreme Court. As stressed:

 Marked the seized items in front of appellant, However, contrary to their claims, June 7,
barangay captain and other members of the buy bust 2006 is not a Friday, but a Wednesday.
team, immediately after the consummation of the Thus, if the PNP Crime Laboratory was
drug transaction. indeed closed on June 7, 2006, the
 Delivered the seized items to the duty investigator, delivery of the seized sachet could have
who in turn sent the same to the PNP Crime easily been done on the next day, or on
Laboratory for examination on the said day. June 8, 2006, instead of doing it two
 During trial, PO3 Ruiz was able to identify the said (2) days after the buy-bust operation.
markings and explain how they were made. This glaring fact, coupled with the absence in
the records as to who among the
The same was held in People v. Mariacos. In order to preserve apprehending officers had actual custody of
the integrity and evidentiary value of the evidence, this was the seized sachet from the time it was
how PO2 Pallayoc did it: prepared for turn-over until its delivery to
the PNP Crime Laboratory, presents a
 Appellant, after being arrested, was immediately substantial and unexplained gap in the chain
brought to the police station where she stayed while of custody of the alleged shabu seized from
waiting for the mayor. Sumili. Undoubtedly, the integrity and
 It was the mayor who opened the packages, evidentiary value of the corpus delicti had
revealing the illegal drugs, which were thereafter been compromised.
marked and sent to the police crime laboratory the
next day.

Despite the presence of the proviso which allows for a Mandatory Drug Testing
justifiable reason for non-compliance, the Supreme Court
reminded the prosecution especially law enforcers to strictly In the case of Dela Cruz v. People55, appellant was arrested by
observe the Chain of Custody Rule. In People v. Dela Cruz, the the NBI for Extortion. Despite his vehement refusal, the NBI
Court held that non-compliance is tantamount to failure in forced him to submit to urine testing pursuant to Sec. 15 of RA
establishing identity of corpus delicti, an essential element of 9165. The SC held:
the offenses of illegal sale and illegal possession of dangerous
drugs. By failing to establish an element of these offenses, In the instant case, we fail to see how a
non-compliance will, thus, engender the acquittal of an urine sample could be material to the charge
accused. of extortion.

In the present case, the Supreme Court took notice of the It is incontrovertible that petitioner refused
reckless manner in which the seized shabu was handled. To to have his urine extracted and tested for
wit: drugs. He also asked for a lawyer prior to his
urine test. He was adamant in exercising his
The circumstance of PO1 Bobon keeping rights, but all of his efforts proved futile,
narcotics in his own pockets precisely because he was still compelled to submit his
underscores the importance of strictly urine for drug testing under those
complying with Section 21. His subsequent circumstances.
identification in open court of the items
coming out of his own pockets is self- Clarification about Sec. 15 of RA 9165
serving.
 The confirmatory test in Section 15 does not
Keeping one of the seized items in his cover persons apprehended or arrested for any
right pocket and the rest in his left unlawful act, but only for unlawful acts listed under
pocket is a doubtful and suspicious way Article II of R.A. 9165.
of ensuring the integrity of the items.  ―A person apprehended or arrested" cannot literally
Contrary to the Court of Appeals‘ finding that mean any person apprehended or arrested for any
PO1 Bobon took the necessary precautions, crime. The phrase must be read in context and
we find his actions reckless, if not dubious.
54 G.R. No. 212160, February 4, 2015
55 G.R. No. 200748, June 23, 2014
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-124
 understood in consonance with R.A. 9165. Section 15
comprehends persons arrested or apprehended for The objective of R.A. No. 9165 is also to rehabilitate drug
unlawful acts listed under Article II of the law. (Dela users and provide them with an opportunity to recover
Cruz v. People) for a second chance at life. A charge for violation of the
Use of Dangerous Drugs is seen as expressive of the intent of
The landmark case of Social Justice Society v. Dangerous the law to rehabilitate persons apprehended or arrested for the
Drugs Board56 first tackled the issue regarding mandatory drug unlawful acts enumerated above instead of charging and
testing. This was a consolidation of three separate petitions convicting them of other crimes with heavier penalties.58
where the constitutionality of Sec. 36, specifically (c), (d), (f)
and (g) of RA 9165 was questioned insofar as it requires In the case of Dela Cruz v. People, the Supreme Court
mandatory drug testing of candidates for public office, elucidated that RA 9165 is not all about prosecution and
students of secondary and tertiary schools, officers and punishment. Speaking through Chief Justice Ma. Lourdes
employees of public and private offices, and persons charged Sereno, the Court explained:
before the prosecutor's office with certain offenses, among
other personalities. On a final note, this Court takes the
opportunity to be instructive on Sec. 11
As to the constitutionality of Sec. 36 (c) and (d), the Supreme (Possession of Dangerous Drugs) and Sec.
Court held: ―The drug test prescribed under Sec. 36(c) and (d) 15 (Use of Dangerous Drugs) of R.A. No.
of RA 9165 for secondary and tertiary level students and public 9165, with regard to the charges that are
and private employees, while mandatory, is a random and filed by law enforcers. This Court notes the
suspicionless arrangement. The objective is to stamp out practice of law enforcers of filing charges
illegal drug and safeguard in the process the well- under Sec. 11 in cases where the presence
being of the citizenry, particularly the youth, from the of dangerous drugs as basis for possession is
harmful effects of dangerous drugs.‖ only and solely in the form of residue, being
subsumed under the last paragraph of Sec.
With regard to the constitutionality of Sec. 36 (f), the Court 11. Although not incorrect, it would be
held: more in keeping with the intent of the
law to file charges under Sec. 15
We find the situation entirely different in the instead in order to rehabilitate first
case of persons charged before the public time offenders of drug use, provided
prosecutor's office with criminal offenses that there is a positive confirmatory
punishable with six (6) years and one (1) test result as required under Sec. 15.
day imprisonment. The operative concepts in The minimum penalty under the last
the mandatory drug testing are paragraph of Sec. 11 for the possession of
"randomness" and "suspicionless." In the residue is imprisonment of twelve years and
case of persons charged with a crime one day, while the penalty under Sec. 15 for
before the prosecutor's office, a first time offenders of drug use is a minimum
mandatory drug testing can never be of six months rehabilitation in a government
random or suspicionless. The ideas of center. To file charges under Sec. 11 on
randomness and being suspicionless are the basis of residue alone would
antithetical to their being made defendants frustrate the objective of the law to
in a criminal complaint. They are not rehabilitate drug users and provide
randomly picked; neither are they beyond them with an opportunity to recover for
suspicion. When persons suspected of a second chance at life.
committing a crime are charged, they are
singled out and are impleaded against their
will.

RA 9165 is not only about prosecution and

punishment of offenders TITLE VI- CRIMES AGAINST PUBLIC MORALS

It is true that the State, in its declaration of policy 57, needs to Public morality refers to moral and ethical standards
further enhance the efficacy of the law against dangerous enforced in a society, by law or police work or social
drugs, it being one of today‘s more serious social ills. However, pressure, and applied to public life, to the content of
it is also the policy of the State to provide effective the media, and to conduct in public places.
mechanisms or measures to re-integrate into society
individuals who have fallen victims to drug abuse or dangerous
drug dependence through sustainable programs of treatment What are the crimes against public morals?
and rehabilitation.
A. Chapter 1 - Gambling and Betting

56 G.R. No. 157870, 158633, 161658, November 3, 2008

57 Sec. 2, R.A. 9165 58 Dela Cruz v. People, supra
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-125
 1. Gambling. (Art. 195) Gambling and Betting), R.A. 3063 (Horse racing
2. Importation, sale and possession of lottery tickets Bookies), P.D. 449 (Cockfighting), P.D. 483 (Game
or advertisements. (Art. 196) Fixing), P.D. 510 (Slot Machines) in relation to
Opinion Nos. 33 and 97 of the Ministry of Justice, P.D.
3. Betting in sports contests. (Art. 197)
1306 (Jai-Alai Bookies) and other City and Municipal
4. Illegal betting on horse races. (Art. 198) Ordinances or gambling all over the country prescribe
5. Illegal cockfighting. (Art. 199) penalties which are inadequate to discourage or
stamp out this pernicious activities;
NOTE: The provisions of Articles 195-199 of the - WHEREAS, there is now a need to increase their
RPC, as amended, as well as those of PD 483 penalties to make them more effective in combating
(betting, game-fixing or point-shaving and this social menace which dissipate the energy and
resources of our people;
machinations in sport contests) and 449
(Cockfighting Law), which are inconsistent
P.D. 1602
with PD 1602, are repealed.
Prescribing Stiffer Penalties on Illegal Gambling

B. Chapter 2 - Offenses against decency and good

Section 1. Penalties. The following penalties are hereby
customs
imposed:
1. Grave Scandal. (Art. 200)
2. Immoral doctrines, obscene publications and
(A) The penalty of prison correccional in its medium period
exhibitions. (Art. 201)
of a fine ranging from one thousand to six thousand
3. Vagrancy and prostitution. (Art. 202)
pesos, and in case of recidivism, the penalty of prision
mayor in its medium period or a fine ranging from five
Chapter One
thousand to ten thousand pesos shall be imposed upon:
GAMBLING AND BETTING

1. Any person other than those referred to in the

succeeding sub-sections who in any manner, shall
ART. 195
directly or indirectly take part in any illegal or
What acts are punishable in gambling
unauthorized activities or games of cockfighting,
jueteng, jai alai or horse racing to include bookie
Gambling – any game or scheme, whether upon chance or
operations and game fixing, numbers, bingo and
skill wherein wagers consisting of:
other forms of lotteries; cara y cruz, pompiang and
1. Money
the like; 7-11 and any game using dice; black jack,
2. Articles
lucky nine, poker and its derivatives, monte,
3. Value
baccarat, cuajao, pangguingue and other card
4. Representative of value that are at stake or made
games; paik que, high and low, mahjong, domino
and other games using plastic tiles and the likes; slot
Why gambling is prohibited and punished
machines, roulette, pinball and other mechanical
- To repress an evil that undermines the social, moral
contraptions and devices; dog racing, boat racing,
and economic growth of the nation. (P. vs. Punto 68
car racing and other forms of races, basketball,
Phil. 481)
boxing, volleyball, bowling, pingpong and other
- Gambling is an act beyond the pale of good morals
forms of individual or team contests to include game
which, for the welfare of the people, should be
fixing, point shaving and other machinations;
exterminated. It has the effect of causing poverty,
banking or percentage game, or any other game
dishonesty, fraud and deceit. Many men have
scheme, whether upon chance or skill, wherein
neglected their business and mortgaged their integrity
wagers consisting of money, articles of value or
to follow the fickle Goddess of the cards. Many
representative of value are at stake or made;
women have wasted their hours and squandered their
substance at the gambling board while some children
2. Any person who shall knowingly permit any form of
were forgotten. (US vs. Salaveria 39 Phil. 102)
gambling referred to in the preceding subparagraph
to be carried on in inhabited or uninhabited place or
in any building, vessel or other means of
What is the governing law?
transportation owned or controlled by him. If the
- PD no. 1602 – Prescribing stiffer penalties in illegal
place where gambling is carried on has a reputation
gambling
of a gambling place or that prohibited gambling is
- WHEREAS, Philippine Gambling Laws such as Articles
195-199 of the Revised Penal Code (Forms of frequently carried on therein, or the place is a public
or government building or barangay hall, the
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-126
 malfactor shall be punished by prision correccional in
its maximum period and a fine of six thousand
pesos. LETTER OF INSTRUCTIONS No. 816

(B) The penalty of prision correccional in its maximum period TO: The Minister of National Defense, The Minister of
or a fine of six thousand pesos shall be imposed upon Local Government and Community Development, The
the maintainer or conductor of the above gambling Chief of Staff, Armed Forces of the Philippines, The
schemes. Chief Constabulary, Director-General INP, The
Chairman Task Force Anti-Gambling
(C) The penalty of prision mayor in its medium period with
temporary absolute disqualification or a fine of six SUBJECT:
thousand pesos shall be imposed if the maintainer, TO EXCLUDE CERTAIN PROHIBITED GAMES UNDER
conductor or banker of said gambling schemes is a PRESIDENTIAL DECREE NO. 1602.
government official, or where such government official
is the player, promoter, referee, umpire, judge or coach WHEREAS, it is the intent of Presidential Decree No. 1602 to
in case of game fixing, point shaving and machination. discourage and prohibit gambling not regulated or sanctioned
under existing laws;
(D) The penalty of prision correccional in its medium period
or a fine ranging from four hundred to two thousand WHEREAS, there is need to exclude therefrom certain games
pesos shall be imposed upon any person who shall, like domino, bingo, poker when not played with five cards
knowingly and without lawful purpose in any hour of stud, cuajo, pangguingue and mahjong when exclusively
any day, possess any lottery list, paper or other matter intended for parlor games or for home entertainment;
containing letters, figures, signs or symbols pertaining
to or in any manner used in the games of jueteng, jai- NOW, THEREFORE, I, FERDINAND E. MARCOS, President of
alai or horse racing bookies, and similar games of the Philippines, do hereby order that the games of domino,
lotteries and numbers which have taken place or about bingo, poker when not played with five cards stud,
to take place. cuajo, pangguinge and mahjong, provided that they are
played as parlor games or for home entertainment; and
(E) The penalty of temporary absolute disqualifications shall provided further, that they are not played in places habitually
be imposed upon any barangay official who, with used for gambling and the betting is not disguised to defeat
knowledge of the existence of a gambling house or the intent of Presidential Decree No. 1602, are hereby
place in his jurisdiction fails to abate the same or take exempted.
action in connection therewith.
DONE in the City of Manila, this 20th day of February in the
(F) The penalty of prision correccional in its maximum period year of Our Lord, nineteen hundred and seventy-nine.
or a fine ranging from five hundred pesos to two
thousand pesos shall be imposed upon any security (Sgd.) FERDINAND E. MARCOS
officer, security guard, watchman, private or house President of the Philippines
detective of hotels, villages, buildings, enclosures and
the like which have the reputation of a gambling place
or where gambling activities are being held.
NOTE: PD 1602 provides stiffer penalties for violations of the
Section 3. Repealing Clause. Provisions of Art. 195-199 of gambling laws. While RA 9287 increased the penalties for
the Revised Penal Code, as amended, Republic Act No. 3063, illegal number games, amending certain provisions of PD 1602
Presidential Decrees Numbered 483, 449, 510 and 1306,
letters of instructions, laws, executive orders, rules and
regulations, city and municipal ordinances which are RA 9287
inconsistent with this Decree are hereby repealed. An Act Increasing the Penalties for Illegal Number
Games,
Section 4. Effectivity. This Decree shall take effect Amending Certain Provisions of PD 1602, and for Other
immediately upon publication at least once in a newspaper of Purposes
general circulation.
Sec. 3. Punishable Acts. - Any person who participates in
Done in the City of Manila, this 11th day of June, in the year of any illegal numbers game shall suffer the following penalties:
Our Lord, nineteen hundred and seventy-eight.

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-127
 A) The penalty of imprisonment from thirty (30) days to 2. Personnel or staff operator
ninety (90) days, if such person acts as a bettor; 3. One who allows his house, vehicle, building, or land
B) The penalty of imprisonment from six (6) years and one to be used in gambling operations
(1) day to eight (8) years, if such person acts as a 4. Collector or Agent
personnel or staff of an illegal numbers game operation; 5. Coordinator, Controller, or Supervisor
The same penalty shall likewise be imposed to any 6. Maintainer, Manager, or Operator
person who allows his vehicle, house, building or land to 7. Financier
be used in the operation of the illegal numbers games. 8. Protector or Coddler
C) The penalty of imprisonment from eight (8) years and 9. Parents, Guardians, or any person exercising moral
one (1) day to ten (10) years, if such person acts as a ascendancy or authority over a minor, ward, or
collector or agent; incapacitated person who induces such person under
D) The penalty of imprisonment from ten (10) years and their authority to commit any of the offenses under
one (1) day to twelve (12) years, if such person acts as the law.
a coordinator, controller or supervisor;
E) The penalty of imprisonment from twelve (12) years and Spectators are not liable in gambling
one (1) day to ten (10) fourteen (14) years, if such - A mere bystander or spectator in a gambling game is
person acts as a maintainer, manager or operator; and not criminally liable, because he does not take part
F) The penalty of imprisonment from fourteen (14) years therein, directly or indirectly. The law does not make
and one (1) day to sixteen (16) years, if such person the mere presence in a gambling house an offense
acts as a financier or capitalist; (US vs. Palma 4 Phil. 547).
G) The penalty of imprisonment from sixteen (16) years and
one (1) day to twenty (20) years, if such person acts as Sec. 8. Immunity from Prosecution. - Any person who
protector or coddler. serves as a witness for the government or provides evidence in
a criminal case involving any violation of this Act, or who
Sec. 4. Possession of Gambling Paraphernalia or voluntarily or by virtue of a subpoena testificandum or duces
Materials. - The possession of any gambling paraphernalia tecum, produces, identifies, or gives testimony shall be
and other materials used in the illegal numbers game immune from any criminal prosecution, subject to the
operation shall be deemed prima facie evidence of any offense compliance with the provisions of Presidential Decree No.
covered by this Act. 1732, otherwise known as Decree Providing Immunity from
Criminal Prosecution to Government Witnesses and the
Liability of Government Officials and Employees under pertinent provisions of the Rules of Court.
RA 9287

Sec. 5. Liability of Government Employees and/or Knowledge permitting gambling to be carried on in a

Public Officials. place owned or controlled by the offender.
a) If the collector, agent, coordinator, controller, supervisor,
maintainer, manager, operator, financier or capitalist of Elements:
any illegal numbers game is a government employee 1. That a gambling game was carried on in an inhabited
and/or public official, whether elected or appointed shall or uninhabited place or in any building, vessel or
suffer the penalty of twelve (12) years and one (1) day to other means of transportation.
twenty (20) years and a fine ranging from Three million 2. That the place, building, vessel or other means of
pesos (P3,000,000.00) to Five million pesos transportation is owned and controlled by the
(P5,000,000.00) and perpetual absolute disqualification offender.
from public office. 3. That the offender permitted the carrying of such
game, knowing that it Is a gambling game.
What forms of gambling are Prohibited by RA 9287?
1. Illegal numbers game – uses numbers or Maintainer or Conductor
combinations thereof as factors in giving out jackpots
2. Jueteng – involves combination of 370 numbers Maintainer - person who sets up and furnishes the means
against 37 numbers from 1-37 and its variants with which to carry on the gambling game or scheme
3. Masiao – combination derived from Jai-alai results
4. Last Two – derived from last 2 digits of sweepstakes Conductor - person who manages or carries on the gambling
game or scheme of a gambling game or scheme are likewise
Who are the persons liable? punished.
1. Bettor

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-128
  Proof that game took place or is about to take place is laudable intention is to improve the public morals and promote
not necessary. the prosperity of their people, their action should be upheld by
 But proof is necessary when the jueteng lists pertain the courts. Ordinance No. 3 of Orion, Bataan, is found to
to games played on other dates. be valid.

The culprit in this case is himself a member of the Judiciary.

Instead of enforcing the law, he has scorned it. His example to
the people of Orion has been pernicious in its influence. If
United States vs. Salaveria gambling is to be suppressed, not only the weak and ignorant
G.R. No. L-13678, November 12, 1918 must be punished, but those with full knowledge of the law
and the consequences of violation. We would accordingly
FACTS: The municipal council of Orion, Bataan, enacted, on suggest to Courts of First Instance that in all cases arising
February 28, 1917, an ordinance which, among other things, under the Gambling Law or ordinances, except for unusual
prohibited the playing of panguingue on days not Sundays or circumstances, a prison sentence should be imposed, if
legal holidays, and penalized the violation thereof by permitted by the law or ordinance. We further suggest that,
a casero [housekeeper] by a fine of not less than P10 nor where the defendant has been found guilty and is a man of
more than P200, and by jugadores [gamblers] by a fine of not station, he be given the maximum penalty.
less than P5 nor more than P200. The justice of the peace of
Orion, when this ordinance went into effect, was Prudencio Applying the foregoing in this instance, it results that the
Salaveria, now the defendant and appellant. Notwithstanding defendant and appellant must be found guilty of a violation of
his official station, on the evening of March 8, 1917, not a ordinance No. 3 of the municipality of Orion, Bataan; and, in
Sunday or legal holiday, seven persons including the justice of accordance therewith, shall be sentenced to the maximum
the peace an his wife were surprised by the police while penalty of the payment of a fine of P200, or to subsidiary
indulging in a game of panguingue in the house of the justice imprisonment in case of insolvency, with the costs of all three
of the peace. The chief of police took possession of the cards, instances against him. So ordered.
the counters (sigayes), a tray, an P2.07 in money, used in the
game.
Mayor Pablo Magtajas vs. Pryce Properties Corp.
These are facts fully proven by the evidence and by the G.R. No. 111097, July 20, 1994
admissions of the accused. Convicted in the justice of the
peace court of Orion, and again in the Court of First Instance FACTS: There was instant opposition when PAGCOR
of Bataan, Salaveria appeals to this court, making five announced the opening of a casino in Cagayan de Oro City.
assignments of error. The three assignments, of a technical Civic organizations angrily denounced the project.The trouble
nature, are without merit, and a fourth, relating to the arose when in 1992, flush with its tremendous success in
evidence, is not sustained by the proof. The remaining several cities, PAGCOR decided to expand its operations to
assignment of error, questioning the validity of the Cagayan de Oro City.he reaction of the Sangguniang
ordinance under which the accused was convicted, Panlungsod of Cagayan de Oro City was swift and hostile. On
requires serious consideration and final resolution. December 7, 1992, it enacted Ordinance No. 3353.Nor was this
all. On January 4, 1993, it adopted a sterner Ordinance No.
ISSUE: WHETHER OR NOT ORDINANCE NO. 3 IS VALID 3375-93Pryce assailed the ordinances before the Court of
Appeals, where it was joined by PAGCOR as intervenor and
HELD: YES. For the suppression of such an evil, coordinate supplemental petitioner. Their challenge succeeded. On March
and harmonious action must concur between the three 31, 1993, the Court of Appeals declared the ordinances invalid
departments of Government. A law or ordinance enacted by and issued the writ prayed for to prohibit their enforcement
the legislative body must exist. Such an ordinance is before us.
Vigorous executive enforcement must take place to make the ISSUE: WON ORDINANCE 3353 AND 3375-93 ARE VALID
law or ordinance a reality. Such activity by the police has
brought this case to the courts. And finally the Judiciary, HELD: NO. Local Government Code, local government units
having full respect for the legislative action of the municipal are authorized to prevent or suppress, among others,
council and for the prosecution by the executive officials, must, "gambling and other prohibited games of chance." Obviously,
by judicial construction, equally as progressive and this provision excludes games of chance which are not
constructive, give effect to the action of the other two powers. prohibited but are in fact permitted by law.The rationale of the
Wherefore, although panguingue is not entirely a game of requirement that the ordinances should not contravene a
chance, since it is a proper subject for regulation by municipal statute is obvious.Casino gambling is authorized by P.D. 1869.
authorities acting under their delegated police power, whose This decree has the status of a statute that cannot be
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-129
amended or nullified by a mere ordinance. Hence, it was not 1. By importing into the Philippines from any foreign
competent for the Sangguniang Panlungsod of Cagayan de Oro place or port any lottery ticket or advertisement.
City to enact Ordinance No. 3353 prohibiting the use of 2. By selling or distributing the name in connivance with
buildings for the operation of a casino and Ordinance No. the importer.
3375-93 prohibiting the operation of casinos. For all their 3. By possessing knowingly and with intent to use,
praiseworthy motives, these ordinances are contrary to P.D. lottery tickets or advertisements.
1869 and the public policy announced therein and are 4. By selling or distributing the same without connivance
therefore ultra vires and void. with the importer.

Presumption of intent to sell, distribute, or use lottery

ticket or advertisement.
ART. 196  The possession of any lottery ticket or advertisement
Importation, sale, and possession of lottery tickets or is prima facie evidence of an intent to sell, distribute
advertisements or use the same. (Art. 196, last par.) But if the
defendant can establish that he did not know of the
Lottery – it is a scheme for the distribution of prizes by existence of the lottery ticket within his premises, the
chance among persons who have paid, or agreed to pay, a presumption is destroyed and the defendant must be
valuable consideration for the chance to obtain a prize (US vs. acquitted. (US vs. Jose)
Filart 30 Phil.80). Lottery embraces all schemes for distribution  It is not necessary that the lottery tickets be genuine,
of prizes by chance. (US vs. Baguio 39 Phil. 962) as it is enough that they be given the appearance of
lottery tickets. If the lottery tickets are counterfeit,
Elements of Lottery: they cannot give rise to the evil sought to be
1. Consideration eradicated.
2. Chance
3. Prize, or some advantage or inequality in amount or
value which is in the nature of a prize.
ART. 197
If the scheme is such that human reason, foresight, Betting in sports contests
sagacity, or design cannot enable one to know or
determine the result under the same has been
accomplished, then it is lottery. P.D. No. 483
BETTING, GAME-FIXING OR POINT SHAVING AND
MACHINATIONS IN SPORT CONTESTS
Art. 196. Importation, sale and possession of lottery
tickets or advertisements. — The penalty of arresto mayor
in its maximum period to prision correccional in its minimum Section 1. Definitions. For purposes of this Decree, the
period or a fine ranging from 200 to 2,000 pesos, or both, in following terms shall mean and be understood to be as
the discretion of the court, shall be imposed upon any person hereunder indicated:
who shall import into the Philippine Islands from any foreign A) Betting money or any object or article of value or
place or port any lottery ticket or advertisement or, in representative of value upon the result of any game,
connivance with the importer, shall sell or distribute the same. races and other sports contest.
Any person who shall knowingly and with intent to B) Game-fixing any arrangement, combination, scheme or
use them, have in his possession lottery tickets or agreement by which the result of any game, races or
advertisements, or shall sell or distribute the same sports contests shall be predicted and/or known other
without connivance with the importer of the same, than on the basis of the honest playing skill or ability of
shall be punished by arresto menor, or a fine not the players or participants.
exceeding 200 pesos, or both, in the discretion of the C) Point-shaving any such arrangement, combination,
court. scheme or agreement by which the skill or ability of any
The possession of any lottery ticket or advertisement player or participant in a game, races or sports contests
shall be prima facie evidence of an intent to sell, to make points or scores shall be limited deliberately in
distribute or use the same in the Philippine Islands. order to influence the result thereof in favor of one or
other team, player or participant therein.
Acts punished relative to lottery tickets or D) Game-machinations any other fraudulent, deceitful,
advertisements. unfair or dishonest means, method, manner or practice

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-130
 employed for the purpose of influencing the result of
any game, races or sport contest. Art. 198. Illegal betting on horse race. — The penalty of
arresto menor or a fine not exceeding 200 pesos, or both, shall
Section 2. Betting, game-fixing, point-shaving or game be imposed upon any person who except during the period
machination unlawful. Game-fixing, point-shaving, allowed by law, shall be on horse races. The penalty of arresto
machination, as defined in the preceding section, in connection mayor or a fine ranging from 200 to 2,000 pesos, or both, shall
with the games of basketball, volleyball, softball, baseball; be imposed upon any person who, under the same
chess, boxing bouts, "jai-alai", "sipa", "pelota" and all other circumstances, shall maintain or employ a totalizer or other
sports contests, games or races; as well as betting therein device or scheme for betting on horse races or realizing any
except as may be authorized by law, is hereby declared profit therefrom.
unlawful.
For the purposes of this article, any race held in the same day
Section 3. Penalty. Any violation of this Decree, or of the at the same place shall be held punishable as a separate
rules and regulations promulgated in accordance herewith, offense, and if the same be committed by any partnership,
shall be punished in the manner following: corporation or association, the president and the directors or
A) When the offender is an official, such as promoter, managers thereof shall be deemed to be principals in the
referee, umpire, judge, or coach in the game, race or offense if they have consented to or knowingly tolerated its
sports contests, or the manager or sponsor of any commission.
participating team, individual or player therein, or
participants or players in such games, races or other Acts punishable in illegal betting on horse races:
sports contests, he shall, upon conviction, be punished 1. By betting on horse races during the periods not
by prision correccional in its maximum period and a fine allowed by law.
of 2,000 pesos with subsidiary imprisonment in case of 2. By maintaining or employing a totalizer or other
insolvency, at the discretion of the court. This penalty device or scheme for betting on races or realizing
shall also be imposed when the offenders compose a profit therefrom during the periods not allowed by
syndicate of five or more persons. law.
B) In case of any offender, he shall, upon conviction, be
punished by prision correccional in its medium period  No liability if there is NO betting or use of totalizer.
and a fine of 1,000 pesos with subsidiary imprisonment  A Totalizer is a form of betting on horse races, in
in case of insolvency at the discretion of the court. which those holding winning tickets divide the total
C) When the offender is an official or employee of any amount between them in proportion to their wagers.
government office or agency concerned with the
enforcement or administration of laws and regulations Racing Days: Private individuals and entities duly licensed by
on sports the penalty provided for in the preceding the Commission on Races (now Games and Amusement Board)
Section 3 a small be imposed. In addition, he shall be may hold horse races on Sundays nor reserved under this Acts,
disqualified from holding any public office or on 24 Saturdays as may be determined by the said
employment for life. If he is an alien, he may be Commission, and on legal holidays, except on the following:
deported. 1. July 4 of each year (RA No. 137)
2. December 30 of each year (RA No. 22)
Section 4. Clearance for arrest, detention or 3. Any registration or voting days (RA No. 180, Revised
prosecution. No person who voluntarily discloses or Election Code)
denounces to the President of the Philippine Amateur Athletic 4. Holy Thursday and Good Friday (RA No. 946)
Federation or to the National Sports Associations concerned
and/or to any law enforcement/police authority any of the acts NOTE: The race held on the same day and at the same
penalized by this Decree shall be arrested, detained and/or place is punishable as a separate offense. (Art. 198 par. 2)
prosecuted except upon prior written clearance from the
President of the Philippines and/or of the Secretary of National
Defense. ART. 199
Illegal Cockfighting

Art. 199. Illegal cockfighting. — The penalty of arresto

ART. 197 menor or a fine not exceeding 200 pesos, or both, in the
Illegal Betting on Horses discretion of the court, shall be imposed upon:

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-131
 1. Any person who directly or indirectly participates in insolvency, at the discretion of the court. This penalty
cockfights, by betting money or other valuable things, shall also be imposed when the offenders compose a
or who organizes cockfights at which bets are made, syndicate of five or more persons.
on a day other than those permitted by law. B) In case of any offender, he shall, upon conviction, be
2. Any person who directly or indirectly participates in punished by prision correccional in its medium period
cockfights, at a place other than a licensed cockpit. and a fine of 1,000 pesos with subsidiary imprisonment
in case of insolvency at the discretion of the court.
C) When the offender is an official or employee of any
PD No. 449 government office or agency concerned with the
COCKFIGHTING LAW OF 1974 enforcement or administration of laws and regulations
on sports the penalty provided for in the preceding
Section 1. Definitions. For purposes of this Decree, the Section 3 a small be imposed. In addition, he shall be
following terms shall mean and be understood to be as disqualified from holding any public office or
hereunder indicated: employment for life. If he is an alien, he may be
deported.
A) Betting money or any object or article of value or
representative of value upon the result of any game, Permitting gambling of any kind in cockpit is punished
races and other sports contest. under the same decree
B) Game-fixing any arrangement, combination, scheme or - The owner, manager or lessee of the cockpit who
agreement by which the result of any game, races or shall permit gambling of any kind on the premises of
sports contests shall be predicted and/or known other the cockpit or place of cockfight during cockfights,
than on the basis of the honest playing skill or ability of violation of the injunction, shall be criminally liable
the players or participants. under Sec. 9 (Sec. 5[f])
C) Point-shaving any such arrangement, combination,
scheme or agreement by which the skill or ability of any Spectators in a cockfight are not liable
player or participant in a game, races or sports contests - The Decree does not punish a person attending as a
to make points or scores shall be limited deliberately in spectator in a cockfight. To be liable, he must
order to influence the result thereof in favor of one or participate in the cockfight as bettor.
other team, player or participant therein.
D) Game-machinations any other fraudulent, deceitful,
unfair or dishonest means, method, manner or practice Chapter two
employed for the purpose of influencing the result of OFFENSES AGAINST DECENCY AND GOOD CUSTOMS
any game, races or sport contest.

Section 2. Betting, game-fixing, point-shaving or game What are the offenses against decency and good
machination unlawful. Game-fixing, point-shaving, customs?
machination, as defined in the preceding section, in connection 1. Grave Scandal (Art. 200)
with the games of basketball, volleyball, softball, baseball; 2. Immoral doctrines, obscene publications and
chess, boxing bouts, "jai-alai", "sipa", "pelota" and all other exhibitions. (Art. 201)
sports contests, games or races; as well as betting therein 3. Vagrancy and prostitution. (Art. 202)
except as may be authorized by law, is hereby declared
unlawful.
ART. 200
Section 3. Penalty. Any violation of this Decree, or of Grave Scandal
the rules and regulations promulgated in accordance
herewith, shall be punished in the manner following: Art. 200. Grave scandal. — The penalties of arresto mayor
and public censure shall be imposed upon any person who
A) When the offender is an official, such as promoter, shall offend against decency or good customs by any highly
referee, umpire, judge, or coach in the game, race or scandalous conduct not expressly falling within any other
sports contests, or the manager or sponsor of any article of this Code.
participating team, individual or player therein, or
participants or players in such games, races or other Grave Scandal – consists of acts which are offensive to
sports contests, he shall, upon conviction, be punished decency and good customs which, having been committed
by prision correccional in its maximum period and a fine publicly, have given rise to public scandal to persons who have
of 2,000 pesos with subsidiary imprisonment in case of accidentally witnessed the same.

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-132
 pornography; (3) offend any race or religion; (4)
Decency – propriety of conduct; proper observance of the tend to abet traffic in and use of prohibited
requirements of modesty, good taste, etc. drugs; and (5) are contrary to law, public order,
morals, and good customs, established policies,
Customs – established usage, social conventions carried on lawful orders, decrees and edicts;
by tradition and enforced by social disapproval of any violation
thereof. (3) Those who shall sell, give away or exhibit films,
prints, engravings, sculpture or literature which
Elements: are offensive to morals. (As amended by PD Nos.
1. That the offender performs an act or acts. 960 and 969).
2. That such act or acts be highly scandalous as
offending against decency or good customs. PD no. 960
3. That the highly scandalous conduct is not expressly Amending Article 201 of the RPC and for Other
falling within any article of this Code. Purposes
4. That the act or acts complained of be committed in a
public place or within the public knowledge or view. Section 1. Amendment of Article 201, Revised Penal Code.
Article 201 of Act Numbered Thirty-eight hundred and fifteen,
The acts must be those that can cause public scandal otherwise known as the Revised Penal Code, is hereby
among the persons witnessing them besides being amended to read as follows;
contrary to public morals and good customs. (Ppl vs. Art. 201. Immoral doctrines, obscene publications and
Dumlao, et. al. CA 38 OG 3715) exhibitions, and indecent shows. The penalty of prision mayor
 If the act or acts of the offender are punished under or a fine ranging from six thousand to twelve thousand pesos,
another article of this Code, Art. 200 is not applicable. or both such imprisonment and fine, shall be imposed upon:
 The acts must be performed in a public place or 1. Those who shall publicly expound or proclaim doctrines
within the public knowledge or view. openly contrary to public morals;
 When the acts were performed in a private house and 2. The authors of obscene literature, published with their
seen by one person, the crime was not committed. knowledge in any form, the editors publishing such
literature, and the owners/operators of the book store
or other establishments selling the same;
ART. 201 3. Those who in theaters, fairs cinematographs or any other
Immoral doctrines, obscene publications and place, shall exhibit indecent or immoral plays, scenes,
exhibitions and indecent shows acts or shows, including the following:
(a) Films which tend to incite subversion, insurrection or
Art. 201. Immoral doctrines, obscene publications and rebellion against the State;
exhibitions and indecent shows. — The penalty of prision (b) Films which tend to undermine the faith and
mayor or a fine ranging from six thousand to twelve thousand confidence of the people in their Government
pesos, or both such imprisonment and fine, shall be imposed and/or duly constituted authorities;
upon: (c) Films which glorify criminals or condone crimes;
(d) Films which serve no other purpose but to satisfy
(1) Those who shall publicly expound or proclaim the market for violence, lust or pornography;
doctrines openly contrary to public morals; (e) Films which offend any race or religion;
(f) Films which tend to abet traffic in the use of
(2) (a) the authors of obscene literature, published prohibited drugs;
with their knowledge in any form; the editors (g) Films contrary to law, public order, morals, good
publishing such literature; and the customs, established policies, lawful orders,
owners/operators of the establishment selling the decrees, edicts, and any or all films which in the
same; judgment of the Board of Censors for Motion
Pictures or other agency established by the
(b) Those who, in theaters, fairs, cinematographs Government to oversee such motion pictures are
or any other place, exhibit, indecent or immoral objectionable on some other legal or moral
plays, scenes, acts or shows, whether live or in grounds.
film, which are prescribed by virtue hereof, shall 4. Those who shall sell, give away of exhibit prints,
include those which (1) glorify criminals or engravings, sculptures or literature which are offensive
condone crimes; (2) serve no other purpose but to morals.
to satisfy the market for violence, lust or

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-133
Section 2. Confiscation of articles. The literature, films, prints, Sec. 4. Additional Penalties. Additional penalties shall be
engravings, sculpture, paintings, or other materials and articles imposed as follows:
involved in the violation referred to in Section 1 hereof shall be 1. In case the offender is a government official or employee
confiscated and forfeited in favor of the Government to be who allows the violations of Section 1 hereof, the
destroyed. penalty as provided herein shall be imposed in the
maximum period and, in addition, the accessory
Section 3. Jurisdiction. Violations of Section 1 hereof shall be penalties provided for in the Revised Penal Code, as
subject to trial by the military tribunals and the offenders shall amended, shall likewise be imposed.
be subject to arrest and detention pursuant to existing laws,
decrees, orders and instructions promulgated pursuant to Sec. 4-A. The Chief of Constabulary shall, with the approval of
Proclamations No. 1081, dated September 21, 1972 and No. the Secretary of National Defense, promulgate the necessary
1104, dated January 17, 1973. rules and regulations for the implementation of this decree.

Section 4. Additional Penalties. Additional penalties shall be

imposed as follows: Under Art. 201 Publicity is essential - This offense in any
1. In case the offender is a government official or employee of the forms mentioned in the article is committed only when
who allows the violations of Section 1 hereof, the there is publicity.
penalty shall be imposed in the maximum period and in
addition, the accessory penalties provided for in the Moral – implies conformity with the generally accepted
Revised Penal Code, as amended shall likewise be standards of goodness or rightness in conduct or character,
imposed. sometimes, specifically, to sexual conduct.
2. The license or permit of the theater, cinematograph or
other place or establishment where the violation has The author of obscene literature is liable only when it is
been committed shall be canceled temporarily or published with his knowledge.
permanently, depending upon the gravity of the - Writing of obscene literature is not punished, but the
violation as determined by the proper military tribunal. author s liable if it is published with his knowledge. In
every case, the editor publishing it is liable.

Obscene – something offensive to chastity, decency or

PD No. 969 delicacy. (People vs. Kottinger 45 Phil. 352)
Amending Presidential Decree 960 which amended
Article 201 of the RPC Indecency – is an act against the good behavior and a just
delicacy. (People vs. Kottinger supra)
Sec. 2. Disposition of the Prohibited Articles. The disposition
of the literature, films, prints, engravings, sculptures, painting,
or other materials involved in the violation referred to in
Section 1 hereof shall be governed by the following rules: People vs. Kottinger
a. Upon conviction of the offender, to be forfeited in favor 45 Phil. 352 (1924)
of the government to be destroyed.
b. Where the criminal case against any violator of this FACTS: On November 24, 1922 detective Juan Tolentino
decree results in acquittal, the obscene/immoral raided Camera Supply Co. Where JJ. Kottinger was the
literature, films, prints, engravings, sculpture, paintings manager, found and confiscated postcards depicting non-
or other materials and articles involved in the violation Christian inhabitants of the Philippines in their native attire and
referred to in Section 1 hereof shall nevertheless be in poses showing how they live.
forfeited in favor of the government to be destroyed,
after forfeiture proceedings conducted as the Chief of Exhibit A carries the legend "Philippines, Bontoc Woman.
Constabulary. Exhibit A-1 is a picture of five young boys and carries the
c. The person aggrieved by the forfeiture action of the legend "Greetings from the Philippines."
Chief of Constabulary may, within fifteen (15) days after Exhibit A-2 has the legend "Ifugao Belle, Philippines. Greetings
his receipt of a copy of the decision, appeal the matter from the Philippines."
to the Secretary of National Defense for review. The Exhibit A-3 has the legend "Igorot Girl, Rice Field Costume."
decision of the Secretary of National Defense shall be Exhibit A-4 has the legend "Kalinga Girls, Philippines.‖
final and unappealable. Exhibit A-5 has the legend "Moros Philippines."

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-134
The prosecution produced no evidence proving the obscenity the law is to prohibit the dissemination of obscene
and indecency of the postcards as they believed the postcards materials to the public.
themselves are the best evidence of that. Dr. H. Otley Beyer, a
UP professor, and corroborated by other witnesses, testified The word ―give away‖ in par. 3 of Art. 201, should be
that none of the pictures showed anything that he did not see read ―distribute‖
on various occasions in his studies. - Pictures with slight degree of obscenity, not used for
art‘s sake but for commercial purposes, fall under this
ISSUE: WON PICTURES PORTRAYING THE INHABITANTS Article.
OF THE COUNTRY IN NATIVE DRESS & AS THEY APPEAR & - The object of the law is to protect the morals of the
CAN BE SEEN IN THE REGIONS IN WHICH THEY LIVE ARE public. (People vs. Aparici 52 OG 249)
OBSCENE OR INDECENT WITHIN THE MEANING OF THE LAW?

HELD: NO. The word ―Obscenity‖ is defined as something People vs. Aparici
offensive to chastity, decency or delicacy. ―Indecency‖ is an 52 OG 249 (1953)
act against good behavior and a just delicacy. The test for
obscenity is whether the tendency of the matter charged as FACTS: On February 3, 1953 Detectives Nibungco and Jose
obscene is to deprave or corrupt those whose minds are open accompanied by photographers Fajardo and Domingo of the
to such immoral influences and into whose hands a publication Manila Chronicle, went to Azcarraga Theatre, in order to
or other article charged as being obscene may fall. Another observe what was being exhibited by the accused Virginia
test is whether or not it shocks the ordinary and common Aparici in the said theatre. She was in a dimly lit stage dancing
sense of men as an indecency. with her hips swaying with nothing on except nylon patches
over her breasts and a too abbreviated pair of nylon panties to
―Obscenity‖ and ―indecency‖ are themselves descriptive, words interrupt her stark nakedness and around her waist was a furry
in common use and every person of average intelligence white girdle with a middle piece punctuating attention on the
understands their meaning. Whether a picture is thing she was supposed to hide.
obscene/indecent must depend on the circumstances of the
case. In the said theatre, there were more than 100 customers and
all of them were men. Most of them have been howling and
The Court turned to Federal Laws prohibiting the use and shouting in tagalog: ―sigue muna, sigue nakakalibog‖. The
importation of obscene materials into the Philippines in order detectives go stopped the show, and arrested Aparaci. In her
to shed light on what constitutes as obscene or indecent. defense, she claimed that her performance (hula hula dance)
―Obscene‖ as used in the Federal statutes makes it a criminal was her portrayal of the life of a widow whose guerrilla
offense to place in the mail any obscene, lewd, or lascivious husband was killed by the Japanese; depicting the different
publication, signifies that form of immorality which has relation emotions of the widow such as sadness, anger and happiness.
to sexual impurity, has the same meaning given at common
law in prosecutions for obscene libel. ISSUE: WON APARICI‘S PERFORMANCE WAS CONSIDERED
INDECENT OR IMMORAL, THUS, IN VIOLATION OF ARTICLE
The pictures in question merely depict persons as they actually 201 OF THE RPC.
live, without attempted presentation of persons in unusual
postures or dress. HELD: YES. The gauge whether her dancing was immoral or
indecent was the reaction of the public. Evidently, the
spectators had given their unequivocal verdict when they were
howling and shouting: ―Sigue muna, sigue, nakakalibog‖.
Mere nudity in pictures and paintings, not an obscenity Counsel for defense also advances the argument that the
- The proper test are: reaction of the low class and uncultured audience is an
1. whether the motive of the picture, as indicated by it, unreliable gauge in determining the objective indecency and
is pure or impure; or decency of a performance. The court clarified that the test
2. Whether it is naturally calculated to excite impure whether a particular act is obscene is its tendency ―to deprave
imaginations. (People vs. Serrano CA, GR No. 5566-R) or corrupt those whose minds are open to such influences‖, be
they cultured or not.
Mere possession of obscene materials is not punishable
- Mere possession of obscene materials, without People v Padan
intention to sell, exhibit, or give them away, is not G.R. No. L-7295 June 28, 1957
punishable under Art. 201, considering the purpose of

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-135
FACTS: The accused exhibited immoral scenes and acts in one the show was supposed to begin at 8:00 o'clock in the
of the Manila nightclubs. Moreover, the manager and evening.
ticket collector were also part of the accused for hiring the
women to perform sexual intercourse in the presence of many The Manila Police Department must have gotten wind of the
spectators. affair; it bought tickets and provided several of its members
who later attended the show, but in plain clothes, and after
They were charged with a violation of the RPC Article 201 in the show conducted a raid and made arrests. At the trial, said
the trial court. All pleaded not guilty. One of the accused policemen testified as to what actually took place inside the
however, changed her mind and pleaded guilty. All building. About two civilians who attended the affair gave
were convicted. The evidence of the lewd show was testimony as to what they saw.
confiscated.
The customers not provided with tickets actually paid P3 at the
The accused filed an appeal in the Supreme Court. 2 of the entrance to defendant Ernesto Reyes. He also collectedtickets.
appellants, manager Fajardo and ticket collector Yabut, failed In all, there were about ninety paying customers, while about
to file their briefs within the period prescribed by law and their sixteen were allowed to enter free, presumably friends of the
appeal was dismissed by resolution of this Court of November management. Jose Fajardo y Garcia was clearly the manager
25, 1955, and the decision as to them became final and of the show. He was at the door to see to it that the customers
executory on January 7, 1956. either were provided with tickets or paid P3.00 entrance fee.
He even asked them from whom they had bought the tickets.
The defendant who pleaded guilty, Marina Padan, in her He ordered that an army steel bed be placed at the center of
appeal did not question her conviction; she merely urged the the floor, covered with an army blanket and provided with a
reduction of the penalty by eliminating the prison sentence. pillow. Once the spectators, about 106 in number, were
The Supreme Court did not consider this because the trial crowded inside that small building, the show started.
court judge reduced the fine from 600 to 200.
Besides, as found by the trial court and as shown by some of
ISSUE: Were the acts obscene and thereby punishable by Art the tickets collected from the spectators, submitted as exhibits,
201 of the RPC? said tickets while bearing on one side superimposed with
rubber stamped name "Pepe Fajardo," which defendant
HELD: YES. This is the first time that the courts in this Fajardo admits to be his name.
jurisdiction, have been called upon to take cognizance of an
offense against morals and decency of this kind. We have had Considering all the above circumstances, we agree with the
occasion to consider offenses like the exhibition of still moving trial court that Jose Fajardo is the most guilty of the four, for
pictures of women in the nude, which we have condemned for he was the one who conducted the show and presumably
obscenity and as offensive to morals. In those cases, one derived the most profit or gain from the same.
might yet claim that there was involved the element of art;
that connoisseurs of the same, and painters and sculptors
might find inspiration in the showing of pictures in the nude, or
the human body exhibited in sheer nakedness. Disposition of prohibited articles.
- The disposition of the literature, films, prints,
But an actual exhibition of the sexual act, preceded by acts of
engravings, sculptures, paintings, or other materials
lasciviousness, can have no redeeming feature. In it, there is
no room for art. One can see nothing in it but clear and involved in the violation referred to in Sec. 1 hereof
unmitigated obscenity, indecency, and an offense to public shall be governed by the following rules:
morals, inspiring and causing as it does, nothing but lust and a. Upon conviction of the offender – to be forfeited
lewdness, and exerting a corrupting influence specially on the in favor of the government to be destroyed.
youth of the land. We repeat that because of all this, the b. Where the criminal case against the violator of
penalty imposed by the trial court on Marina, despite her plea
the decree results in an acquittal – to be forfeited
of guilty, is neither excessive nor unreasonable.
in favor of the government to be destroyed, after
On the appeal of Fajardo, he claimed that he was an innocent forfeiture proceedings conducted by the Chief of
bystander but that because of his popularity in the Constabulary.
neighborhood, he was requested by the spectators to select c. The person aggrieved by the forfeiture action of
the man and the woman to engage or indulge in the actual act the Chief of Constabulary may, within 15 days
of coitus before the spectators. After making the selection, he after his receipt of a copy of the decision, appeal
did not even care to witness the act but left the scene and
the matter to the Secretary of National Defense
returned to it only when he heard a commotion produced by
the raid conducted by the police. for review. The decision of the Secretary of
National Defense shall be final and unappealable.
The evidence on his active participation and that he was the (Sec. 2, PD 969)
manager and one in charge of the show is however ample,
even conclusive. In 1953, the place used for ping-pong was
used for an exhibition of human "fighting fish", the actual act NOTE: If the offender is a government official or
of coitusor copulation. Tickets were sold at P3 each, and
employee, the penalty as provided herein shall be imposed in
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-136
its maximum period and in addition, the accessory penalties When a person enters the estate of another he may
provided for in RPC, as amended, shall likewise be imposed. commit:
(Sec. 4, PD 969)
a. Vagrancy if the estate is not enclosed or fenced,
because entry is not prohibited, hence trespass is
not committed.
ART. 201 b. Trespass to property if manifested entry is
Immoral doctrines, obscene publications and prohibited. (Art. 281)
exhibitions and indecent shows c. Theft, when a person enters a fenced or enclosed
estate, without consent of the owner or overseer
Art. 202. Vagrants and prostitutes; penalty. — The to hunt, fish or gather plant products.
following are vagrants:
1. Any person having no apparent means of subsistence,
who has the physical ability to work and who neglects What is prostitution?
to apply himself or herself to some lawful calling; - It is any lascivious or lewd act habitually done for
2. Any person found loitering about public or semi-public profit by a woman.
buildings or places or trampling or wandering about
the country or the streets without visible means of
support; Elements of Prostitution:
3. Any idle or dissolute person who ledges in houses of ill a. The offender is a woman
fame; ruffians or pimps and those who habitually b. She habitually indulges in sexual intercourse or
associate with prostitutes; lascivious conduct
4. Any person who, not being included in the provisions c. She does so for money or profit.
of other articles of this Code, shall be found loitering
in any inhabited or uninhabited place belonging to  Hence, one sexual intercourse with a man for money
another without any lawful or justifiable purpose; or profit does not make a woman a prostitute. And
5. Prostitutes. several intercourses with different men do not make
her a prostitute, if there is no evidence that she
indulged in sexual intercourse for money or profit.
For the purposes of this article, women who, for money
or profit, habitually indulge in sexual intercourse or  Note also that sexual intercourse is not absolutely
lascivious conduct, are deemed to be prostitutes. necessary, as lascivious conduct is sufficient.
- Any person found guilty of any of the offenses
covered by this articles shall be punished by arresto  Habitually associating with prostitutes is vagrancy but
menor or a fine not exceeding 200 pesos, and in case when the offender engages in the business or profits
of recidivism, by arresto mayor in its medium period by prostitution or enlists the services of any other
to prision correccional in its minimum period or a fine person for the purpose of prostitution, the crime is
ranging from 200 to 2,000 pesos, or both, in the white slavery under Art. 341 or child abuse if
discretion of the court. involving minors.

Who are Vagrants? Art. 202 not applicable to minors.

- Vagrants are those who loiter around public or private - Persons below 18 years of age shall be exempt from
places without any visible means of support but are prosecution for the crimes of vagrancy and
physically able to work and do not apply themselves prostitution under Sec. 202 of RPC, of mendicancy
to some lawful calling, such as able-bodied beggars. under PD 1563, and sniffing of rugby under PD
1619, such prosecution being inconsistent with the
Dissolute – lax, unrestrained, immoral. UN Convention on the Rights of the Child: Provided,
Ruffians – brutal, violent, lawless persons. that said persons shall undergo appropriate
Pimp – one who provides gratification for the lust of others. counseling and treatment program. (Sec. 58 of RA
9344, Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act of 2006)

What crimes may be committed by ―loitering around?‖ Only pars. 1 and 2 of Art. 202 require absence of
- Loitering around constitutes Vagrancy, unless such visible means of support.
act is not punishable under other articles of the RPC.

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-137
 - Absence of visible means of support is an essential Vagrancy prior to its amendment by this Act shall be dismissed
element of the offense of vagrancy only under the upon effectivity of this Act
first and second par. of this article. .
SEC. 3. Immediate Release of Convicted Persons. – All
 Loitering around saloons and gambling houses persons serving sentence for violation of the provisions of
is vagrancy only when there is evidence of Article 202 of the Revised Penal Code on Vagrancy prior to its
absence of visible means of support. amendment by this Act shall be immediately released upon
effectivity of this Act: Provided, That they are not serving
sentence or detained for any other offense or felony.
PD no. 1563
Mendicancy Law of 1978 SEC. 4. Repealing Clause. – All laws, presidential decrees,
executive orders, rules and regulations and other issuances, or
- Under the Mendicancy Law of 1978, one who has no any part thereof, inconsistent with this Act are hereby
visible and legal means of support, or lawful repealed, modified or amended accordingly.
employment and who is physically able to work but
neglects to apply himself to some lawful calling and SEC. 5. Effectivity Clause. – This Act shall take effect fifteen
instead uses begging as a means of living, is (15) days after its publication in the Official Gazette or in at
considered a mendicant and, upon conviction, shall be least two (2) newspapers of general circulation.
punished by a fine not exceeding P500.00 or by
imprisonment for a period not exceeding 2 years or TITLE VII- CRIMES COMMITTED BY PUBLIC OFFICERS
both at the discretion of the court.
Crimes committed by Public Officers:
- Any person who abets mendicancy by giving alms 1. Malfeasance and Misfeasance (204-209)
directly to mendicants, exploited infants and minors 2. Bribery and Corruption (210-212)
on public roads, sidewalks, parks and bridges shall be 3. Frauds and Illegal Exactions and Transactions (216)
punished by a fine not exceeding P20.00. 4. Malversation of Public Funds and Property (217-222)
5. Infidelity in the Custody of Prisoners (223-225)
- A vagrant without visible means of support may 6. Infidelity in the Custody of Documents(226-228)
become a mendicant if he uses begging as a means 7. Revelation of Secrets (229-230)
of living. 8. Disobedience, refusal of assistance, maltreatment of
prisoners (231-235)
RA No. 10158 9. Other offenses or irregularities by public officers (236-244)
An Act Decriminalizing Vagrancy, Amending for this 10. Abuses against chastity(245)
purpose Article 202 of Act No. 3815,
as amended, Otherwise Known as the Revised Penal Chapter 1: Preliminary Provisions
Code ARTICLE 203: WHO ARE PUBLIC OFFICERS?

SECTION 1. Article 202 of the Revised Penal Code is To be a public officer one must be-
hereby, amended to read as follows: 1. Taking part in the performance of public functions in
the government, OR performing in said Government
Article 202. Prostitutes; Penalty. – For the purposes of or in any of its branches public duties as an
this article, women who, for money or profit, habitually employee, agent, or subordinate official, of any rank
indulge in sexual intercourse or lascivious conduct, are or class; and
deemed to be prostitutes. 2. That his authority to take part in the performance of
public functions or to perform public duties must be-
Any person found guilty of any of the offenses covered by a. By direct provision of law;
this article shall be punished by arresto menor or a fine not b. By popular election; or
exceeding 200 pesos, and in case of recidivism, by arresto c. By appointment from a competent authority
mayor in its medium period to prision correctional in its
minimum period or a fine ranging from 200 to 2,000 pesos, PUBLIC OFFICERS:
or both, in the discretion of the court.  The term ―public officers‖ embraces every public
servant from the highest to the lowest.
SEC. 2. Effect on Pending Cases. – All pending cases under  It obliterates the standard distinction in the law of
the provisions of Article 202 of the Revised Penal Code on public officers between ―officer‖ and ―employee‖.

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-138
  One appointed as a laborer in the government is not UNJUST JUDGMENT- is one which is contrary to law and is
a public officer. But the temporary performance of not supported by evidence.
public functions by a laborer makes him a public Elements:
officer. a. That the offender is a judge;
b. That he renders a judgment in a case submitted to
Malfeasance and Misfeasance in Office him for decision;
c. That the judgment is unjust;
 Misfeasance- is the improper performance of some d. That the judge knows that his judgment is unjust;
act which might lawfully be done.
 Malfeasance- is the performance of some act which NOTES:
ought not to be done.  Judgment- is the final consideration and
 Nonfeasance- is the omission of some act which determination of a court of competent jurisdiction
ought to be performed. upon the matters submitted to it, in an action or
proceeding.
Q:What are the crimes classified under malfeasance and  The judgment must be contrary to law and not
misfeasance in office? supported by evidence. DEFENSE: mere error in good
A: Those enumerated under Articles 204-211 faith.
 There must be evidence that the judgment is unjust,
Misfeasance Nonfeasance Malfeasance it cannot be presumed.
 There must be evidence that the judge knew that the
Art. 204.- Art. 208- Art. 210- Direct
judgment is unjust.
Knowingly Prosecution of Bribery
rendering unjust offenses;  The source of an unjust judgment may be either a)
judgment negligence and error, b) ill-will or revenge, or c) bribery.
tolerance  The offense refers only to a judgment of an individual
judge in his court, and not to the judgment rendered
in a collegial court by the members thereof [In Re:
Art. 205- Art. 211- Indirect Wenceslao Laureta (1987)]
Rendering Bribery  Before a criminal action against the judge will
judgment through prosper, there must be a trial or authoritative judicial
negligence
declaration that his decision or order is really unjust
which may result from either an action of certiorari or
prohibition in a higher court
 PENALTY: Prision Mayor AND perpetual absolute
Art. 206-Rendering disqualification
unjust
interlocutory order JUDGMENT RENDERED THROUGH NEGLIGENCE (Art.
205)

Elements:
a. That the offender is a judge;
Art. 207- Malicious
b. That he renders a judgment in a case submitted to
delay in the
administration of him for decision;
justice c. That the judgment is manifestly unjust;
d. That it is due to inexcusable negligence or ignorance;

Note: A judgment is manifestly unjust if it is so manifestly

contrary to law, that even a person having basic knowledge of
the law cannot doubt the injustice.
Chapter II: Malfeasance and Misfeasance PENALTY: arresto mayor AND temporary special
Section 1: Dereliction of Duty disqualification

KNOWINGLY RENDERING UNJUST JUDGMENT (Art. UNJUST INTERLOCUTORY ORDER (ART. 206)
204)
Elements:
1. That the offender is a judge; and

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-139
2. That he performs any of the following acts: 2. That knowing the commission of the crime, he does
a. Knowingly renders unjust interlocutory order or decree; or not cause the prosecution of the criminal or knowing
b. Renders a manifestly unjust interlocutory order or decree that a crime is about to be committed, he tolerates its
through inexcusable negligence or ignorance. commission;
3. That the offender acts with malice and deliberate
NOTES: intent to favor the violator of the law.
 Interlocutory order: It is an order which is issued
by the court between the commencement and the Who can be the offenders in Art. 208?
end of a suit or action and which decides some point 1. Public Officer-officers of the prosecution
or matter, but which, however, is not a final decision department, whose duty is to institute criminal
of the matter in issue. proceedings for felonies upon being informed of their
 TEST: Does it leave something to be done in the trial perpetration.
court with respect to the merits of the case? If it 2. Officer of the law- includes all those who, by
does, it is interlocutory order. If it does not, it is a reason of the position held by them, are duty-bound
final order. to cause prosecution and punishment of offenders.
 Example: Order granting preliminary injunction or Notes:
Order appointing a receiver.  Not applicable to revenue officers
 PENALTY:  Also known as prevaricacion
a. arresto mayor minimum and suspension- if  The use of the word ―negligence‖ should not be
the judge knowingly renders an unjust understood merely as lack of skill or foresight. It
interlocutory order simply means ―neglect of the duties of his office by
b. suspension- if the judge acted with maliciously failing to move the prosecution and
inexcusable negligence or ignorance punishment of the delinquent.‖
 There must be duty on the part of the public officer to
MALICIOUS DELAY IN THE ADMINISTRATION OF prosecute or to move the prosecution of the offender.
JUSTICE (ART. 207)  The offender must act with malice, which means that
the act complained of must be the result of a
Elements: deliberate evil intent and does not cover a mere
1. That the offender is a judge; voluntary act.
2. That there is a proceeding in his court;  The crime committed by the violator must be proved
3. That he delays in the administration of justice; and first before the person charged under this article be
4. That the delay is malicious, that is, the delay is caused by held liable.
the judge with deliberate intent to conflict damage on either  PENALTY: prision correcional minimum and
party in the case. suspension

Notes: BETRAYAL OF TRUST BY AN

 Malice must be proven. Malice is present where the ATTORNEY OR SOLICITOR- REVELATION OF SECRETS
delay is sought to favor one party to the prejudice of (ART. 209)
the other.
 Mere delay without malice is not a felony under this Elements:
provision. 1. Causing damage to his client, either:
 PENALTY: prision correcional minimum a. By any malicious breach of professional duty;
or
PROSECUTION OF OFFENSES; NEGLIGENCE AND b. Inexcusable negligence or ignorance;
TOLERANCE (ART. 208) 2. Revealing any of the secrets of his client learned by him in
his professional capacity; and
Acts punishable: 3. Undertaking the defense of the opposing party in the same
1. By maliciously refraining from instituting prosecution against case without the consent of his first client
violators of the law; and a. after having undertaken the defense of said
2. By maliciously tolerating the commission of a crime. first client, or
b. after having received confidential
Elements: information from said client.
1. That the offender is a public officer or officer of
the law who has a duty to cause the prosecution of, Modes of Commission:
or to prosecute the offenses;

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-140
(a) Maliciously causing damage to his client through a breach 3. That such offer or promise be accepted, or gift or
of his professional duty. present received by the public officer-
(b) Through gross ignorance, causing damage to the client; a. With a view to committing some crime; or
(c) Inexcusable negligence; b. In consideration of the execution of an act
(d) Revelation of secrets learned in his professional capacity; which does not constitute a crime, but the
(e) Undertaking the defense of the opposite party in a case act must be unjust; or
without the consent of the first client whose defense has c. To refrain from doing something which it is
already been undertaken. his official duty to do; and
4. That the act which the offender agrees to perform or
NOTES: which he executes be connected with the
 Procurador Judicial: is a person who had some performance of his official duties.
practical knowledge of law and procedure, but not a
lawyer, and was permitted to represent a party in a Punishable Acts:
case before an inferior court. 1. By agreeing to perform, or by performing in
 The Supreme Court held that not all information consideration of any offer, promise, gift, or present,
received by counsel from the client is classified as an act constituting a crime, in connection with the
privileged: performance of his official duties;
A distinction must be made between 2. By accepting a gift in consideration of the execution
confidential communications relating to past of an act which does not constitute a crime, in
crimes already committed, and future crimes intended connection with the performance of his official duty.
to be committed by the client. The 3. By agreeing to refrain, or by refraining, from doing
attorney-client privilege only covers past something which it is his official duty to do, in
crimes. consideration of a gift or promise.
 PENALTY: prision correcional minimum or a fine
ranging from 200 to 1,000 pesos, or both. FIRST MODE: By agreeing to perform, or by performing in
consideration of any offer, promise, gift, or present, an act
SECTION II. BRIBERY constituting a crime, in connection with the performance of his
official duties (Art. 210 1st par.)
BRIBERY
-It is the crime of the public officer who receives a gift,  The act constitutes a crime wherein mere agreement
present, offer or promise by reason or in connection with the consummates direct bribery.
performance of his official duties  If the act performed by the officer constitutes a
crime, he shall suffer the penalty imposed for the
BRIBERY- is the crime of the receiver. bribery AND the crime committed.
 The acceptance of the offer or promise is enough to
CORRUPTION OF PUBLIC OFFICERS- is the crime of the consummate the crime.
giver.  If there is no acceptance, only the person making the
offer or promise is liable for Attempted Corruption of
Bribery cannot be committed without the corresponding crime a Public Officer.
of corruption of public officer.  PENALTY: prision mayor medium & minimum AND
fine not less than three times the value of the gift, in
KINDS OF BRIBERY: addition to penalty of the crime agreed upon
a. Direct Bribery (Art. 210)
b. Indirect Bribery (Art. 211) SECOND MODE: By accepting a gift in consideration of the
c. Qualified Bribery (Art. 211-A) execution of an act which does not constitute a crime, in
connection with the performance of his official duty. (Art. 210,
2nd par.)
DIRECT BRIBERY (ART. 210) o The act agreed upon does not constitute a crime.
o The gift must be accepted by the public officer
Elements: himself or through a third person.
1. That the offender be a Public Officer; o The gift must be capable of pecuniary estimation.
2. That the offender accepts an offer or a promise or o A mere promise to give a gift and a mere promise to
receives a gift or present by himself or through execute an act not constituting a crime is NOT
another; sufficient .
o PENALTY:

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-141
 a. if act is executed- same penalty in Art 210 (1st
par) POINT OF DIRECT INDIRECT
b. if act is not accomplished- prision DISTINCTION BRIBERY BRIBERY
correcional medium AND a fine not less than
As to The public officer The public officer
twice the value of such gift.
accepting/receiving receives gift receives gift
of gifts
THIRD MODE: By agreeing to refrain, or by refraining, from
doing something which it is his official duty to do, in
consideration of a gift or promise. (Art. 210, 3rd par.)
 In this kind of direct bribery, the object for which the
gift is received or promise is to make the public As to existence of There is an No such
officer refrain from doing something which it is his an agreement agreement agreement exists
official duty to do. between the public
 If the act of refraining from doing something officer and the
constitutes a crime in itself, the bribery is not giver of gift or
punished under this paragraph but under par. 1 of present
Art. 210
 Prevaricacion (Art.208) vs 3rd Form of Direct Bribery:
 They are both committed by refraining from doing
something which pertains to the official duty of the
As to necessity of The offender It is not necessary
officer
the performance of agrees to perform that the officer
 The offender refrained from doing his official duty in
the act or performs an act should do any
consideration of a gift promised or received. This
or refrains from particular act or
element is not necessary in the crime of
doing something, even promise to do
prevaricacion.
because of the gift an act, as it is
 PENALTY: prision correccional maximum to prision
or promise enough that he
mayor minimum AND a fine not less than three times
accepts gifts
the value of such gift.
offered to him by
reason of his
INDIRECT BRIBERY (ART. 211)
office.

 It is the crime of any public officer who shall accept

gifts offered to him by reason of his office.
 The officer is not required to do anything in
consideration of what he may receive.

Elements:
1. That the offender is a public officer;
2. That he accepts gifts; and QUALIFIED BRIBERY (ART. 211-A)
3. That the said gifts are offered to him by reason of his
office In this kind of bribery, a law enforcement officer refrains from
NOTES: arresting or prosecuting an offender who commits an offense
• Mere acceptance of the gift because of his position penalized with reclusion perpetua and/or death.
constitutes indirect bribery. But after receiving the
gift, he does any act in favor of the giver, it ceases to Elements:
be indirect bribery but becomes direct bribery. 1. That the offender is a public officer entrusted with
• There is no attempted or frustrated indirect bribery. law enforcement;
• It is considered indirect bribery even if there was a 2. That the offender refrains from arresting or
sort of an agreement between public officer and giver prosecuting an offender who has committed a crime;
of a gift. 3. The crime committed must be punishable by reclusion
• PENALTY: perpetua and/or death
(a) prision correccional medium and 4. That the offender refrains from arresting or
maximum prosecuting the offender in consideration of any
(b) suspension promise, gift, or present.
(c ) public censure

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-142
Note: admitted that he never communicated with the NLRC
 The penalty imposed upon the offender must be concerning the garnishment. He returned the writ unsatisfied
reclusion perpetua or death or reclusion perpetua to only on February 20, 1980 although by its express terms, it
death, otherwise, the public officer is liable for was returnable within thirty days from October 29,
dereliction of duty under Art. 208 1979. Clearly, Manipon had planned to get Dominguez to
 PENALTY: acquiesce to a consideration for lifting the garnishment order.
a. the penalty on the offender is the same as
that of the officer. Dacumos vs Sandiganbayan (1991)
b. death- if the public officer was the one who Facts: Petitioner, a revenue examiner of the Bureau of
asked or demanded for the gift. Internal Revenue stationed at San Pablo City, offered to settle
the tax liability of a certain firm, by pulling out its assessments
CORRUPTION OF papers from the office of the BIR Commissioner and procuring
PUBLIC OFFICIALS (ART. 212) a tax clearance. As such, he would require a fee of P35,000.00
(later reduced to P30,000.00). Gregorio Samia, the manager of
Elements: the firm, pretended to go along with him but reported the
1. That the offender makes to a public officer: matter to the NBI, which arranged an entrapment.
a. offers or promises; or
b. Gives gifts or presents; and HELD: Petitioner is liable for direct bribery. The implausibility
2. That the offers or promises are made or the gifts or of his promises does not mean they were not made or that
presents given to a public officer, under circumstances that will they did not appear to be credible, coming as they did from
make the public officer liable for direct bribery or indirect one with his long experience in the BIR and appeared to know
bribery. his way around. The Court finds it especially remarkable that
he met Samia at a private place instead of his office at the
NOTES: BIR, considering that they were supposed to be discussing
 The offender in corruption of public officer is the giver official business and it was Samia who he says was requesting
of gift or offeror of promise. his assistance.
 The crime is attempted if the offer, promise, gift, or
present was refused. It is consummated if the same PRESIDENTIAL DECREE No. 46
were accepted by the officer. MAKING IT PUNISHABLE FOR PUBLIC OFFICIALS AND
 This article punishes the person who made the offer
EMPLOYEES TO RECEIVE, AND FOR PRIVATE PERSONS
or promise or gave the gift, even if the gift was
TO GIVE, GIFTS ON ANY OCCASION, INCLUDING
demanded by the public officer and the offer was not
CHRISTMAS
made voluntarily prior to the said demand by the
(November 10, 1972)
public officer.
P.D. 46 (Making it Punishable for Public Officials and
Manipon vs Sandiganbayan (1986) Employees to Receive and for Private Persons to Give, Gifts on
any Occasion, including Christmas) punishes:
Facts: Manipon is the Deputy Sheriff of CFI Baguio. He was 1. Any public official or employee who receives, directly
assigned to enforce to implement the execution order in a case or indirectly; and
rendered by the Minister of Labor. As such, he garnished the 2. Any private person who gives, or offers to give:
bank accounts of the respondent (Dominguez) therein. Any gift, present or other valuable thing to any
Manipon demanded P1,000 from Dominguez for a favor occasion, including Christmas, when such gift, present or other
extended by him to the latter, by not enforcing the valuable thing is given by reason of his official position,
garnishment order. regardless of whether or not the same is for past favor or
favors or the giver hopes or expects to receive a favor or
HELD: Manipon is liable for direct bribery. Manipon's behavior better treatment in the future from the public official or
at the very outset, had been marked with irregularities. He employee concerned in the discharge of his official functions.
garnished the bank accounts without informing the labor
arbiter so that the corresponding order for the payment by the Included within the prohibition is the throwing of parties or
bank of the garnished amount could be made and the sum entertainments in honor of the official or employees or his
withdrawn immediately to satisfy the judgment under immediate relatives.
execution. His lame excuse was that he was very busy in the
sheriff's office, attending to voluminous exhibits and court P.D. 46: Imposable Penalty
proceedings. That was also the same excuse he gave for not  The penalty of imprisonment for not less than one
informing the labor arbiter of the novation. In fact he candidly (1) year nor more than five (5) years and perpetual
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-143
 disqualification from public office shall be  The immunity shall not attach should it turn out
imposed. subsequently that the information and/or testimony is
 The official or employee concerned shall likewise be false and malicious or made only for the purpose of
subject to administrative disciplinary action and, harassing, molesting or in any way prejudicing the
if found guilty, shall be meted out the penalty of public officer denounced. In such a case, the public
suspension or removal, depending on the officer so denounced shall be entitled to any action,
seriousness of the offense. civil or criminal, against said informant or witness.
(Section 2)
PRESIDENTIAL DECREE No. 749
GRANTING IMMUNITY FROM PROSECUTION TO REPUBLIC ACT No. 3019
GIVERS OF BRIBES AND OTHER GIFTS AND TO THEIR ANTI-GRAFT AND
ACCOMPLICES IN BRIBERY AND OTHER GRAFT CASES CORRUPT PRACTICES ACT
AGAINST PUBLIC OFFICERS
(July 18, 1975)
Definition of Terms (Sec. 2)
Persons Granted Immunity
Any person who voluntarily gives information and  Government-it refers to the national government,
willingly testifies against public official or employee shall be the local government, the GOCCs and all other
exempt from prosecution or punishment for any violation of: instrumentalities or agencies of the government.
1. Articles 210, 211, 212 of RPC;  "Public officer―- includes elective and appointive
2. R.A. 3019, as amended; officials and employees, permanent or temporary,
3. Section 345 of the Internal Revenue Code and Section whether in the classified or unclassified or exempt
3604 of the Tariff and Customs Code and other service receiving compensation, even nominal, from
provisions of the said Codes penalizing abuse or the government.
dishonesty on the part of the public officials  ―Receiving any gift‖-includes the act of accepting
concerned; directly or indirectly a gift from a person other than a
4. Other laws, rules and regulations punishing acts of member of the public officer's immediate family, in
graft, corruption and other forms of official abuse behalf of himself or of any member of his family or
(Section 1) relative within the fourth civil degree, either by
consanguinity or affinity, even on the occasion of a
 This immunity may be enjoyed even in cases where family celebration or national festivity like Christmas,
the information and testimony are given against a if the value of the gift is under the circumstances
person who is not a public official but who is a manifestly excessive.
principal, or accomplice, or accessory in the  ―Person‖- includes natural and juridical persons,
commission of any of the above-mentioned violations. unless the context indicates otherwise

 This immunity may be enjoyed by such informant or Corrupt Practices of Public Officials (Sec. 3)
witness notwithstanding that he offered or gave the
bribe or gift to the public official or his accomplice for (a) Persuading, inducing or influencing another public
such gift or bribe-giving. Provided, the following officer to perform an act constituting a violation of
conditions concur: rules and regulations duly promulgated by competent
authority or an offense in connection with the official
duties of the latter, or allowing himself to be
1. The information must refer to consummated violations of persuaded, induced, or influenced to commit such
violation or offense.
any of the above-mentioned provisions of law, rules
and regulations;
(b) Directly or indirectly requesting or receiving any
2. The information and testimony are necessary for the
gift, present, share, percentage, or benefit, for
conviction of the accused public officer; himself or for any other person, in connection with
3. Such information and testimony are not yet in the any contract or transaction between the Government
possession of the State; and any other part, wherein the public officer in his
4. Such information and testimony can be corroborated on its official capacity has to intervene under the law.
material points; and
5. The informant or witness has not been previously convicted (c) Directly or indirectly requesting or receiving any
of a crime involving moral turpitude. (Section 1) gift, present or other pecuniary or material benefit,
for himself or for another, from any person for whom
the public officer, in any manner or capacity, has
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-144
secured or obtained, or will secure or obtain, any representative or dummy of one who is not so
Government permit or license, in consideration for the qualified or entitled.
help given or to be given, without prejudice to Section
thirteen of this Act. (k) Divulging valuable information of a confidential
character, acquired by his office or by him on account
(d) Accepting or having any member of his family of his official position to unauthorized persons, or
accept employment in a private enterprise which has releasing such information in advance of its
pending official business with him during the authorized release date.
pendency thereof or within one year after its
termination. CASES:
Morfe v. Mutuc (1968)
(e) Causing any undue injury to any party, including
the Government, or giving any private party any
FACTS: Section 7 of Republic Act No. 3019 (R.A. 3019),
unwarranted benefits, advantage or preference in the
discharge of his official administrative or judicial provides that ―every public officer, ...after his assumption to
functions through manifest partiality, evident bad office and within the month of January of every other year
faith or gross inexcusable negligence. This provision thereafter, as well as upon the termination of his position, shall
shall apply to officers and employees of offices or prepare and file with the head of the office to which he
government corporations charged with the grant of belongs, a true detailed and sworn statement of assets and
licenses or permits or other concessions. liabilities, including a statement of the amounts and sources of
his income, the amounts of his personal and family expenses
(f) Neglecting or refusing, after due demand or and the amount of income taxes paid for the next preceding
request, without sufficient justification, to act within a
calendar year...‖
reasonable time on any matter pending before him
for the purpose of obtaining, directly or indirectly, Jesus Morfe, disputing that such requirement is
from any person interested in the matter some violative of due process as an oppressive exercise of police
pecuniary or material benefit or advantage, or for the power and as an unlawful invasion of the constitutional right to
purpose of favoring his own interest or giving undue privacy, implicit in the ban against unreasonable search and
advantage in favor of or discriminating against any seizure construed together with the prohibition against self-
other interested party. incrimination, filed a petition for declaratory relief before
the Court of First Instance (CFI) of Pangasinan. After
(g) Entering, on behalf of the Government, into any
the submission of pleadings and stipulation of facts, the CFI
contract or transaction manifestly and grossly
found for Morfe, affirming that the requirement of periodical
disadvantageous to the same, whether or not the
public officer profited or will profit thereby. submission of such sworn statement of assets and liabilities
exceeds the permissible limit of the police power and is thus
(h) Director or indirectly having financing or pecuniary offensive to the due process clause – hence, Section 7 of R.A.
interest in any business, contract or transaction in 3019 is unconstitutional.
connection with which he intervenes or takes part in Aggrieved, Executive Secretary Amelito Mutuc
his official capacity, or in which he is prohibited by the appealed the decision of the CFI before the Supreme Court.
Constitution or by any law from having any interest.
HELD: The requirement of periodical submission of the sworn
(i) Directly or indirectly becoming interested, for statement of assets and liabilities, pursuant to R.A. 3019, does
personal gain, or having a material interest in any
not exceed the permissible limit of the State‘s police power and
transaction or act requiring the approval of a board,
panel or group of which he is a member, and which is not offensive to the due process clause. Nothing can be
exercises discretion in such approval, even if he votes clearer than that R.A. 3019 was precisely aimed at curtailing
against the same or does not participate in the action and minimizing the opportunities for official corruption and
of the board, committee, panel or group. maintaining a standard of honesty in the public service. It is
intended to further promote morality in public administration.
Interest for personal gain shall be presumed against A public office must indeed be a public trust. Nobody can cavil
those public officers responsible for the approval of at its objective; the goal to be pursued commands the assent
manifestly unlawful, inequitable, or irregular of all. The conditions then prevailing called for norms of such
transaction or acts by the board, panel or group to
character. The times demanded such a remedial device.
which they belong.

Soriano vs Sandiganbayan
(j) Knowingly approving or granting any license,
permit, privilege or benefit in favor of any person not
qualified for or not legally entitled to such license, FACTS: Tan was accused of qualified theft. The petitioner,
permit, privilege or advantage, or of a mere who was an Asst. Fiscal, was assigned to investigate. In the
course of the investigation, petitioner demanded Php.4000
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-145
from Tan as price for dismissing the case. Tan reported it to There is no law which invests the petitioner with the
the NBI which set up an entrapment. Tan was given a power to intervene in the payment of the salary
Php.2000, marked bill, and he had supplied the other half. differentials of the complainants or anyone for that
The entrapment succeeded and an information was filed with matter. Far from exercising any power, the petitioner played
the Sandiganbayan. After trial, the Sandiganbayan rendered a the humble role of a supplicant whose mission was to expedite
decision finding the petitioner guilty as a principal in violating payment of the salary differentials. In his official capacity as
Section 3(b) of the Anti Graft and Corrupt Practices Act assistant principal, he is not required by law to intervene in the
(R.A.3019). A motion for reconsideration was denied by the payment of the salary differentials. Accordingly, he cannot be
Sandiganbayan, hence this instant petition. said to have violated the law afore-cited although he exerted
efforts to facilitate the payment of the salary differentials.
HELD: The decision of the SB is erroneous. It is obvious that
the investigation conducted by the petitioner was not Trieste vs Sandiganbayan
a contract. Neither was it a transaction because this term must
be construed as analogous to the term which precedes it. A FACTS: The SB convicted the petitioner of 12 violations of
transaction, like a contract, is one which involves some Sec. 3(h) of RA 3019. It was alleged in the Information that
consideration as in credit transactions and this element the accused, being then the Municipal Mayor and member of
(consideration) is absent in the investigation conducted by the the Committee on Award of the Municipality of Numancia,
petitioner. Aklan, had administrative control of the funds of the
In the light of the foregoing, We agree with the municipality and whose approval is required in the
petitioner that it was error for the Sandiganbayan to have disbursements of municipal funds, did then and there wilfully
convicted him of violating Sec. 3 (b) of R.A. No. 3019. and unlawfully have financial or pecuniary interest in a
DISPOSITIVE: The judgment of the Sandiganbayan is business, contract or transaction in connection with which said
modified in that the petitioner is deemed guilty of bribery accused intervened or took part in his official capacity and in
as defined and penalized by Article 210 of the Revised which he is prohibited by law from having any interest, to wit
Penal Code the purchases of construction materials by the Municipality of
Numancia, Aklan from Trigen Agro-Industrial Development
Jaravata vs Sandiganbayan (1984) Corporation, of which the accused is the president,
incorporator, director and major stockholder paid under
FACTS: On January 5, 1979, accused informed the classroom Municipal Voucher No. 211-90-10-174 in the amount of
teachers of the approval of the release of their salary P558.80 by then and there awarding the supply and delivery of
differentials for 1978 and to facilitate its payment accused and said materials to Trigen Agro-Industrial Development
the classroom teachers agreed that accused follow-up the Corporation and approving payment thereof to said corporation
papers in Manila with the obligation on the part of the in violation of the Anti-Graft and corrupt Practices Act.
classroom teachers to reimburse the accused of his expenses.
Accused incurred expenses in the total amount of HELD: SB erred in convicting petitioner. The SC acquitted
P220.00 and there being six classroom teachers, he divided petitioner.
said amount by six or at the rate of P36.00 each. What is contemplated in Section 3(h) of the anti-
Accused received more than the rightful contribution graft law is the actual intervention in the transaction in which
of P36.00 from four classroom teachers. The total amount one has financial or pecuniary interest in order that liability
received by the accused in excess of the share of the may attach. The official need not dispose his shares in the
classroom teachers in the reimbursement of his expenses is corporation as long as he does not do anything for the firm in
P194.00. its contract with the office. For the law aims to prevent the
The SB found him guilty for violating Sec. 3(b) of RA don-tenant use of influence, authority and power.
3019 which states : Sec. 3. Corrupt practices of public officers There is absolutely no evidence that petitioner had, in
xxx his capacity as Mayor, used his influence, power, and authority
(b) Directly or indirectly requesting or receiving any in having the transactions given to Trigen. He didn't ask
gift, present, share, percentage, or benefit, for himself or for anyone-neither Treasurer Vega nor Secretary Maravilla for that
any other person in connection with any contract or matter, to get the construction materials from Trigen.
transaction between the Government and any other party, Mejorada vs Sandiganbayan
wherein the public officer in his official capacity has to
intervene under the law. FACTS: Petitioner is a right of way agent. As such, his main
duty was to negotiate with property owners affected by
HELD: Jaravata is not liable for Sec. 3(b) of RA 3019. Sec. highway constructions or improvements for the purpose of
3(b) of R.A. No. 3019 refers to a public officer whose official compensating them for the damages incurred by said owners.
intervention is required by law in a contract or transaction.

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-146
 Petitioner contacted the herein claimants and guilty, held liable for the pertinent offenses under Section 3 of
informed them that he could work out their claims for payment R.A. No. 3 019.
of the values of their lots and/or improvements affected by the Considering that all the elements of the offense of
widening of said highway. However, when they already violation of Sec. 3(e) were alleged in the second information,
demanded for the payment of their property, only P1,000 was the Court finds the same to be sufficient in form and substance
given to each of them which was lower than they are entitled. to sustain a conviction.
SB found him guilty of violating Sec. 3(e) of RA 3019.
Go vs Sandiganbayan
HELD: The Sandiganbayan established the fact that the
petitioner took advantage of his position as a right-of-way- FACTS: Vicente C. Rivera, then DOTC Secretary, and
agent by making the claimants sign the aforementioned petitioner Henry Go, Chairman and President of PIATCO, were
agreements to demolish and sworn statements which charged with violation of Section 3(g) of RA 3019, also known
contained falsified declarations of the value of the as the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act. Go, in relation to
improvements and lots. the voided 1997 Concession Agreement and the Amended and
There was evident bad faith on the part of the Restated Concession Agreement (ARCA) entered into by the
petitioner when he inflated the values of the true claims and government with Philippine International Air Terminals Co., Inc
when he divested the claimants of a large share of the (PIATCO).
amounts due them. Petitioner Go contended that it was error to charge
The manner by which the petitioner divested the him with the violation given that he was not a public officer, a
private parties of the compensation they received was part of' necessary element of the offense under Sec 3(g) of RA 3019.
the scheme which commenced when the petitioner approached He further assert that conspiracy by a private party with a
the claimants and informed them that he could work out their public officer is chargeable only with the offense under
claims for payment of the values of their lots and/or Sec3(e).
improvements affected by the widening of the Pasig-Sta. Cruz-
Calamba Road. HELD: Petitioner is not correct. The application of the anti-
graft law extends to both public officers and private persons.
Braza vs Sandiganbayan Private persons, when acting in conspiracy with public officers,
may be indicted and, if found guilty, held liable for the
FACTS: Petitioner was initially charged in an information for pertinent offenses under Section 3 of RA 3019. This is in
violation of Sec. 3(g) of RA 3019. He pleaded not guilty consonance with the avowed policy of the anti-graft law to
thereto. Thereafter, an Amended Information was filed but this repress certain acts of public officers and private persons alike
time charging him with violation of Sec. 3 (e) of RA 3019. constituting graft or corrupt practices act or which may lead
Braza challenges the sufficiency of the allegations in thereto.
the 2nd information because there is no indication of any actual
and quantifiable injury suffered by the government. He argued PEOPLE vs GO
that the facts under the 2nd information are inadequate to FACTS: A complaint was filed with the Ombudsman against
support a valid indictment for violation of Sec.3 (e) of R.A. several persons for alleged violation of R.A. 3019. Among
3019. those charged was herein respondent, who was then the
Chairman and President of PIATCO, for having supposedly
HELD: Petitioner is not correct. There are two (2) ways by conspired with then DOTC Secretary Arturo Enrile (Secretary
which a public official violates Section 3(e) of R.A. No. 3019 in Enrile) in entering into a contract which is grossly and
the performance of his functions, namely: (1) by causing manifestly disadvantageous to the government. While a
undue injury to any party, including the Government; or (2) by probable cause was found against Enrile, he was no longer
giving any private party any unwarranted benefit, advantage indicted because he died prior to the issuance of the
or preference. resolution.
It must be emphasized that Braza was indicted for SB dismissed the complaint against the accused since
violation of Section 3(e) of R.A. No. 3019 under the second he is a private person and his alleged co-conspirator was
mode. "To be found guilty under the second mode, it suffices already deceased even before the case was filed. Thus, it lacks
that the accused has given unjustified favor or benefit to jurisdiction over the accused.
another, in the exercise of his official, administrative and
judicial functions.― The element of damage is not required for HELD: SB is not correct.
violation of Section 3(e) under the second mode. Doctrine: The death of one of two or more conspirators does
Settled is the rule that private persons, when acting in not prevent the conviction of the survivor or survivors.—
conspiracy with public officers, may be indicted and, if found Indeed, it is not necessary to join all alleged co-conspirators in
an indictment for conspiracy. If two or more persons enter into

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-147
a conspiracy, any act done by any of them pursuant to the 2. any application filed by him the approval of which is not
agreement is, in contemplation of law, the act of each of them discretionary on the part of the official or officials concerned
and they are jointly responsible therefor. This means that but depends upon compliance with requisites provided by law,
everything said, written or done by any of the conspirators in or rules or regulations issued pursuant to law;
execution or furtherance of the common purpose is deemed to 3. any act lawfully performed in an official capacity or in the
have been said, done, or written by each of them and it makes exercise of a profession.
no difference whether the actual actor is alive or dead, sane or
insane at the time of trial. The death of one of two or more Prohibition on Members of Congress (Sec.5)
conspirators does not prevent the conviction of the survivor or
survivors. Member of the Congress during their term are
It is true that by reason of Secretary Enrile's death, prohibited to acquire or receive any personal pecuniary interest
there is no longer any public officer with whom respondent can in any specific business enterprise which will be directly and
be charged for violation of R.A. 3019. It does not mean, particularly favored or benefited by any law or resolution
however, that the allegation of conspiracy between them can authored by him.
no longer be proved or that their alleged conspiracy is already
expunged. It shall likewise be unlawful for such member of
The death of Secretary Enrile does not mean that Congress or other public officer, who, having such interest
there was no public officer who allegedly violated Section 3 (g) prior to the approval of such law or resolution authored or
of R.A. 3019. In fact, the Office of the Deputy Ombudsman for recommended by him, continues for thirty days after such
Luzon found probable cause to indict Secretary Enrile for approval to retain such interest.
infringement of Sections 3 (e) and (g) of R.A. 3019.Were it not
for his death, he should have been charged. Penalties for violations (Sec.9)
The avowed policy of the State and the legislative (a) any public officer or private person committing any of
intent to repress "acts of public officers and private persons the unlawful acts or omissions enumerated in
alike, which constitute graft or corrupt practices,‖ would be Sections 3, 4, 5 and 6 of this Act shall be punished
frustrated if the death of a public officer would bar the with imprisonment for not less than six years and one
prosecution of a private person who conspired with such public month nor more than fifteen years, perpetual
officer in violating the Anti-Graft Law. disqualification from public office, and confiscation or
forfeiture in favor of the Government of any
Prohibition on Private Individuals (Sec.4) prohibited interest and unexplained wealth manifestly
(a) It shall be unlawful for any person having family or out of proportion to his salary and other lawful
close personal relation with any public official to income.
capitalize or exploit or take advantage of such family (b) Any public officer violating any of the provisions of
or close personal relation by directly or indirectly Section 7 of this Act (SALN) shall be punished by a
requesting or receiving any present, gift or material or fine of not less than one thousand pesos nor more
pecuniary advantage from any other person having than five thousand pesos, or by imprisonment not
some business, transaction, application, request or exceeding one year six months, or by both such fine
contract with the government, in which such public and imprisonment, at the discretion of the Court.
official has to intervene
(b) It shall be unlawful for any person knowingly to
induce or cause any public official to commit any of Other Provisions:
the offenses defined in Section 3 hereof.
Section 8. Dismissal due to unexplained wealth. If in
Prohibition on Certain Relatives (Sec.5) accordance with the provisions of Republic Act Numbered One
The spouse or any relative, by consanguinity or affinity within thousand three hundred seventy-nine, a public official has
the 3rd civil degree, of the President, Vice-President, Senate been found to have acquired during his incumbency, whether
President, or the Speaker of the House of Representatives is in his name or in the name of other persons, an amount of
prohibited to intervene, directly or indirectly, in any business, property and/or money manifestly out of proportion to his
transaction, contract or application with the Government. salary and to his other lawful income, that fact shall be a
Exceptions: ground for dismissal or removal. Properties in the name of the
1. any person who, prior to the assumption of office of any of spouse and unmarried children of such public official may be
the above officials to whom he is related, has been already taken into consideration, when their acquisition through
dealing with the Government along the same line of business, legitimate means cannot be satisfactorily shown. Bank deposits
nor to any transaction, contract or application already existing shall be taken into consideration in the enforcement of this
or pending at the time of such assumption of public office; section, notwithstanding any provision of law to the contrary.

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-148
Section 9. Penalties for violations. (a) Any public officer or may legitimately practice his profession, trade or occupation,
private person committing any of the unlawful acts or during his incumbency, except where the practice of such
omissions enumerated in Sections 3, 4, 5 and 6 of this Act profession, trade or occupation involves conspiracy with any
shall be punished with imprisonment for not less than one year other person or public official to commit any of the violations
nor more than ten years, perpetual disqualification from public penalized in this Act.
office, and confiscation or forfeiture in favor of the
Government of any prohibited interest and unexplained wealth In terms of Jurisdiction
manifestly out of proportion to his salary and other lawful
Sandiganbayan (P.D. No. 1606 as amended)
income.

a. Violations of Republic Act No. 3019, as amended, otherwise

Any complaining party at whose complaint the criminal
prosecution was initiated shall, in case of conviction of the known as the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act, Republic
accused, be entitled to recover in the criminal action with Act No. 1379, and Chapter II, Section 2, Title VII, Book II of
priority over the forfeiture in favor of the Government, the the Revised Penal Code, where one or more of the accused are
amount of money or the thing he may have given to the officials occupying the following positions in the government,
accused, or the value of such thing. whether in a permanent, acting or interim capacity, at the time
of the commission of the offense;
(b) Any public officer violation any of the provisions of
Section 7 of this Act shall be punished by a fine of not 1) Officials of the executive branch occupying the positions of
less than one hundred pesos nor more than one
regional director and higher, otherwise classified as Grade ‘27‘
thousand pesos, or by imprisonment not exceeding
one year, or by both such fine and imprisonment, at and higher, of the Compensation and Position Classification Act
the discretion of the Court. of 1989 (Republic Act No. 6758), specifically including:
―(a) Provincial governors, vice-governors, members of the
The violation of said section proven in a proper administrative sangguniang panlalawigan, and provincial treasurers,
proceeding shall be sufficient cause for removal or dismissal of assessors, engineers, and other provincial department heads:
a public officer, even if no criminal prosecution is instituted ―(b) City mayors, vice-mayors, members of the sangguniang
against him. panlungsod, city treasurers, assessors, engineers, and other
city department heads;
Section 10. Competent court. Until otherwise provided by ―(c) Officials of the diplomatic service occupying the position of
law, all prosecutions under this Act shall be within the original
consul and higher;
jurisdiction of the proper Court of First Instance.
―(d) Philippine army and air force colonels, naval captains, and
all officers of higher rank;
Section 11. Prescription of offenses. All offenses punishable
under this Act shall prescribe in ten years. ―(e) Officers of the Philippine National Police while occupying
the position of provincial director and those holding the rank of
Section 12. Termination of office. No public officer shall be senior superintendent and higher;
allowed to resign or retire pending an investigation, criminal or ―(f) City and provincial prosecutors and their assistants, and
administrative, or pending a prosecution against him, for any officials and prosecutors in the Office of the Ombudsman and
offense under this Act or under the provisions of the Revised special prosecutor;
Penal Code on bribery. ―(g) Presidents, directors or trustees, or managers of
government-owned or controlled corporations, state
Section 13. Suspension and loss of benefits. Any public universities or educational institutions or foundations.
officer against whom any criminal prosecution under a valid ―(2) Members of Congress and officials thereof classified as
information under this Act or under the provisions of the
Grade ‘27‘ and higher under the Compensation and Position
Revised Penal Code on bribery is pending in court, shall be
suspended from office. Should he be convicted by final Classification Act of 1989;
judgment, he shall lose all retirement or gratuity benefits ―(3) Members of the judiciary without prejudice to the
under any law, but if he is acquitted, he shall be entitled to provisions of the Constitution;
reinstatement and to the salaries and benefits which he failed ―(4) Chairmen and members of the Constitutional
to receive during suspension, unless in the meantime Commissions, without prejudice to the provisions of the
administrative proceedings have been filed against him.
Constitution; and
―(5) All other national and local officials classified as Grade ‘27‘
Section 14. Exception. Unsolicited gifts or presents of small
and higher under the Compensation and Position Classification
or insignificant value offered or given as a mere ordinary token
Act of 1989.
of gratitude or friendship according to local customs or usage,
shall be excepted from the provisions of this Act.
b. Other offenses or felonies whether simple or complexed
Nothing in this Act shall be interpreted to prejudice or prohibit with other crimes committed by the public officials and
the practice of any profession, lawful trade or occupation by employees mentioned in subsection a. of this section in
any private person or by any public officer who under the law relation to their office;
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-149
 (1) To further their private interests, or give undue
c. Civil and criminal cases filed pursuant to and in connection advantage to anyone; or
with Executive Order Nos. 1, 2, 14 and 14-A, issued in 1986. (2) To prejudice the public interest.

Provided, That the Regional Trial Court shall have exclusive (d) Solicitation or acceptance of gifts
original jurisdiction where the information: (a) does not allege Public officials and employees shall not solicit or
any damage to the government or any bribery; or (b) alleges accept, directly or indirectly, any gift, gratuity, favor,
damage to the government or bribery arising from the same or entertainment, loan or anything of monetary value from any
closely related transactions or acts in an amount not exceeding person in the course of their official duties or in connection
One million pesos (P1,000,000.00). (R.A. No. 10660) with any operation being regulated by, or any transaction
which may be affected by the functions of their office.

As to gifts or grants from foreign governments, the

Republic Act No. 6713 Congress consents to:
Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public (i) The acceptance and retention by a public official or
Officials and Employees employee of a gift of nominal value tendered and received as a
AN ACT ESTABLISHING A CODE OF CONDUCT AND souvenir or mark of courtesy;
ETHICAL STANDARDS FOR PUBLIC OFFICIALS AND (ii) The acceptance by a public official or employee of
EMPLOYEES, TO UPHOLD THE TIME-HONORED a gift in the nature of a scholarship or fellowship grant or
PRINCIPLE OF PUBLIC OFFICE BEING A PUBLIC TRUST, medical treatment; or
GRANTING INCENTIVES AND REWARDS FOR (iii) The acceptance by a public official or employee of
EXEMPLARY SERVICE, ENUMERATING PROHIBITED travel grants or expenses for travel taking place entirely
ACTS AND TRANSACTIONS AND PROVIDING outside the Philippine (such as allowances, transportation,
PENALTIES FOR VIOLATIONS THEREOF AND FOR food, and lodging) of more than nominal value if such
OTHER PURPOSES acceptance is appropriate or consistent with the interests of
the Philippines, and permitted by the head of office, branch or
Sec. 7-Prohibited Acts and Transactions. agency to which he belongs.

a. Financial and material interest. The Ombudsman shall prescribe such regulations as
Public officials and employees shall not, directly or may be necessary to carry out the purpose of this subsection,
indirectly, have any financial or material interest in any including pertinent reporting and disclosure requirements.
transaction requiring the approval of their office. Nothing in this Act shall be construed to restrict or
prohibit any educational, scientific or cultural exchange
b. Outside employment and other activities programs subject to national security requirements.
related thereto.
Public officials and employees during their CHAPTER III. FRAUDS AND ILLEGAL EXACTIONS AND
incumbency shall not: TRANSACTIONS
(1) Own, control, manage or accept employment as
officer, employee, consultant, counsel, broker, agent, trustee FRAUDS AGAINST THE PUBLIC TREASURY AND
or nominee in any private enterprise regulated, supervised or SIMILAR OFFENSES (ART. 213)
licensed by their office unless expressly allowed by law;
(2) Engage in the private practice of their profession
unless authorized by the Constitution or law, provided, that Acts punished:
such practice will not conflict or tend to conflict with their 1. Entering into an agreement with an interested party
official functions; or or speculator or making use of any other scheme, to
(3) Recommend any person to any position in a defraud the government, in dealing with any person
private enterprise which has a regular or pending official with regard to furnishing supplies, the making of
transaction with their office. contracts, or the adjustment or settlement of
accounts relating to public property or funds;
(c) Disclosure and/or misuse of confidential 2. Demanding, directly or indirectly, the payment of
information. sums different from or larger than those authorized
Public officials and employees shall not use or by law, in collection of taxes, licenses, fees, and other
divulge, confidential or classified information officially known to imposts;
them by reason of their office and not made available to the 3. Failing voluntarily to issue a receipt, as provided by
public, either: law, for any sum of money collected by him officially,

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-150
 in the collection of taxes, licenses, fees, and other c. Collecting or receiving, directly or indirectly, by way of
imposts; payment or otherwise, things or objects of a nature different
4. Collecting or receiving, directly or indirectly, by way of from that provided by law.
payment or otherwise, things or objects of a nature
different from that provided by law, in the collection  On the first form of illegal exaction:
of taxes, licenses, fees, and other imposts. Mere demand for larger or different amount is sufficient to
consummate the crime. It is not necessary that the taxpayer
should actually pay larger than or different from that fixed by
Elements of frauds against public treasury under law.
paragraph 1: Illustration:
1. Offender is a public officer; A taxpayer goes to the local municipal treasurer to pay real
2. He has taken advantage of his office, that is, he intervened estate taxes on his land. Actually, what is due the government
in the transaction in his official capacity; is P400.00 only but the municipal treasurer demanded
3. He entered into an agreement with any interested party or P500.00. By that demand alone, the crime of illegal exaction is
speculator or made use of any other scheme with regard to already committed even though the taxpayer does not pay the
furnishing supplies, the making of contracts, or the adjustment P500.00.
or settlement of accounts relating to public property or funds;
4. He had intent to defraud the government.  On the second form of illegal exaction:
The act of receiving payment due the government without
Illustrations: issuing a receipt will give rise to illegal exaction even though a
(1) A public official who is in charge of procuring supplies provisional receipt has been issued. What the law requires is a
for the government obtained funds for the first class receipt in the form prescribed by law, which means official
materials and buys inferior quality products and receipt.
pockets the excess of the funds. This is usually
committed by the officials of the Department of Public  On the third form of illegal exaction:
Works and Highways. Illustration:
(2) The Quezon City government ordered 10,000 but Payment of checks not belonging to the taxpayer, but that of
what was delivered was only 1,000 T-shirts, the checks of other persons, should not be accepted to settle the
public treasury is defrauded because the government obligation of that person.
is made to pay that which is not due or for a higher
price.  Under Article 213, if any of these acts penalized as
illegal exaction is committed by those employed in the
Bureau of Customs or Bureau of Internal Revenue,
 The public officer must act in his official capacity. the law that will apply to them will be the Revised
o As a public officer, he has the duty to deal Administrative Code or the Tariff and Customs Code
with any person with regard to furnishing or National Revenue Code.
supplies, the making of contracts, or the
adjustment or settlement of accounts OTHER FRAUDS (ART. 214)
relating to public property or funds.
 It is not necessary that the Government is actually Elements:
defrauded by reason of the transaction. It is sufficient 1. Offender is a public officer;
that the public officer who acted in his official 2. He takes advantage of his official position;
capacity had the intent to defraud the Government. 3. He commits any of the frauds or deceits enumerated in
Article 315 to 318.

Elements of illegal exactions under paragraph 2: NOTES:

1. Offender is a public officer entrusted with the collection of  Articles 315 to 318 define and penalize:
taxes, licenses, fees and other imposts; a. Estafa;
2. He is guilty of any of the following acts or omissions: b. Other forms of swindling;
a. Demanding, directly or indirectly, the payment of sums c. Swindling of minor; and
different from or larger than those authorized by law; or d. Other deceits.
b. Failing voluntarily to issue a receipt, as provided by law, for  The RTC has jurisdiction when this article is involved
any sum of money collected by him officially; or because the MTC has no jurisdiction to impose the
penalty of disqualification.

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-151
 PROHIBITED TRANSACTIONS (ART. 215) Government includes the National Government, and any of
its subdivisions, agencies or instrumentalities, including
Elements: government-owned or -controlled corporations and their
1. Offender is an appointive public officer; subsidiaries [Section 1(b)].
2. He becomes interested, directly or indirectly, in any
transaction of exchange or speculation; Ill-gotten wealth defined
3. The transaction takes place within the territory subject to
In Section 1 (d), ―ill-gotten wealth‖ means:
his jurisdiction;
4. He becomes interested in the transaction during his
… any asset, property, business enterprise or material
incumbency.
possession of any person within the purview of Section Two
(2) hereof, acquired by him directly or indirectly through
NOTES:
dummies, nominees, agents, subordinates and/or business
 It is sufficient under this article that the appointive
associates by any combination or series of the following means
officer has an interest in any transaction of exchange
or similar schemes:
or speculation, such as buying and selling stocks,
commodities, land, etc. hoping to take advantage of 1) Through misappropriation, conversion, misuse, or
an expected rise or fall in price. malversation of public funds or raids on the public treasury;
 Under Article 14 of the Code of Commerce, the
following, inter alia, may not engage in the 2) By receiving, directly or indirectly, any commission, gift,
commercial profession either in person or by proxy: share, percentage, kickbacks or any other form of pecuniary
1. Justices, judges, or fiscals. benefit from any person and/or entity in connection with any
2. Employees engaged in the collection and government contract or project or by reason of the office or
administration of public funds. position of the public officer concerned;

POSSESSION OF PROHIBITED 3) By the illegal or fraudulent conveyance or disposition of

INTEREST BY A PUBLIC OFFICER (ART. 216) assets belonging to the National Government or any of its
subdivisions, agencies or instrumentalities or government-
Persons liable: owned or -controlled corporations and their subsidiaries;
1. Public officer who, directly or indirectly, became interested
4) By obtaining, receiving or accepting directly or indirectly any
in any contracts or business in which it was his official duty to
shares of stock, equity or any other form of interest or
intervene.
participation including promise of future employment in any
2. Experts, arbitrators, and private accountants who, in like
business enterprise or undertaking;
manner, took part in any contract or transaction connected
with the estate or property in the appraisal, distribution or
5) By establishing agricultural, industrial or commercial
adjudication of which they had acted.
monopolies or other combinations and/or implementation of
3. Guardians and executors with respect to the property
decrees and orders intended to benefit particular persons or
belonging to their wards or the estate.
special interests; or

Notes: 6) By taking undue advantage of official position, authority,

 Actual fraud is not necessary; the act is punished relationship, connection or influence to unjustly enrich himself
because of the possibility that fraud may be or themselves at the expense and to the damage and
committed or that the office may place his own prejudice of the Filipino people and the Republic of the
interest above that of the government or party which Philippines.
he represents.
Elements of Plunder
AN ACT DEFINING AND PENALIZING THE
CRIME OF PLUNDER The case of Joseph Ejercito Estrada v. Sandiganbayan
Republic Act No. 7080 (G.R. No. 148560, November 19, 2001) enumerates
the elements of the crime of plunder, as follows:
Public officer defined
(1) That the offender is a public officer who acts (a) by
A public officer means any person holding any public office himself or (b) in connivance with members of his family,
in the Government of the Republic of the Philippines by virtue relatives by affinity or consanguinity, business associates,
of an appointment, election or contract [Section 1 (a)]. subordinates or other persons;

Government defined
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-152
(2) That he amassed, accumulated or acquired ill-gotten 1. As to the issue of alleged vagueness and ambiguity
wealth through a combination or series of the following of the Plunder Law:
overt or criminal acts described in Section 1 (d) of R.A.
No. 7080 as amended; and • A statute is not rendered uncertain and void merely
because general terms are used therein, or because
(3) That the aggregate amount or total value of the ill-gotten of the employment of terms without defining them;
wealth amassed, accumulated or acquired is at least much less do we have to define every word we use.
P50,000,000.00.
• The words ‖combination‖ and ‖series‖ are intended by
Competent Court the Congress to be interpreted in their natural, plain
and ordinary acceptation and signification, unless it is
Section 3 provides, ―Until otherwise provided by law, all evident that the legislature intended a technical or
prosecutions under this Act shall be within the original special legal meaning to those words.
jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan.‖
• Thus when the Plunder Law speaks
Rule of Evidence of "combination," it is referring to at least two (2) acts
falling under different categories of enumeration
Section 4 provides that, ―For purposes of establishing the
provided in Sec. 1, par. (d), e.g., raids on the public
crime of plunder, it shall not be necessary to prove each and
treasury in Sec. 1, par. (d), subpar. (1), and
every criminal act done by the accused in furtherance of the
fraudulent conveyance of assets belonging to the
scheme or conspiracy to amass, accumulate or acquire ill-
National Government under Sec. 1, par. (d), subpar.
gotten wealth, it being sufficient to establish beyond
(3).
reasonable doubt a pattern of overt or criminal acts
indicative of the overall unlawful scheme or • On the other hand, to constitute a ‖series‖ there must
conspiracy.‖ be two (2) or more overt or criminal acts falling under
the same category of enumeration found in Sec. 1,
Suspension and Loss of Benefits
par. (d), say, misappropriation, malversation
and raids on the public treasury, all of which fall
• Section 5 provides that, ―Any public officer against
under Sec. 1, par. (d), subpar. (1).
whom any criminal prosecution under a valid
information under this Act in whatever stage of
2. Section 4 does not violate due process.
execution and mode of participation, is pending in
court, shall be suspended from office. • What the prosecution needs to prove beyond
reasonable doubt is only a number of acts sufficient
• Should he be convicted by final judgment, he shall
to form a combination or series which would
lose all retirement or gratuity benefits under
constitute a pattern and involving an amount of at
any law, but if he is acquitted, he shall be entitled
least P50,000,000.00. There is no need to prove each
to reinstatement and to the salaries and other
and every other act alleged in the Information to
benefits which he failed to receive during
have been committed by the accused in furtherance
suspension, unless in the meantime, administrative
of the overall unlawful scheme or conspiracy to
proceedings have been filed against him.‖
amass, accumulate or acquire ill-gotten wealth.
Prescription of Crimes
Illustration:
• Section 6 provides that, ―the crime punishable under
• Supposing that the accused is charged in an
this Act shall prescribe in twenty (20) years.
Information for plunder with having committed fifty
(50) raids on the public treasury.
• However, the right of the State to recover properties
unlawfully acquired by public officers from them or
o The prosecution need not prove all
from their nominees or transferees shall not be
these 50 raids, it being sufficient to
barred by prescription, laches, or estoppel.‖
prove by pattern at least two (2) of
the raids beyond reasonable doubt
CASES:
provided only that they amounted
Joseph Estrada v. Sandiganbayan to at least P50,000,000.00.
G.R. No. 148560. November 19, 2001
3. Plunder is a malum in se which requires proof of
criminal intent.

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-153
 • Mens rea is an element of plunder since the degree of competently enter a plea to a subsequent indictment
responsibility of the offender is determined by his based on the same facts.
criminal intent.
The Wellex Group, Inc. vs. Sandiganbayan
• The legislative declaration in R.A. No. 7659 that G.R. No. 18791. June 25, 2012
plunder is a heinous offense implies that it is a malum
in se. • Section 2 of R.A. 7080 mandates the court to forfeit
not only the ill-gotten wealth, interests earned, and
• For when the acts punished are inherently immoral or other incomes and assets, but also the properties and
inherently wrong, they are mala in se and it does not shares of stock derived from the deposit or
matter that such acts are punished in a special law, investment.
especially since in the case of plunder, the predicate
crimes are mainly mala in se. • Not only does the Plunder Law authorize the
forfeiture of the ill-gotten wealth as well as any asset
acquired with the use of the ill-gotten wealth, Section
Jinggoy Estrada v. Sandiganbayan 6 likewise authorizes the forfeiture of these ill-gotten
G.R. No. 148965. February 26, 2002 wealth and any assets acquired therefrom even if
they are in the possession of other persons.
1. Contrary to petitioners posture, the allegation
is that he received or collected money from
illegal gambling on several instances. Lilia Organo vs. Sandiganbayan
G.R. No. 133535. September 9, 2005
• The phrase on several instances means the
petitioner committed the predicate act in • The Sandiganbayan has no jurisdiction over the crime
series. of plunder unless committed by public officials and
employees occupying the positions with Salary Grade
• The Court held that where these two terms are to be 27 or higher, under the Compensation and Position
taken in their popular, not technical, meaning, the Classification Act of 1989 (Republic Act No. 6758) in
word series is synonymous with the clause on relation to their office.
several instances.
• The Court explained that the crime of plunder defined
2. The second paragraph of the Amended in Republic Act No. 7080, as amended by Republic Act
Information alleged in general terms how the accused No. 7659, was provisionally placed within the
committed the crime of plunder. jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan until otherwise
provided by law. Republic Act No. 8249, enacted on
• It used the words in connivance/conspiracy with his
February 5, 1997, is the special law that provided for
co-accused. Following the ruling in Quitlong, these
the jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan otherwise than
words are sufficient to allege the conspiracy of the
that prescribed in Republic Act No. 7080.
accused with the former President in committing the
crime of plunder.
Fleudeliz Organo vs. Sandiganbayan
Two levels of conspiracy:
G.R. No. 136916. December 14, 1999
a. When conspiracy is charged as a crime, the act of
• Under Republic Act No. 8249, the Sandiganbayan has
conspiring and all the elements of said crime must be
jurisdiction over accused public officials only when
set forth in the complaint or information; and
they occupy positions corresponding to Salary
Grade 27 or higher.
b. To allege conspiracy as a mode in the commission of
an offense in either of the following manner:
• Thus, RA 7080, insofar as it provided
that all prosecutions for plunder fell within the
(1) by use of the word conspire, or its derivatives or
Sandiganbayan‘s jurisdiction, was impliedly repealed.
synonyms, such as confederate, connive, collude,
etc; or
Enrile vs. Sandiganbayan
(2) by allegations of basic facts constituting the
[G.R. No. 213847. December 14, 1999 ]
conspiracy in a manner that a person of common
understanding would know what is intended, and with
such precision as would enable the accused to
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-154
• The Court is further mindful of the Philippines‘ OFFICER OR EMPLOYEE AND PROVIDING FOR
responsibility in the international community arising THE PROCEEDINGS THEREFOR.
from the national commitment under the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights. Republic Act No. 1379

• This national commitment to uphold the Public officer or employee defined

fundamental human rights as well as value the
―Public officer or employee" means any person
worth and dignity of every person has authorized
holding any public office or employment by virtue of
the grant of bail not only to those charged in criminal
an appointment, election or contract, and any person
proceedings but also to extraditees upon a clear and
holding any office or employment, by appointment or
convincing showing: (1) that the detainee will not be
contract, in any State owned or controlled corporation
a flight risk or a danger to the community; and (2)
or enterprise [Sec.1(a)].
that there exist special, humanitarian and compelling
circumstances.
Other legitimately acquired property defined
• The currently fragile state of Enrile‘s health presents
"Other legitimately acquired property" means any real or
another compelling justification for his admission to
personal property, money or securities which the respondent
bail.
has at any time acquired (1) by inheritance and the
income thereof, or (2) by gift inter vivos before his
• Bail, regardless of the crime charged, should be
becoming a public officer or employee, or (3) any
allowed independently of the merits of the charge,
property (or income thereof) already pertaining to him
provided his continued incarceration is clearly shown
when he qualified for public office or employment, or
to be injurious to his health or to endanger his life.
(4) the fruits and income of the exclusive property of
• It is relevant to observe that granting provisional the respondent's spouse.
liberty to Enrile will then enable him to have his
Illegitimately acquired property defined
medical condition be properly addressed and better
attended to by competent physicians in the hospitals
1. Property unlawfully acquired by the respondent, but its
of his choice.
ownership is concealed by its being recorded in the name of,
or held by, the respondent's spouse, ascendants, descendants,
• This will not only aid in his adequate preparation of
relatives, or any other person.
his defense but, more importantly, will guarantee his
appearance in court for the trial.
2. Property unlawfully acquired by the respondent, but
transferred by him to another person or persons on or after
the effectivity of this Act.
People vs. Sandiganbayan
[G.R. No. 158754. August 10, 2007]
3. Property donated to the respondent during his incumbency,
unless he can prove to the satisfaction of the court that the
• Even if the capital offense charged is bailable owing
donation is lawful.
to the weakness of the evidence of guilt, the right to
bail may justifiably still be denied if the probability of
Filing of Petition
escape is great.
• Whenever any public officer or employee has acquired
• Here, ever since the promulgation of the assailed
during his incumbency an amount of property which
Resolutions a little more than four (4) years ago,
is manifestly out of proportion to his salary as such
Jinggoy does not, as determined by Sandiganbayan,
public officer or employee and to his other lawful
seem to be a flight risk.
income and the income from legitimately acquired
property, said property shall be presumed prima
• The movant [Jinggoy] has, in general, been
facie to have been unlawfully acquired [Sec. 2].
consistently respectful of the Court and its
processes. He has not ominously shown, by word or
• The Solicitor General, upon complaint by any
by deed, that he is of such a flight risk that would
taxpayer to the city or provincial fiscal who (1) shall
necessitate his continued incarceration.
conduct a previous inquiry similar to preliminary
investigations in criminal cases and (2) shall certify to
AN ACT DECLARING FORFEITURE IN FAVOR OF
the Solicitor General that there is reasonable ground
THE STATE ANY PROPERTY FOUND TO HAVE
to believe that there has been committed a violation
BEEN UNLAWFULLY ACQUIRED BY ANY PUBLIC
of this Act and the respondent is probably guilty
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-155
 thereof, shall file, in the name and on behalf of the Protection against self-incrimination
Republic of the Philippines, in the Court of First
Instance of the city or province where said • Neither the respondent nor any other person
public officer or employee resides or holds shall be excused from attending and testifying
office, a petition for a writ commanding said or from producing books, papers,
officer or employee to show cause why the correspondence, memoranda and other records
property aforesaid, or any part thereof, should on the ground that the testimony or evidence,
not be declared property of the State: Provided, documentary or otherwise, required of him may tend
That no such petition shall be filed within one year to incriminate him or subject him to prosecution [Sec.
before any general election or within three months 8].
before any special election [Sec.2].
• But no individual shall be prosecuted criminally
• The resignation, dismissal or separation of the officer for or on account of any transaction, matter or
or employee from his office or employment in the thing concerning which he is compelled, after
Government or in the Government-owned or having claimed his privilege against self-incrimination,
controlled corporation shall not be a bar to the filing to testify or produce evidence, documentary or
of the petition: otherwise, except that such individual so testifying
shall not be exempt from prosecution and conviction
• Provided, however, That the right to file such for perjury or false testimony committed in so
petition shall prescribe after four years from testifying or from administrative proceedings [Sec.8].
the date of the resignation, dismissal or
separation or expiration of the term of the Immunity
office or employee concerned, except as to those
The Solicitor General may grant immunity from criminal
who have ceased to hold office within ten years prior
prosecution to any person who testifies to the unlawful
to the approval of this Act, in which case the
manner in which the respondent has acquired any of
proceedings shall prescribe after four years from the
the property in question in cases where such testimony is
approval hereof [Sec.2].
necessary to prove violations of this Act [Sec. 9].
Period for the answer, hearing, judgment, and
Laws on prescription
appeal
The laws concerning acquisitive prescription and limitation of
• The respondent shall have a period of fifteen days
actions cannot be invoked by, nor shall they benefit the
within which to present his answer [Sec. 4].
respondent, in respect of any property unlawfully acquired by
• The Court shall set a date for a hearing, which may him [Sec.11].
be open to the public, and during which the
CASES:
respondent shall be given ample opportunity to
explain, to the satisfaction of the court, how he has
Almeda vs. Perez
acquired the property in question [Sec.5].
5 SCRA 970 (1962)
• If the respondent is unable to show to the
• As the proceeding for forfeiture, as pointed out and
satisfaction of the court that he has lawfully acquired
as provided for in the law, is not a penal proceeding
the property in question, then the court shall declare
but a civil one for the forfeiture of the properties
such property, forfeited in favor of the State, and by
illegally acquired, and as the procedure outlined in
virtue of such judgment the property aforesaid shall
the law is that which is followed in civil actions,
become property of the State:
amendment of the charges or the petition for
forfeiture may be made as in ordinary civil
• Provided, That no judgment shall be rendered within
actions; i.e., the amendments may be made before
six months before any general election or within three
trial or in the course of trial without need of another
months before any special election. The Court may, in
investigation.
addition, refer this case to the corresponding
Executive Department for administrative or criminal
• It also follows that amendments setting forth newly
action, or both [Sec.6].
discovered acquisitions may be in the petition
without obtaining the consent of the respondent.
• The parties may appeal from the judgment of the
Court of First Instance as provided in the Rules of
Court for appeals in civil cases [Sec.7].
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-156
• If the investigation is only similar to that in a criminal CHAPTER FOUR
case, but other steps in proceedings are those for civil Malversation of Public Funds or Property
proceedings, it stands to the reason that the
proceeding is not criminal. Malversation of public funds or property –
Presumption of malversation (Art. 217)
Cabal vs. Kapunan
6 SCRA 1059 (1962)
Acts punished:
• Forfeiture of property in substance is a criminal 1. Appropriating public funds or property.
proceeding for the purpose of protection of the rights
of the defendant against self-incrimination. 2. Taking or misappropriating the same.

• The doctrine in Almeda refers to the purely 3. Consenting, or through abandonment or negligence,
procedural aspect of said proceeding, and has no permitting any other person to take such public funds or
bearing on the substantial rights of the respondents property.
therein, particularly their constitutional right against
self-incrimination. 4. Being otherwise guilty of the misappropriation or
malversation of such funds or property.
Republic vs. IAC
172 SCRA 296 (1989) Elements common to all acts of malversation under
Article 217:
• The provisions of the law creates a presumption
against the public officer or employee who acquires a 1. Offender is a public officer;
property grossly disproportionate to his income, i.e.
that the property was unlawfully acquired. 2. He had the custody or control of funds or property by
reason of the duties of his office;
• However, this presumption is juris tantum. It may be
rebutted by the public officer or employee by 3. Those funds or property were public funds or property for
showing to the satisfaction of the court that his which he was accountable; and
acquisition of the property was lawful
4. He appropriated, took, misappropriated or consented or,
through abandonment or negligence, permitted another person
to take them.

• This crime is predicated on the relationship of the

offender to the property or funds involved. The
offender must be accountable for the property
misappropriated.

• If the fund or property, though public in character is

the responsibility of another officer, malversation is
not committed unless there is conspiracy.

• Accountable officer does not refer only to cashier,

disbursing officers or property custodian. Any public
officer having custody of public funds or property for
which he is accountable can commit the crime of
malversation if he would misappropriate such fund or
property or allow others to do so.

• There is no malversation through simple negligence

or reckless imprudence. This is one crime in the
Revised Penal Code where the penalty is the same
whether committed with dolo or culpa.

• A private person may also commit malversation

under the following situations:

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-157
(1) Conspiracy with a public officer in committing malversation; have them in his possession when demand therefore
was made and that (3) he could not satisfactorily
(2) When he has become an accomplice or accessory to a explain his failure so to account.
public officer who commits malversation;
• An accountable public officer may be convicted for
(3) When the private person is made the custodian in malversation even if there is no direct evidence of
whatever capacity of public funds or property, whether personal misappropriation, where he has not been
belonging to national or local government, and he able to explain satisfactorily the absence of the
misappropriates the same; public funds involved.

(4) When he is constituted as the depositary or administrator Ilogon vs. Sandiganbayan

of funds or property seized or attached by public authority 218 SCRA 766 (1993)
even though said funds or property belong to a private
individual. • The fact that petitioner did not personally use the
missing funds is not a valid defense and will not
• Government funds include not only revenue funds but exculpate him from his criminal liability.
also trust funds.
• The fact also that petitioner fully settled the amount
• Aside from public property, private property may be later is of no moment.
involved in malversation. When private property is
attached or seized by public authority and the public • The return of funds malversed is not a defense.
officer accountable therefor misappropriates the It is neither an exempting circumstance nor a ground
same, malversation is committed also. for extinguishing the accused's criminal liability. At
best, it is a MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCE.
• When a demand is made upon an accountable officer
and he cannot produce the fund or property involved, Azarcon vs. Sandiganbayan
there is a prima facie presumption that he had 268 SCRA 747 (1997)
converted the same to his own use. However, the
presumption of malversation is rebuttable. It is evident that the petitioner did not cease to be a
private individual when he agreed to act as depositary
• Demand is not necessary in malversation, it merely of the garnished dump truck.
raises a prima facie presumption that missing funds
or property have been to personal use. Therefore, when the information charged him and
Jaime Ancla before the Sandiganbayan for
• Payment of the amount misappropriated or restitution malversation of public funds or property, the
of property misappropriated is only mitigating prosecution was in fact charging two private
circumstance, not exempting. individuals without any public officer being similarly
charged as a co-conspirator. Consequently, the
• Damage on the part of the government is not Sandiganbayan had no jurisdiction over the
considered an essential element. controversy.

CASES: Failure of accountable officer to render

accounts (Art. 218)
Labatagos vs. Sandiganbayan
183 SCRA 415 (1990) Elements:

• Malversation consists not only in misappropriating or 1. Offender is public officer, whether in the service or
converting public funds or property to one's personal separated therefrom by resignation or any other cause.
use but also in knowingly allowing another or others
to make use of or misappropriate the funds or 2. He is an accountable officer for public funds or property.
property.
3. He is required by law or regulation to render account to the
Estepa vs. Sandiganbayan Commission on Audit, or to a provincial auditor.
182 SCRA 269 (1990)
4. He fails to do so for a period of two months after such
• In the crime of malversation, all that is necessary for accounts should be rendered.
conviction is proof that (1) the accountable officer
had received the public funds and that (2) he did not
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-158
 • Art. 218 does not require that there be a demand by 4. He applies such public fund or property to any public use
the Commission on Audit or provincial auditor that the other than for which it was appropriated for.
public officer should render an account. It is sufficient
that there is a law or regulation requiring him to • Illegal use of public funds or property is also known
render account. as technical malversation. The term technical
malversation is used because in this crime, the fund
• It is not essential that there be misappropriation. If or property involved is already appropriated or
there is misappropriation, he would be liable also for earmarked for a certain public purpose.
malversation under Article 217.
• Instead of applying it to the public purpose to which
Failure of a responsible public officer to render the fund or property was already appropriated by law,
accounts before leaving the country (Art. 219) the public officer applied it to another purpose.

Elements: • Even though the application made proved to be more

beneficial to public interest than the original purpose
1. Offender is a public officer. for which the amount or property was appropriated
by law or ordinance, the public officer involved is still
2. He is an accountable officer for public funds or
liable for technical malversation.
property.
• There is no technical malversation if there is no law or
3. He unlawfully leaves or attempts to leave the
ordinance appropriating public funds or property for a
Philippine Islands without securing a certificate from
particular purpose.
the Commission on Audit showing that his accounts
have been finally settled. • Criminal intent is not an element of technical
malversation. The offense is malum prohibitum.
• When an accountable officer leaves the country
without first securing a clearance from the • Technical malversation is not included nor does it
Commission on Audit regarding such accountability, necessarily include the crime of malversation of public
the implication is that he left the country because he funds.
has misappropriated the funds under his
accountability. • Illegal use of public funds or property distinguished
from malversation under Art. 217:
• A responsible public officer, not necessarily an
accountable one, who leaves the country without first a. The offender in the former does not derive
securing clearance from the Commission on Audit. any personal gain or profit; in the latter, the offender profits
from the proceeds of the crime.
• The purpose of the law is to discourage responsible or
accountable officers from leaving without first b. In the former, the public fund is applied to another
liquidating their accountability. use; in the latter, the public fund or property is applied to
personal use and benefit of the offender or of another person.
• Mere leaving without securing clearance constitutes
violation of the Revised Penal Code. It is not Failure to make delivery of public funds or
necessary that they really misappropriated public property (Art. 221)
funds.
Acts punished:
Illegal use of public funds or property (Art.
220) 1. Failing to make payment by a public officer who is under
obligation to make such payment from government funds in
Elements: his possession.

1. Offender is a public officer. 2. Refusing to make delivery by a public officer who has been
ordered by competent authority to deliver any property in his
2. There are public funds or property under his administration. custody or under his administration.

3. Such fund or property were appropriated by law or Elements of failure to make payment:
ordinance.
1. Public officer has government funds in his possession.

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-159
2. He is under obligation to make payment from such funds. • Classes of prisoners involved:

3. He fails to make the payment maliciously. 1. If the fugitive has been sentenced to final judgment to any
penalty.
• For refusal to make delivery of property, the refusal
must be malicious also. 2. If the fugitive is held only as detention prisoner for any
crime or violation of law or municipal ordinance.
Officers included in the preceding provisions
(Art. 222) o A detention prisoner is a person in legal
custody, arrested fro, and charged with
• Private individuals who may be liable under Arts. 217 some crime or public offense.
to 222:
• Release of detention prisoner who could not be
1. Private individuals who, in any capacity or whatever, delivered to the judicial authority within the time fixed
have been charge of any national, provincial, or by law, is not infidelity in the custody of prisoner
municipal funds, revenue, or property. (People vs. Lacanan, 95 Phil. 375).

2. Administrator or depository of funds or property • There is real and actual evasion of service of sentence
attached, seized, or deposited by public authority, when the custodian permits the prisoner to obtain a
even such property belongs to a private individual. relaxation of his imprisonment and to escape the
punishment of being deprived of his liberty, although
• Purpose of Article 222:
the convict may not have fled (U.S. vs. Bandino, 29
Phil. 459).
… to extend the provisions of the Code on malversation to
private individuals.
Rodillas vs. Sandiganbayan
• The words ―administrator‖ and ―depository‖ include
G.R. No. L-58652, May 20, 1988
the sheriffs and receivers. But judicial administrator is
not included in the word ―administrator‖ because he is
• It is the duty of any police officer having
not in charge of any property attached, impounded,
custody of a prisoner to take necessary
or placed in deposit by public authority.
precautions to assure the absence of any
means of escape.

• A failure to undertake these precautions will

CHAPTER FIVE
make his act one of definite laxity or
Infidelity of Public Officers
negligence amounting to deliberate non-
Section One performance of duty.
Infidelity in the Custody of Prisoners
• The petitioner further contends that he cannot be
Conniving with or consenting to evasion (Art. convicted because there was no connivance between
223) him and the prisoner.

Elements: • However, the petitioner is not being charged with

conniving under Article 223 but for evasion through
1. Offender is a public officer. negligence under Article 224. It is, therefore, not
necessary that connivance be proven to hold
2. He had in his custody or charge a prisoner, either detention him liable for the crime of infidelity in the
prisoner or prisoner by final judgment. custody of prisoners.

3. Such prisoner escaped from his custody. Evasion through negligence (Art. 224)

4. He was in connivance with the prisoner in the latter‘s Elements:

escape.
1. Offender is a public officer;
• Under Art. 223, it is necessary that the public officer
had consented to, connived in, the escape of the 2. He is charged with the conveyance or custody of a prisoner
prisoner under his custody or charge. or prisoner by final judgment; and

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-160
3. Such prisoner escapes through his negligence. 2. He abstracts, destroys or conceals a document or papers.

• The opening sentence of Art. 224, ―If the evasion of 3. Said document or papers should have been entrusted to
the prisoner shall have taken place.‖ such public officer by reason of his office.

o Under Art. 157, defining and penalizing 4. Damage, whether serious or not, to a third party or to the
evasion of service of sentence, the prisoner public interest has been caused.
must be a convict by final judgment.
• If any of these circumstances be not present, the
o In cases decided by the Supreme Court, the crime does not arise.
―detention prisoner‖ is included in the word
―prisoner.‖ • Only public officers who have been officially entrusted
with the documents or papers can be held liable
• If the prisoner escapes through the negligence of the under this article.
public officer, the latter suffers the same penalty
regardless of whether the prisoner is a convict or • A document is a written instrument by which
merely a detention prisoner. something is proven or made of record (People vs.
Agnis, 47 Phil. 945). Thus, books, periodicals,
• The fact that the public officer recaptured the pamphlets, etc. are not documents.
prisoner who had escaped from his custody does not
afford complete exculpation (People vs. Quisel, C.A. • Not only documents but also papers may be involved.
52 O.G. 6975). Money bills received as exhibits in court are papers
(People vs. Abraham, G.R. No. 17628, February 17,
• If the offender who aided or consented to the 1922).
prisoner‘s escaping from confinement, whether the
prisoner is a convict or a detention prisoner, is not the • The act of removal should be coupled with criminal
custodian, the crime is delivering prisoners from jail intent or illegal purpose (Manzanaris vs. People, 127
under Article156. SCRA 201).

• If the jail guard who allowed the prisoner to escape is • However, the act of destroying or concealing
already off-duty at that time and he is no longer the document does not require proof of illicit purpose.
custodian of the prisoner, the crime committed by
Illustrations:
him is delivering prisoners from jail.
1. Post office official who retained the mail without
Escape of prisoner under the custody of a
forwarding the letters to their destination is guilty of
person not a public officer (Art. 225)
infidelity in the custody of papers.
Elements:
2. Delivering document to the wrong party is infidelity in
1. The offender is a private person. the custody thereof.

2. The conveyance or custody of a prisoner or person Officer breaking seal (Art. 227)
under arrest is confided to him.
Elements:
3. The prisoner or person under arrest escapes.
1. Offender is a public officer.
4. The offender consents to the escape of the prisoner
2. He is charged with the custody of papers or property.
or person under arrest, or that the escape takes place
through his negligence.
3. These papers or property are sealed by proper authority.
Section Two
4. He breaks the seal or permits them
Infidelity in the custody of documents
to be broken.
Removal, concealment, or destruction of
• It is the breaking of seals, not the opening of a closed
documents (Art. 226)
envelope, which is punished under this article.
Elements:
• The opening of public papers by breaking seals
should be done only by the proper authority. Hence,
1. Offender is a public officer.
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-161
 the offender must be the one who breaks the seal 1. Offender is a public officer.
without authority to do so.
2. He has charge of papers.
• It is sufficient that the seal is broken, even if the
contents are not tampered with. Damage or intent to 3. Those papers should not be published.
cause damage is not necessary.
4. He delivers those papers or copies thereof to a third person.
Opening of closed documents (Art. 228)
5. The delivery is wrongful.
Elements:
6. Damage is caused to public interest.
1. Offender is a public officer.
• The word ―charge‖ means control or custody.
2. Any closed papers, documents, or object are entrusted to
• Material damage to third persons is not necessary.
his custody.
• If the papers contain secrets and therefore should not
3. He opens or permits to be opened said closed papers,
be published, and the public officer having charge
documents or objects.
thereof removes and delivers them wrongfully to a
4. He does not have proper authority. third person, the crime is revelation of secrets by a
public officer. If the papers do not contain secrets,
• The word ―custody‖ means guarding or keeping safe; their removal for illicit purpose is infidelity in the
care. custody of documents.

• If, in the opening closed papers or object, the officer Illustration:

broke the seal, the offense is breaking the seal under
Art. 227. a. Provincial fiscal who revealed the records of all investigation
conducted by him to the defendant who thereby learned of the
• Under this article, damage or intent to cause damage evidence of the prosecution.
is not an element of the offense.
Public officer revealing secrets of private
• Section Three individual (Art. 230)
Revelation of Secrets
Elements:
Revelation of secrets by an officer (Art. 229)
1. Offender is a public officer.
Acts punished:
2. He knows of the secrets of a private individual by reason of
1. Revealing any secrets known to the offending public his office.
officer by reason of his official capacity.
3. He reveals such secrets without authority or justifiable
Elements: reason.

1. Offender is a public officer. • Revelation to one person is sufficient, for public

revelation is not required.
2. He knows of a secret by reason of his official capacity.
• It is not necessary that damage is suffered by the
3. He reveals such secret without authority or justifiable private individual.
reasons.
• The reason for this provision is to uphold faith and
4. Damage, great or small, is caused to the public interest. trust in public service.

• If the secret revealed does not affect public interest, CHAPTER SIX
the revelation would constitute no crime at all.
OTHER OFFENSES OR IRREGULARITIES BY
2. Delivering wrongfully papers or copies of papers of PUBLIC OFFICERS
which he may have charge and which should not be published.
OFFENSES COVERED:
Elements:

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-162
 Section One • If the order of the superior is illegal, this article does
Disobedience, refusal of assistance, and not apply. Hence, the subordinate has a legal right to
maltreatment of prisoners refuse to execute such order.

Open disobedience (Art. 231) Refusal of assistance (Art. 233)

Elements: Elements:

1. Officer is a judicial or executive officer. 1. Offender is a public officer.

2. There is a judgment, decision or order of a superior 2. A competent authority demands from the offender that he
authority. lend his cooperation towards the administration of justice or
other public service.
3. Such judgment, decision or order was made within the
scope of the jurisdiction of the superior authority and issued 3. Offender fails to do so maliciously.
with all the legal formalities.
• There must be a demand from competent authority.
4. He, without any legal justification, openly refuses to execute
the said judgment, decision or order, which he is duty bound Illustration:
to obey.
A chief of police who flatly and insolently refuses to serve
Illustration: summons of a provincial fiscal, after having been duly
requested to do so by the latter official, is guilty of a violation
Mandamus by Supreme Court ordering lower court to receive of this article (People vs. Castro, G.R. No. 19273, March 16,
certain evidence. If the lower court openly refuses to obey said 1923).
judicial order, there is violation of this article.
• There must be damage to the public interest or to a
Disobedience to order of superior officer when third party, great or small.
said order was suspended by inferior officer
(Art. 232) Refusal to discharge elective office (Art. 234)

Elements: Elements:

1. Offender is a public officer. 1. Offender is elected by popular election to a public office.

2. An order is issued by his superior for execution. 2. He refuses to be sworn in or to discharge the duties of said
office.
3. He has for any reason suspended the execution of such
order. 3. There is no legal motive for such refusal to be sworn in or to
discharge the duties of said office.
4. His superior disapproves the suspension of the execution of
the order. • The refusal must be without legal motive. If the
elected person is underage, or otherwise disqualified,
5. Offender disobeys his superior despite the disapproval of his refusal to be sworn in or to discharge the duties of
the suspension. the office is justified.

• The law has taken into account that a superior officer • Such refusal is punished because the discharge of the
may sometimes err and that orders issued by him duties of said office becomes a matter of duty, not
may proceed from a mistaken judgment. Thus, a only a right.
subordinate may suspend the order issued, submit his
reason to his superior in order that the latter may • The refusal must be without legal motive. If the
give them proper weight. elected person is underage, or otherwise disqualified,
his refusal to be sworn in or to discharge the duties of
• But if the superior disapproves the suspension of his the office is justified.
order, the subordinate must obey it once, and refusal
to do so constitutes contempt. • Such refusal is punished becomes the discharge of
the duties of said office becomes a matter of duty,
not only a right.

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-163
 • Refusal to discharge the duties of an appointive office 1. Offender is entitled to hold a public office or employment,
is not covered by this article. either by election or appointment.

2. The law requires that he should first be sworn in and/or

should first give a bond.
Maltreatment of prisoners (Art. 235)
3. He assumes the performance of the duties and powers of
Elements: such office;.

1. Offender is a public officer or employee. 4. He has not taken his oath of office and/or given the bond
required by law.
2. He has under his charge a prisoner or detention prisoner.
Prolonging performance of duties and powers
3. He maltreats such prisoner in either of the following
(Art. 237)
manners:
Elements:
a) By overdoing himself in the correction or
handling of a prisoner or detention prisoner under his 1. Offender is holding a public office.
charge either:
2. The period provided by law, regulations or special provision
(1) By the imposition of punishment not for holding such office, has already expired.
authorized by the regulations; or
3. He continues to exercise the duties and powers of such
(2) By inflicting such punishments in a cruel and office.
humiliating manner; or
Abandonment of office or position (Art. 238)
b) By maltreating such prisoners to extort a
confession or to obtain some information from the Elements:
prisoner.
1. Offender is a public officer.
• The offender party is either a convict by final
judgment, or a detention prisoner. To be detention 2. He formally resigns from his position.
prisoner, the person arrested must be placed in jail
3. His resignation has not yet been accepted.
even for a short while.
4. He abandons his office to the detriment of the public
• The maltreatment (1) must relate to the correction or
service.
handling of the prisoner, or (2) must be for the
purpose of extorting a confession or obtaining some
• There must be a written or formal resignation. The
information from the prisoner. Thus, if the jailer
resignation has to pass to various officials of the
inflicted physical injuries because of personal grudge
offices concerned for appropriate action (People vs.
against the prisoner, the jailer is liable for physical
Santos, C.A. 55 O.G. 5566).
injuries only.
• If the abandonment of the office has for its purpose
• The offender is also liable for physical injuries or
to evade the discharge of the duties of preventing,
damage caused, if any is caused by his maltreating
prosecuting, or punishing any of the crimes falling
the prisoner.
within Title One, and Chapter One of Title Three, the
penalty is higher.
• The offender is also liable for physical injuries or
damage caused, if any is caused by his maltreating
Section Three
the prisoner.
Usurpation of powers and unlawful
Section Two
appointments
Anticipation, prolongation, and abandonment
of the duties and powers of public office Usurpation of legislative powers (Art. 239)

Anticipation of duties of a public office (Art. Elements:

236)
1. Offender is an executive or judicial officer.
Elements:
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-164
 2. He (a) makes general rules or regulations beyond the form continuing the proceeding.
scope of his authority or (b) attempts to repeal a law
or (c) suspends the execution thereof. 5. He continues the proceeding.

Usurpation of executive functions (Art. 240) Orders or requests by executive officers to any
judicial authority (Art. 243)
Elements:
Elements:
1. Offender is a judge.
1. Offender is an executive officer.
2. He (a) assumes a power pertaining to the executive
authorities, or (b) obstructs the executive authorities in the 2. He addresses any order or suggestion to any judicial
lawful exercise of their powers. authority.

• Legislative officers are not liable for usurpation of 3. The order or suggestion relates to any case or business
powers. Only a judge can commit usurpation of coming within the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of justice.
executive functions (People vs. Hilvano, 99 Phil. 655).
• The purpose is to maintain the independence of the
Usurpation of judicial functions (Art. 241) judiciary.

Elements: • Legislative or judicial officers are not liable under this

article.
1. Offender is an officer of the executive branch of the
government. Unlawful appointments (Art. 244)

2. He (a) assumes judicial powers, or (b) obstructs the Elements:

execution of any order or decision rendered by any judge
1. Offender is a public officer.
within his jurisdiction.
2. He nominates or appoints a person to a public office.
Usurpation of judicial functions (Art. 241)
3. Such person lacks the legal qualifications therefor.
• Articles 239 to 241 punish interference by the officers
of one of the three branches of the government with
4. Offender knows that his nominee or appointee lacks the
the functions of the officers of another department.
qualification at the time he made the nomination or
appointment.
• The purpose is to maintain the separation and
independence of the three departments of the
• There must be a law providing for the qualifications of
government and to keep the three branches within
a person to be nominated or appointed to a public
the legitimate confines of their respective jurisdictions
office.
and the officers thereof within the scope of their
lawful authority (Angara vs. Electoral Commission, 63 Section Four
Phil. 139). Abuses against chastity

Disobeying request for disqualification (Art. Abuses against chastity (Art. 245)
242)
Acts punished:
Elements:
1. Soliciting or making immoral or indecent advances to a
1. Offender is a public officer. woman interested in matters pending before the offending
officer for decision, or with respect to which he is required to
2. A proceeding is pending before such public officer.
submit a report to or consult with a superior officer.
3. There is a question brought before
2. Soliciting or making immoral or indecent advances to a
woman under the offender‘s custody.
the proper authority regarding his jurisdiction, which is not yet
decided.
3. Soliciting or making immoral or indecent advances to the
wife, daughter, sister or relative within the same degree by
4. He has been lawfully required to refrain

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-165
affinity of any person in the custody of the offending warden  Any person who shall kill his father, mother, or child,
or officer. whether legitimate or illegitimate, or any of his
ascendants, or descendants (meaning – legitimate),
Elements: or his spouse, shall be guilty of parricide.

1. Offender is a public officer. Elements:

1. A person is killed;
2. He solicits or makes immoral or indecent advances to a 2. The deceased is killed by the accused;
3. The deceased is the father, mother, or child, whether
woman.
legitimate or illegitimate, or a legitimate other ascendant
or other descendant, or the legitimate spouse, of the
3. Such woman is:
accused.
(a) interested in matters pending before the offender for Notes:
decision, or with respect to which he is required to submit a  The key element in parricide is the relationship of the
report to or consult with a superior officer; or offender with the victim. In the case of parricide of a
spouse, the best proof of the relationship between
(b) under the custody of the offender who is a warden or the accused and the deceased would be the marriage
other public officer directly charged with the care and custody certificate. (People vs. Jesus Paycana, Jr., 2008)
of prisoners or persons under arrest; or
 Among the three requisites, the relationship between
(c) the wife, daughter, sister or relative within the same the offender and the victim is the most crucial. This
relationship is what actually distinguishes the crime of
degree by affinity of the person in the custody of the offender.
parricide from homicide. In parricide involving
spouses, the best proof of the relationship between
Note: The mother of the person in the custody of the offender the offender and victim is their marriage certificate.
is not included. Oral evidence may also be considered in proving the
relationship between the two as long as such proof is
• The word ―solicit‖ means to propose earnestly and not contested. (People vs. Manuel Macal, 2016)
persistently something unchaste and immoral to
woman.  If the deceased is either the father, mother, or the
child of the accused, proof of legitimacy is not
• The crime is consummated by mere proposal because required. (People vs. Feliciano Embalido, 1933)
it is sufficient that there is soliciting or making
 The relationship must be in the direct line and not in
immoral or indecent advances to the woman.
the collateral line.
• It is not necessary that the woman should have
 Since parricide is a crime of relationship, if a stranger
yielded to the solicitation of the offender. conspired in the commission of the crime, he cannot
be held liable for parricide. His participation would
make him liable for murder or for homicide, as the
case may be. The rule of conspiracy that the act of
one is the act of all does not apply here because of
TITLE VIII- CRIMES AGAINST PERSONS the personal relationship of the offender to the
offended party.

Crimes against persons  If the offender and the offended party, although
Articles 246 – 266, Revised Penal Code59 related by blood and in the direct line, are separated
by an intervening illegitimate relationship, parricide
Crimes against persons can no longer be committed.
 The essence of crime here involves the taking of
human life, destruction of the fetus, inflicting injuries Example:
or rape.
A is the parent of B, the illegitimate daughter. B
A. Destruction of life married C and they begot a legitimate child D. If D,
daughter of B and C, would kill A, the grandmother,
Parricide, murder, homicide the crime cannot be parricide anymore because of the
intervening illegitimacy. The relationship between A
1. Parricide (Art. 246 & 250) and D is no longer legitimate. Hence, the crime
committed is homicide or murder.

Cases:
59
This report only covers Articles 246 – 261. For Articles 262 – 266 and
Special Penal Laws, kindly refer to the next reporter.
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-166
(1) People vs. Jesus Paycana, Jr. (2) that violence is used upon such pregnant woman without
G.R. No. 179035 – April 16, 2008 intending an abortion; (3) that the violence is intentionally
Tinga, J. exerted; and (4) that as a result of the violence the fetus dies,
either in the womb or after having been expelled therefrom. In
Facts: Appellant Jesus Paycana Jr. was charged with the the crime of infanticide, it is necessary that the child be born
complex crime of parricide with unintentional abortion before alive and be viable, that is, capable of independent existence.
the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Iriga City, Branch 37 in which However, even if the child who was expelled prematurely and
appellant admitted that the victim Lilybeth Balandra-Paycana is deliberately were alive at birth, the offense is abortion due to
his legitimate wife. the fact that a fetus with an intrauterine life of 6 months is not
viable. In the present case, the unborn fetus was also killed
Appellant sought to exculpate himself from the crime by when the appellant stabbed Lilybeth several times.
setting up self-defense, claiming that it was his wife who
attacked him first. In view of the nature of self-defense, it Final ruling: The appeal is DISMISSED. The Decision of the
necessarily follows that appellant admits having killed his Court of Appeals is AFFIRMED.
seven (7)-month pregnant wife, and in the process put to
death their unborn child. (2) People vs. Manuel Macal
G.R. No. 211062 – January 13, 2016
Appellant claimed that he wrested the weapon from Lilybeth Perez, J.
after she stabbed him first. According to him, they had an
altercation on the evening of 25 November 2002 because he Facts: Angeles Ytac, the mother of the victim testified that at
saw a man coming out from the side of their house and when around 1:20 in the morning of February 12, 2003, she, her
he confronted his wife about the man, she did not answer. children Catherine, Jessica, Auria and Arvin were walking home
after playing bingo at a local peryahan. Some friends tagged
The trial court found appellant guilty in a decision dated 14 along with them so that they could all feast on the leftover
April 2005. No compelling reason, therefore, exists for this food prepared for the fiesta that was celebrated the previous
Court to disturb the trial court‘s finding that appellant did not day. Along the way, Angeles and her group met Auria's
act in self-defense. husband, the accused appellant. The latter joined them in
walking back to their house.
Moreover, Dr. Rey Tanchuling, a defense witness who
attended to appellant‘s wound, testified on cross-examination When they arrived at the house, the group proceeded to the
that the injuries suffered by appellant were possibly self- living room except for Auria and the accused-appellant who
inflicted considering that they were mere superficial wounds. went straight to their bedroom, about four (4) meters away
from the living room. Shortly thereafter, Angeles heard her
In any event, self-defense on the part of appellant is further daughter Auria shouting, "mother help me I am going to be
negated by the physical evidence in the case. Specifically, the killed." Upon hearing Auria's plea for help, Angeles and the
number of wounds of the victim, fourteen (14) in all, indicates rest of her companions raced towards the bedroom but they
that appellant‘s act was no longer an act of self-defense but a found the door of the room locked. Arvin kicked open the door
determined effort to kill his victim. The victim died of multiple of the bedroom and there they all saw a bloodied Auria on one
organ failure secondary to multiple stab wounds. side of the room. Next to Auria was the accused-appellant who
was then trying to stab himself with the use of an improvised
The RTC, as affirmed by the Court of Appeals, properly bladed weapon (belt buckle). Auria was immediately taken to a
convicted appellant of the complex crime of parricide with hospital, on board a vehicle owned by a neighbor, but was
unintentional abortion in the killing of his seven (7)-month pronounced dead on arrival. Angeles declared that the
pregnant wife. accused-appellant jumped over the fence and managed to
escape before the policemen could reach the crime scene.
Issue: Whether or not appellant is guilty of the complex crime
of parricide with unintentional abortion. Accused appellant did not refute the factual allegations of the
prosecution that he stabbed his wife, resulting in the latter's
Held: Bearing the penalty of reclusion perpetua to death, the death, but seeks exoneration from criminal liability by
crime of parricide is committed when: (1) a person is killed; interposing the defense that the stabbing was accidental and
(2) the deceased is killed by the accused; and (3) the not intentional. Accused appellant also interposed that his wife
deceased is the father, mother, or child, whether legitimate or was with another man when the stabbing occurred.
illegitimate, or a legitimate other ascendant or other
descendant, or the legitimate spouse of the accused. The key The RTC convicted the accused-appellant of the crime of
element in parricide is the relationship of the offender with the parricide. The RTC even went further by saying that the
victim. In the case of parricide of a spouse, the best proof of accused-appellant injured himself so that he can later on
the relationship between the accused and the deceased would invoke self-defense which he failed to do as there are
be the marriage certificate. The testimony of the accused of witnesses who can easily disprove his theory of self-defense.
being married to the victim, in itself, may also be taken as an
admission against penal interest. CA affirmed.

As distinguished from infanticide, the elements of unintentional Issue: Whether or not accused-appellant is guilty of parricide.
abortion are as follows: (1) that there is a pregnant woman;

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-167
Held: Yes. Parricide is committed when: (1) a person is killed; We have carefully considered the evidence presented in this
(2) the deceased is killed by the accused; (3) the deceased is case and we find no sufficient ground to hold that the
the father, mother, or child, whether legitimate or illegitimate, appellant surprised his wife in the act of committing adultery.
or a legitimate other ascendants or other descendants, or the The case, therefore, does not come within the purview of
legitimate spouse of the accused. article 247 of the Revised Penal Code. It follows that the lower
court committed no error in finding the appellant guilty of
Among the three requisites, the relationship between the parricide as defined and penalized by article 246 of said Code.
offender and the victim is the most crucial. This relationship is Appreciating, however, in his favor the mitigating
what actually distinguishes the crime of parricide from circumstances of illiteracy and voluntary surrender to the
homicide. In parricide involving spouses, the best proof of the authorities, we sentence the appellant to suffer the penalty of
relationship between the offender and victim is their marriage twelve years and one day of reclusion temporal (Rule 5, article
certificate. Oral evidence may also be considered in proving 64 in connection with rule 2, article 61, Revised Penal Code).
the relationship between the two as long as such proof is not
contested. Final ruling: The judgment is AFFIRMED.

In this case, the spousal relationship between Auria and the 2. Death or physical injuries inflicted under
accused-appellant is beyond dispute. As previously stated, the exceptional circumstances (Art. 247)
defense already admitted that Auria was the legitimate wife of  Article 247 is an absolutory cause that recognizes the
the accused-appellant during the pre-trial conference. Such commission of a crime but for reasons of public policy
admission was even reiterated by the accused-appellant in the and sentiment there is no penalty imposed.
course of trial of the case. Nevertheless, the prosecution
produced a copy of the couple's marriage certificate which the Elements:
defense admitted to be a genuine and faithful reproduction of 1. A legally married person, or a parent, surprises his
the original. Hence, the key element that qualifies the killing to spouse or his daughter, the latter under 18 years of age
parricide was satisfactorily demonstrated in this case. and living with him, in the act of committing sexual
intercourse with another person;
Final ruling: The CA's decision is AFFIRMED with 2. He or she kills any or both of them, or inflicts upon
MODIFICATIONS with regard to indemnity and damages. any or both of them any serious physical injury in the act
or immediately thereafter;
(3) People vs. Feliciano Embalido 3. He has not promoted or facilitated the prostitution of
G.R. No. L-37379 – March 18, 1933 his wife or daughter, or that he or she has not consented
Abad Santos, J. to the infidelity of the other spouse.

Facts: The appellant was charged with the crime of parricide. Notes:
He admits having killed his wife, but claims that he surprised  The accused must be a legally married person. Thus,
her in the act of committing adultery. The lower court found man who surprised his common-law wife in the act of
him guilty of the crime of parricide as defined and penalized by sexual intercourse with another man and kill her or
article 246 of the Revised Penal Code. both of them in the act, is not entitled to the benefits
of Article 247. The law requires that he must be
On appeal, he contends that he should have been sentenced in legally married.
accordance with article 247 of the Revised Penal Code, which
reads follows:  Must the parent be legitimate? This article does not
seem to require it. It requires only: (1) that the
Any legally married person who, having surprised his spouse in daughter be under 18 years old; and (2) that she is
the act of committing sexual intercourse with another person, living with her parents.
shall kill any of them or both of them in the act or immediately
thereafter, or shall inflict upon them any serious physical  The Revised Penal Code, in requiring that the accused
injury, shall suffer the penalty of destierro. "shall kill any of them or both of them . . .
immediately" after surprising his spouse in the act of
Issue: Whether or not appellant is guilty of parricide. intercourse, does not say that he should commit the
killing instantly thereafter. It only requires that the
Held: Yes. In cases of parricide, prosecution is required to death caused be the proximate result of the outrage
prove three facts, namely: (1) That death of the deceased: (2) overwhelming the accused after chancing upon his
that he or she was killed by the accused; and (3) that the spouse in the basest act of infidelity. But the killing
deceased was a legitimate ascendant or descendant, or the should have been actually motivated by the same
legitimate spouse of the accused. If the deceased is either the blind impulse, and must not have been influenced by
father, mother, or the child of the accused, proof of legitimacy external factors. (People vs. Francisco Abarca,
is not required. Once these facts are established beyond a 1987)
reasonable doubt, conviction is warranted. Matters of defense,
mitigation, excuse, or justification must appear by a  The burden of proof to show the concurrence of all
preponderance of evidence. three elements rests on the defense. Most critically,
the appellant must prove that he caught his wife in
flagrante delicto; that he killed her while she was in

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-168
 the very act of voluntary sexual intercourse with proceeded to the "mahjong session" as it was the "hangout" of
another man or immediately thereafter. (People vs. Kingsley Koh. The accused found Koh playing mahjong. He
Jimmy Talisic, 1997) fired at Kingsley Koh three times with his rifle. Koh was hit and
died instantaneously . Arnold and Lina Amparado who were
 The death caused must be the proximate result of the occupying a room adjacent to the room where Koh was playing
outrage overwhelming the accused after chancing mahjong were also hit by the shots fired by the accused.
upon his spouse in the act of infidelity. Simply put,
the killing by the husband of his wife must concur The RTC of Leyte found him guilty and sentencing the
with her flagrant adultery. (People vs. Manolito accused-appellant Francisco Abarca to death for the complex
Oyanib, 2001) crime of murder with double frustrated murder, but believes
the accused Francisco Abarca is deserving of executive
 Neither does the phrase ―in the act of committing clemency, not of full pardon but of a substantial if not a radical
sexual intercourse‖ include a situation where the reduction or commutation of his death sentence.
accused surprised his wife after the act, as when he
saw her already rising up and the man was buttoning Issue: Whether or not the trial court erred in convicting the
his drawers. (People vs. Marciano Gonzales, accused instead of entering a judgment of conviction under
1939) Article 247.

 Among the three elements, the most vital is that the Held: Yes. The Solicitor General recommends that we apply
accused-appellant must prove to the court that he Article 247 of the Revised Penal Code defining death inflicted
killed his wife and her paramour in the act of sexual under exceptional circumstances, complexed with double
intercourse or immediately thereafter. (People vs. frustrated murder. Article 247 reads in full:
Manuel Macal, supra)
ART. 247. Death or physical injuries inflicted under
 If death results or the physical injuries are serious, exceptional circumstances. — Any legally married
there is criminal liability although the penalty is only person who, having surprised his spouse in the act of
destierro. The banishment is intended more for the committing sexual intercourse with another person,
protection of the offender rather than a penalty. If shall kill any of them or both of them in the act or
the crime committed is less serious physical injuries immediately thereafter, or shall inflict upon them any
or slight physical injuries, there is no criminal liability. serious physical injury, shall suffer the penalty of
destierro.
 The benefits of this article do not apply to the person
who consented to the infidelity of his spouse or who If he shall inflict upon them physical injuries of any
facilitated the prostitution of his wife. other kind, he shall be exempt from punishment.

 The article is also made available to parents who shall These rules shall be applicable, under the same
surprise their daughter below 18 years of age in circumstances, to parents with respect to their
actual sexual intercourse while ―living with them.‖ The daughters under eighteen years of age, and their
phrase ―living with them‖ is understood to be in their seducers, while the daughters are living with their
own dwelling, because of the embarrassment and parents.
humiliation done not only to the parent but also to
the parental abode. If it was done in a motel, the Any person who shall promote or facilitate prostitution
article does not apply. of his wife or daughter, or shall otherwise have
consented to the infidelity of the other spouse shall
Cases: not be entitled to the benefits of this article.

(4) People vs. Francisco Abarca We agree that the aforequoted provision applies in the instant
G.R. No. 74433 – September 14, 1987 case. There is no question that the accused surprised his wife
Sarmiento, J. and her paramour, the victim in this case, in the act of illicit
copulation, as a result of which, he went out to kill the
Facts: Khingsley Paul Koh and the wife of accused Francisco deceased in a fit of passionate outburst.
Abarca, Jenny, had illicit relationship. Upon reaching home
around 6:00pm on July 15, 1884, the accused found his wife, Article 247 prescribes the following elements:
Jenny, and Khingsley Koh in the act of sexual intercourse. (1) that a legally married person surprises his spouse in the act
When the wife and Koh noticed the accused, the wife pushed of committing sexual intercourse with another person; and
her paramour who got his revolver. The accused who was then (2) that he kills any of them or both of them in the act or
peeping above the built-in cabinet in their room jumped and immediately thereafter.
ran away.
These elements are present in this case. The trial court, in
The accused went to look for a firearm. He went to the house convicting the accused-appellant of murder, therefore erred.
of a PC soldier, C2C Arturo Talbo, arriving there at around 6:30
p.m. He got Talbo's firearm, an M-16 rifle, and went back to Though quite a length of time, about one hour, had passed
his house. He was not able to find his wife and Koh there. He between the time the accused-appellant discovered his wife

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-169
having sexual intercourse with the victim and the time the after him but did not overtake him. He came back to their
latter was actually shot, the shooting must be understood to house but only to be met by a stabbing thrust from his wife
be the continuation of the pursuit of the victim by the accused- using a chisel. He was not hit as he was able to parry the
appellant. The Revised Penal Code, in requiring that the blow, thus prompting him to grab the chisel from his wife. He
accused "shall kill any of them or both of them . . . lost his temper and stabbed her to death.
immediately" after surprising his spouse in the act of
intercourse, does not say that he should commit the killing Issue: Whether or not the trial court erred in not finding that
instantly thereafter. It only requires that the death caused be accused-appellant had killed his wife under exceptional
the proximate result of the outrage overwhelming the accused circumstances and in not applying the provision of Article 247
after chancing upon his spouse in the basest act of infidelity. of the Revised Penal Code.
But the killing should have been actually motivated by the
same blind impulse, and must not have been influenced by Held: No. Having admitted the killing, the accused must now
external factors. The killing must be the direct by-product of bear the burden of showing the applicability of Article 247.
the accused's rage. Accordingly, the defense must prove the following:
It must be stressed furthermore that Article 247, supra, does
not define an offense but grants a privilege or benefit to the 1. That a legally married person (or a parent) surprises his
accused for the killing of another or the infliction of serious spouse (or his daughter, under 18 years of age and living with
physical injuries under the circumstances therein mentioned. him), in the act of committing sexual intercourse with another
Punishment, consequently, is not inflicted upon the accused. person.
He is banished, but that is intended for his protection.
2. That he or she kills any or both of them or inflicts upon any
This does not mean, however, that the accused-appellant is or both of them any serious physical injury in the act or
totally free from any responsibility. Granting the fact that he immediately thereafter.
was not performing an illegal act when he fired shots at the
victim, he cannot be said to be entirely without fault. While it 3. That he has not promoted or facilitated the prostitution of
appears that before firing at the deceased, he uttered warning his wife (or daughter) or that he or she has not consented to
words ("an waray labot kagawas,") that is not enough a the infidelity of the other spouse.
precaution to absolve him for the injuries sustained by the
Amparados. We nonetheless find negligence on his part. We stress that the burden of proof to show the concurrence of
Accordingly, we hold him liable under the first part, second all three elements rests on the defense. Most critically,
paragraph, of Article 365, that is, less serious physical injuries Appellant Jimmy Talisic must prove that he caught his wife in
through simple imprudence or negligence. (The records show flagrante delicto; that he killed her while she was in the very
that Arnold Amparado was incapacitated for one and one-half act of voluntary sexual intercourse with another man or
months; there is no showing, with respect to Lina Amparado, immediately thereafter. Sadly for him, he has miserably failed
as to the extent of her injuries. We presume that she was to do so.
placed in confinement for only ten to fourteen days based on
the medical certificate estimating her recovery period.) The Court also pronounced that the version of the accused
that he caught the victim in flagrante delicto of adultery is
Final ruling: The decision is MODIFIED. quite difficult to swallow hook, line and sinker. It is very
unlikely for a wife in her right senses to indulge in marital
(5) People vs. Jimmy Talisic infidelity knowing that her husband is just around the corner
G.R. No. 97961 – September 5, 1997 and would soon come back because he was just away for a
Panganiban, J. short while to fetch water. If there was tryst, the victim could
have chosen to perpetrate the adulterous act not in the living
Facts: Sixteen-year old Danilo Talisic testified that at dawn of room of their very own house. The plausible place of
May 8, 1988, his mother, Janita Talisic, was stabbed to death assignation would have been outside to avoid impending
with a chisel by his father Jimmy Talisic, who afterwards danger of being caught.
displayed the bloodied weapon before their altar. Substantially
corroborating Danilo's testimony, Victoria Sagio Tautho stated One thing more, it is very unlikely that after the victim was
that she found her sister's lifeless body sprawled on the floor caught in flagrante, she would just stay put, watch her
of their living room, as well as the crimson-drenched chisel at husband run berserk, chasing her paramour with a lethal
the altar. weapon (bolo). The normal reaction of one in this kind of
dreadful situation is to swiftly flee from the scene while there
Testifying for his defense, accused-appellant declared that is yet time.
between the hours of 3:00 and 4:00 in the early morning of
May 8, 1988, she (sic) was requested by his wife to fetch This assertion of the accused is simply out of this world to
water from a well as they had earlier (planned) to go to the contemplate. All the more it became weird when he further
city together. As requested, he then fetched water from a well said that the victim prepared to meet him with a chisel since
about 200 meters away from their house which took him about he was carrying a long bolo.
30 minutes to do so. When he came back from the well and
while climbing up the stairs, he was surprised to see a man If the accused was attacked by the victim with a chisel, would
lying on top of his wife. He tried to draw his bolo and stabbed he not use his bolo since he was admittedly raging mad due to
the man who, however, was able to run away. He tried to run

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-170
the victim's infidelity? Why used [sic] a chisel when the bolo in stomach. Tita left the room upon seeing Manolito, only to
hand was more handy. come back armed with a Tanduay bottle. She hit Manolito in
the head, while at the same time shouting "kill him Jake, kill
The foregoing demonstrate that Article 247 of the Revised him Jake."
Penal Code is inapplicable to this case because appellant failed
to prove the essential requisite of having caught his wife and In the commotion, Manolito stabbed Jesus, hitting him in the
her alleged paramour in flagrante delicto. Indeed, appellant abdomen. Jesus fell down and Manolito stabbed him again.
succeeded only in demonstrating his utter lack of credibility on Meanwhile, Tita stabbed Manolito in the arm with the broken
the witness stand. Tanduay bottle. This angered Manolito and he stabbed Tita in
the left breast. He stabbed her three (3) more times in
On the other hand, the records of this case clearly bolster the different parts of her body. Tita fell near the lifeless body of
trial court's conclusion that Appellant Jimmy Talisic did not her paramour.
catch his wife with another man that fateful morning. Jimmy's
deep-seated suspicion of his wife's infidelity and his During trial, accused admitted the killings. He argued that he
resentment of her maltreatment of their children, coupled with killed them both under the exceptional circumstances provided
his erratic and turbulent temper, could explain why he killed in Article 247 of the Revised Penal Code.
her.
Issue: Whether or not the killings were under the exceptional
Final ruling: The appeal is DENIED and the decision is circumstances provided in Article 247 of the Revised Penal
AFFIRMED. Code.

(6) People vs. Manolito Oyanib Held: Yes. Having admitted the killing, it is incumbent upon
G.R. Nos. 130634-35 – March 12, 2001 accused to prove the exempting circumstances to the
Pardo, J. satisfaction of the court in order to be relieved of any criminal
liability. Article 247 of the Revised Penal Code prescribes the
Facts: Accused Manolito Oyanib and Tita T. Oyanib were following essential elements for such a defense: (1) that a
married and had two (2) children, Desilor and Julius. legally married person surprises his spouse in the act of
committing sexual intercourse with another person; (2) that he
In 1994, following a series of arguments, Manolito and Tita kills any of them or both of them in the act or immediately
decided to live separately. Manolito retained custody of their thereafter; and (3) that he has not promoted or facilitated the
two (2) children. Despite their separation, Manolito tried to win prostitution of his wife (or daughter) or that he or she has not
Tita back and exerted all efforts towards reconciliation for the consented to the infidelity of the other spouse. Accused must
sake of the children. However, Tita was very reluctant to prove these elements by clear and convincing evidence,
reconcile with Manolito. In fact, she was very open about her otherwise his defense would be untenable. "The death caused
relationship with other men and would flaunt it in front of must be the proximate result of the outrage overwhelming the
Manolito. accused after chancing upon his spouse in the act of infidelity.
Simply put, the killing by the husband of his wife must concur
One time, he chanced upon his wife and her paramour, Jesus, with her flagrant adultery."
in a very intimate situation by the hanging bridge at Brgy.
Tambacan, Iligan City. Manolito confronted Tita and Jesus To the mind of the court, what actually happened was that
about this. He censured his wife and reminded her that she accused chanced upon Jesus at the place of his wife. He saw
was still his wife. They just ignored him; they even threatened his wife and Jesus in the act of having sexual intercourse.
to kill him. Blinded by jealousy and outrage, accused stabbed Jesus who
fought off and kicked the accused. He vented his anger on his
In the evening of September 4, 1995, after supper, his wife when she reacted, not in defense of him, but in support of
daughter Desilor handed Manolito a letter from the Iligan City Jesus. Hence, he stabbed his wife as well several times.
National High School. The letter mentioned that his son Julius Accused Manolito Oyanib y Mendoza surrendered to the police
failed in two (2) subjects and invited his parents to a meeting when a call for him to surrender was made.
at the school. Because he had work from 8:00 in the morning
until 5:00 in the afternoon the next day, Manolito went to The law imposes very stringent requirements before affording
Tita's house to ask her to attend the school meeting in his the offended spouse the opportunity to avail himself of Article
behalf. 247, Revised Penal Code. As the Court put it in People v.
Wagas:
Upon reaching Tita's rented place, he heard "sounds of
romance" (kissing) coming from the inside. He pried open the "The vindication of a Man's honor is justified because of the
door lock using a hunting knife. He caught his wife Tita and scandal an unfaithful wife creates; the law is strict on this,
Jesus having sexual intercourse. Jesus was on top of Tita and authorizing as it does, a man to chastise her, even with death.
his pants were down to his knees. But killing the errant spouse as a purification is so severe as
that it can only be justified when the unfaithful spouse is
Upon seeing him, Jesus kicked Manolito in the cheek. Manolito caught in flagrante delicto; and it must be resorted to only
immediately stabbed Jesus, the suddenness of the assault with great caution so much so that the law requires that it be
caused him to lose his balance and fall down. Manolito took inflicted only during the sexual intercourse or immediately
advantage of this opportunity and stabbed Jesus in the thereafter."

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-171
 kills any of them or both of them in the act or immediately
Final ruling: The appealed decision is REVERSED. thereafter; and (3) that he has not promoted or facilitated the
prostitution of his wife (or daughter) or that he or she has not
(7) People vs. Marciano Gonzales consented to the infidelity of the other spouse. Among the
G.R. No. 46310 – October 31, 1939 three elements, the most vital is that the accused-appellant
Concepcion, J. must prove to the court that he killed his wife and her
paramour in the act of sexual intercourse or immediately
Facts: The appellant testified that at midday on June 2, 1938, thereafter.
on returning to his house from the woods, he surprised his
wife, Sixta Quilason, and Isabelo Evangelio in the act, told her Having admitted the stabbing, the burden of proof is shifted to
that the man was the very one who used to ask rice and food the defense to show the applicability of Article 247. As
from them, and counseled her not to repeat the same disclosed by the accused-appellant, when he saw Auria with a
faithlessness. His wife, promised him not to do the act again. man, the two were just seated beside each other and were
Thereafter, he left the house and went towards the South to simply talking. Evidently, the absolutory cause embodied in
see his carabaos. Upon returning to his house at above five Article 247 is not applicable in the present case.
o'clock in the afternoon, and not finding his wife there, he
looked for her and found her with Isabelo near the toilet of his 3. Murder (Art. 248 & 250)
house in a place covered with underbush, who was standing
and buttoning his drawers, immediately took to his heels. The Elements:
accused went after him, but unable to overtake him, he 1. A person was killed;
returned to where his wife was and, completely obfuscated, 2. Accused killed him;
attacked her with a knife without intending to kill her. 3. The killing was attended by any of the following
Thereafter, he took pity on her and took her dead body to his qualifying circumstances –
house. a. With treachery, taking advantage of superior
strength, with the aid or armed men, or employing
The appellant contends that, having surprised his wife, under means to weaken the defense, or of means or
circumstances indicative that she had carnal intercourse with persons to insure or afford impunity;
Isabelo, he was entitled to the privilege afforded by article 247  To constitute treachery, two conditions must
of the Revised Penal code providing: "Any legally married concur: (1) the employment of means of
person who, having surprised his spouse in the act of execution which tend directly and specially
committing sexual intercourse with another person, shall kill to insure the accomplishment of the crime
either of them or both of them in the act or immediately without risk to the assailant arising from the
thereafter, or shall inflict upon them any serious physical defense the victim might make; and (2) a
injury, shall suffer the penalty of destierro. deliberate or conscious adoption of the
means of execution. When a victim is
Issue: Whether or not the killing is under the exceptional unexpectedly attacked from behind,
circumstances provided in Article 247 of the Revised Penal depriving him of any opportunity to defend
Code. himself, undeniably there is alevosia. The
essence of treachery is that the attack is
Held: No. The Court do not believe that the accused can avail deliberate and without warning, done in a
himself of the aforesaid article, because the privilege there swift and unexpected manner, affording the
granted is conditioned on the requirement that the spouse hapless, unarmed and unsuspecting victim
surprise the husband or the wife in the act of committing no chance to resist or escape. (People vs.
sexual intercourse with another person; the accused did not Wilson Lab-eo, 2002)
surprise his wife in the very act or carnal intercourse, but after
the act, if any such there was, because from the fact that she  There is treachery when the offender
was rising up and the man was buttoning his drawers, it does commits any of the crimes against the
not necessarily follow that a man and a woman had committed person employing means, methods or forms
the carnal act. in the execution thereof that tend directly
and especially to insure its execution without
Final ruling: The judgment is modified taking into account risk to himself arising from the defense
the mitigating circumstances of lack of intention on the part of which the offended party might make.
the accused to commit so grave a wrong as that committed
upon the person of the deceased, and of his lack of instruction.  The essence of treachery is that the
offended party was denied the chance to
(8) People vs. Manuel Macal, supra defend himself because of the means,
methods, form in executing the crime
Doctrine: Article 247 is an absolutory cause that recognizes deliberately adopted by the offender. It is a
the commission of a crime but for reasons of public policy and matter of whether or not the offended party
sentiment there is no penalty imposed. The defense must was denied the chance of defending himself.
prove the concurrence of the following elements: (1) that a
legally married person surprises his spouse in the act of  The unexpectedness of an attack cannot be
committing sexual intercourse with another person; (2) that he the sole basis of a finding of treachery even

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-172
 if the attack was intended to kill another as  Evident premeditation is absorbed in price,
long as the victim‘s position was merely reward or promise, if without the
accidental. The means adopted must have premeditation the inductor would not have
been a result of a determination to ensure induced the other to commit the act but not
success in committing the crime. (Miguel as regards the one induced.
Cirera vs. People, 2014)
f. With cruelty, by deliberately and inhumanly
 The qualifying circumstance of treachery augmenting the suffering of the victim, or outraging
exists in the commission of a crime when an or scoffing at his person or corpse.
adult person illegally attacks a child of  Cruelty includes the situation where the
tender years and causes his death. The victim is already dead and yet, acts were
killing of a child is murder qualified by committed which would decry or scoff the
treachery, even if the manner of attack was corpse of the victim. The crime becomes
not shown, because the weakness of the murder.
victim due to his tender age results in the
absence of any danger to the accused. In  Hence, this is not actually limited to cruelty.
the present case, Rodrigo, the murdered It goes beyond that because even if the
child, was only twelve (12) years old. victim is already a corpse when the acts
(People vs. Hitro Sancholes, 1997) deliberately augmenting the wrong done to
him were committed, the killing is still
 To be considered qualifying, the particular qualified to murder although the acts done
circumstance must be alleged in the no longer amount to cruelty.
information. If what was alleged was not
proven and instead another circumstance,  Under Article 14, the generic aggravating
not alleged, was established during the trial, circumstance of cruelty requires that the
even if the latter constitutes a qualifying victim be alive, when the cruel wounds were
circumstance under Article 248, the same inflicted and, therefore, must be evidence to
cannot qualify the killing to murder. The that effect. Yet, in murder, aside from
accused can only be convicted of homicide. cruelty, any act that would amount to
scoffing or decrying the corpse of the victim
b. In consideration of a price, reward or promise; will qualify the killing to murder.

c. By means of inundation, fire, poison, explosion, 4. The killing is not parricide or infanticide.
shipwreck, stranding of a vessel, derailment or assault
upon a railroad, fall of an airship, by means of motor Cases:
vehicles, or with the use of any other means involving
great waste and ruin; (9) People vs. Wilson Lab-eo
 When a person is killed by fire, the G.R. No. 133438 – January 16, 2002
primordial criminal intent of the offender is Carpio, J.
considered. If the primordial criminal intent
of the offender is to kill and fire was only Facts: The deceased Segundina Cayno is engaged in the
used as a means to do so, the crime is only business of selling rummage goods in front of the Tadian
murder. If the primordial criminal intent of Public Market at Tadian, Mountain Province. In the morning of
the offender is to destroy property with the October 21, 1996, Nancy Gaoan and Julie Dangla went to see
use of pyrotechnics and incidentally, Segundina to be massaged by the latter.
somebody within the premises is killed, the
crime is arson with homicide. But this is not While Nancy and Julie were plucking the white hair strands of
a complex crime under Article 48. This is Segundina, appellant Wilson Lab-eo arrived and approached
single indivisible crime penalized under his aunt, Segundina. Upon seeing him, Nancy went to a
Article 326, which is death as a consequence distance of about 2 meters while Julie was still near
of arson. That somebody died during such Segundina. Appellant sat down in front of his aunt and uttered
fire would not bring about murder because something to her in a very soft voice. Nancy did not hear what
there is no intent to kill in the mind of the he said because of her distance from them while Julie could
offender. He intended only to destroy not make out the conversation because of the sound coming
property. However, a higher penalty will be from a running motor engine. What they only heard was
applied. Segundina's answer which was uttered in a loud angry voice
"koma-an ka tay baka mahigh bloodac" ("you get out because
d. On occasion of any of the calamities enumerated in I might suffer high blood). They saw appellant leave.
the preceding paragraph, or of an earthquake,
eruption of a volcano, destructive cyclone, epidemic, Appellant proceeded to the market place, which was just about
or any other public calamity; 5 meters away. Thereat, he saw at the butcher's shop of a
certain Gaskiw, a 15-inch knife with a 9-inch blade with a
e. With evident premeditation; width of 1 inch at its widest and 1 cm. at its point. He took it

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-173
and right away and returned to the shop of Segundina and We also affirm the lower court's finding that abuse of superior
suddenly made a thrusting motion and he stabbed Segundina strength was absorbed in treachery. Likewise, the lower court
on the left portion of her back. He then ran away leaving the correctly held that craft was absorbed in treachery as shown
knife at the victim's back with the jacket he had covered it by the fact that the appellant hid the knife under his jacket to
with, hanging by the knife's handle. The entire length of the prevent the victim from seeing it and from being alerted of an
knife's 9-inch blade had penetrated the victim's body. Upon impending assault. Craft may be absorbed in treachery if it is
seeing that Segundina was stabbed, Julie removed the knife deliberately adopted as the means, method or form for the
with the jacket from the victim's back and placed them down treacherous strategy.
on the pavement while Nancy, Nelson and the other people
who saw the incident shouted for help. Final ruling: The decision is AFFIRMED.

Segundina died in the morning of the following day (October (10) Miguel Cirera vs. People
22, 1996). The cause of death was determined to be G.R. No. 181843 – July 14, 2014
"hypovolomic shock secondary to massive hemorrhage". Leonen, J.

The appellant was indicted for murder under Article 248 of the Facts: Two (2) informations for frustrated murder were filed
Revised Penal Code. The trial court found the appellant guilty against petitioner.
of the crime of murder.
Romeo Austria testified that at around 8:30 a.m. on April 20,
Issue: Whether or not the accused is guilty of murder. 2000, he was playing a lucky nine game at a wake on Araneta
Avenue, Quezon City. Miguel arrived, asking money from
Held: Yes. The Court held that while the appellant argues that Austria so he could buy liquor. In response, Austria asked
treachery was not employed in the stabbing of the victim. Miguel "to keep quiet." Gerardo Naval "arrived and asked
However, the prosecution counters that treachery attended the [Austria] to go home." There was an exchange of words
commission of the crime because the appellant stabbed the between Naval and Miguel. Austria "stood up [and] felt that he
victim from behind, without warning and without an was stabbed." As he ran home, he noticed Miguel "armed with
opportunity to defend herself. a knife," this time chasing Naval. Austria was "hospitalized . . .
and was . . . confined for more than a month." He spent
We hold that treachery attended the stabbing of the victim around ₱110,000.00 for his hospitalization. On cross-
Segundina Cay-no. As a rule, a sudden attack by the assailant, examination, Austria testified that he saw Miguel attempt to
whether frontally or from behind, is treachery if he deliberately stab him again.
adopted such mode of attack with the purpose of depriving the
victim of a chance to either fight or retreat. Gerardo Naval testified that Miguel was irked when he asked
Austria to go home. After he and Miguel had an exchange of
To constitute treachery, two conditions must concur: (1) the words, he "felt a hard blow on his back." Naval retaliated.
employment of means of execution which tend directly and However, he ran away when he saw Miguel holding a knife.
specially to insure the accomplishment of the crime without Miguel chased Naval who fell on the ground. When Naval saw
risk to the assailant arising from the defense the victim might that Miguel was "about to stab him again, he hit [Miguel] with
make; and (2) a deliberate or conscious adoption of the means a bench" and left him lying on the ground, unable to stand.
of execution. When a victim is unexpectedly attacked from According to Naval, "he did not see the [knife] land on his
behind, depriving him of any opportunity to defend himself, back." Naval was also confined at the hospital but only for six
undeniably there is alevosia. The essence of treachery is that (6) days.
the attack is deliberate and without warning, done in a swift
and unexpected manner, affording the hapless, unarmed and Dr. Carlos Angeles testified that "he treated [Austria] for [the]
unsuspecting victim no chance to resist or escape. stab wound at [his] back." He declared that Austria could have
died without an emergency operation. According to him, "a
In this case, the victim was stabbed, undoubtedly from behind. long and sharp instrument, probably a knife," could have been
Dr. Milagros Inhumang, the physician who attended to the used to stab the victim. Dr. Arnold Angeles, Naval‘s doctor,
victim at the time of the incident, testified that the wound testified that "continuous blood loss" could have caused
inflicted on the victim was found at the back, left side portion. Naval‘s death.
The testimonies of the prosecution witnesses substantiate this
medical finding. The appellant was behind the victim when he The trial court found petitioner guilty of two (2) counts of
stabbed her. frustrated murder, which was affirmed by the Court of
Appeals.
The fact that the appellant used a very sharp butcher's knife,
15 inches long with a 9-inch blade, shows that the appellant Issue: Whether or not treachery do not exist and, hence,
had chosen well his weapon of attack. The deadly nature of petitioner may only be convicted of two counts of frustrated
the weapon used, the traitorous manner of the assault, and homicide.
the location of the wound inflicted upon the victim, conjointly
demonstrate a deliberate and determined assault with intent to Held: Yes. Article 248 of the Revised Penal Code provides that
kill. murder is committed by a person who kills, under certain
circumstances, another person that is not his or her father,
mother, child, ascendant, descendant, or spouse. It provides:

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-174
 (2) [D]eliberate or conscious adoption of such means, method,
ARTICLE 248. Murder. — Any person who, not falling or manner of execution.
within the provisions of Article 246 shall kill another,
shall be guilty of murder and shall be punished by A finding of the existence of treachery should be based on
reclusión temporal in its maximum period to death, if "clear and convincing evidence." Such evidence must be as
committed with any of the following attendant conclusive as the fact of killing itself. Its existence "cannot be
circumstances: presumed." As with the finding of guilt of the accused, "[a]ny
doubt as to [its] existence . . . [should] be resolved in favor of
1. With treachery, taking advantage ofsuperior the accused."
strength, with the aid of armed men, or employing
means to weaken the defense or of means or persons The unexpectedness of an attack cannot be the sole basis of a
to insure or afford impunity. finding of treachery even if the attack was intended to kill
2. In consideration of a price, reward or promise. another as long as the victim‘s position was merely accidental.
3. By means of inundation, fire, poison, explosion, The means adopted must have been a result of a
shipwreck, stranding of a vessel, derailment or assault determination to ensure success in committing the crime.
upon a street car or locomotive, fall of an airship, by
means of motor vehicles, or with the use of any other In this case, no evidence was presented to show that
means involving great waste and ruin. petitioner consciously adopted or reflected on the means,
4. On occasion of any of the calamities enumerated in method, or form of attack to secure his unfair advantage.
the preceding paragraph, or of an earthquake,
eruption of a volcano, destructive cyclone, epidemic, The attack might "have been done on impulse [or] as a
or any other public calamity. reaction to an actual or imagined provocation offered by the
5. With evident premeditation. victim." In this case, petitioner was not only dismissed by
6. With cruelty, by deliberately and inhumanly Austria when he approached him for money. There was also
augmenting the suffering of the victim, or outraging an altercation between him and Naval. The provocation might
or scoffing at his person or corpse. have been enough to entice petitioner to action and attack
private complainants.
If these qualifying circumstances are not present or cannot be
proven beyond reasonable doubt, the accused may only be Therefore, the manner of attack might not have been
convicted with homicide, defined in Article 249 of the Revised motivated by a determination to ensure success in committing
Penal Code: the crime. What was more likely the case, based on private
complainants‘ testimonies, was that petitioner‘s action was an
Art. 249. Homicide. – Any person who, not falling impulsive reaction to being dismissed by Austria, his altercation
within the provisions of Article 246, shall kill another with Naval, and Naval‘s attempt to summon Austria home.
withoutthe attendance of any of the circumstances
enumerated in the next preceding article, shall be Generally, this type of provocation negates the existence of
deemed guilty of homicide and be punished by treachery. This is the type of provocation that does not lend
reclusión temporal. itself to premeditation. The provocation in this case is of the
kind which triggers impulsive reactions left unchecked by the
However, treachery, as a qualifying circumstance to sustain a accused and caused him to commit the crime. There was no
conviction of frustrated murder rather than frustrated evidence of a modicum of premeditation indicating the
homicide, was not proven by the prosecution. possibility of choice and planning fundamental to achieve the
elements of treachery.
Article 14(16) of the Revised Penal Code defines treachery:
As to the penalty:
ARTICLE 14. Aggravating Circumstances. — The Article 250 of the Revised Penal Code provides that a penalty
following are aggravating circumstances: lower by one degree than that which should be imposed for
.... homicide may be imposed upon a person guilty of frustrated
16. That the act be committed with treachery homicide.
(alevosia).
The imposable penalty for homicide is reclusion temporal.
There is treachery when the offender commits any of the Article 50 of the Revised Penal Code provides that the penalty
crimes against the person, employing means, methods, or to be imposed upon principals of a frustrated crime shall be
forms in the execution thereof, which tend directly and the penalty next lower in degree than that prescribed by law
specially to insure its execution, without risk to himself arising for the consummated crimes. The penalty next lower in degree
from the defense which the offended party might make. is prision mayor.

The requisites of treachery are: Final ruling: The decision of the Court of Appeals is SET
(1) [T]he employment of means, method, or manner of ASIDE. Petitioner is found guilty of two (2) counts of frustrated
execution which will ensure the safety of the malefactor from homicide.
defensive or retaliating acts on the part of the victim, no
opportunity being given to the latter to defend himself or to (11) People vs. Hitro Sancholes
retaliate; and G.R. Nos. 110999 & 111000 – April 18, 1997

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-175
Regalado, J. accused. In the present case, Rodrigo, the murdered child,
was only twelve (12) years old.
Facts: Accused-appellants Hitro Sancholes, Kareem Sancholes
and two other unidentified persons were charged with murder There was also a clear case of abuse of superior strength,
in two separate informations. Witness Magno Reposo testified given the blatant inequality of strength between the victim and
that while he was fishing at the Ilog River of Casanga-an, his aggressors, as well as the degree of force and the weapons
Tara, Mabinay, Negros Oriental at 10:00 o'clock in the morning used by the latter. However, this cannot be appreciated even
of June 10, 1990, he heard a shout for help. When he looked as a generic aggravating circumstance since it is absorbed by
to where the shout came from he saw Enrique Cabual who was treachery which has been used to qualify the crime to murder.
also fishing in the river being ganged up by Hitro Sancholes
and Kareem Sancholes. Hitro Sancholes hacked Enrique Cabual As to the killing of Enrique Cabual, even if the qualifying
with the use of a bolo about 27 inches long hitting the latter circumstance of abuse of superior strength was not alleged in
on the middle portion of his head. Upon being hit, Enrique fell the information, treachery was nonetheless alleged therein and
into the river. Kareem followed Enrique and stabbed the latter was sufficiently established at the trial. It consequently
with the use of a hunting knife. qualified the killing of this victim to murder.

While witness Elpidio Babor testified that while he was Treachery was ineluctably attendant in the killing of Enrique by
gathering firewood on the land of Pepe Dupio situated at appellants. This victim was fishing in the river sitting on a
Casanga-an, Tara, Mabinay, Negros Oriental at 9:00 a.m. of piece of wood when appellants and the two other unidentified
June 10, 1990 heard a shout for help of a child saying: "Help persons suddenly and unexpectedly ganged up on him. Upon
papa," which came from the lowland. He then looked down being hit on the head with a bolo wielded by Hitro, he fell into
and from a distance of 100 meters away he saw Kareem the river. Immediately thereafter, Kareem followed him into
Sancholes and Hitro Sancholes chasing a boy, later identified the water and stabbed him. Under these circumstances, the
to be Rodrigo Cabual. When they overtook the boy, Kareem victim was totally and unquestionably in a defenseless state.
Sancholes stabbed the boy with the use of a hunting knife. Lito
Sancholes joined the assault by hacking the boy hitting the Final ruling: The judgment is AFFIRMED.
forehead. Hitro hacked the boy again and as a consequence
thereof the boy fell and died. 4. Homicide (Art. 249 & 250)
 Homicide is the unlawful killing of a person not
The accused-appellants interposed alibi as defense. The trial constituting murder, parricide or infanticide.
court rendered its decision finding appellants guilty beyond
reasonable doubt of the crime of murder. Elements:
1. A person was killed;
Issue: Whether or not Code. 2. Offender killed him without any justifying
circumstances;
Held: Yes. The prosecution has sufficiently established by 3. Offender had the intention to kill, which is presumed;
strong and compelling evidence the killing of Enrique and 4. The killing was not attended by any of the qualifying
Rodrigo Cabual by the appellants through the positive circumstances of murder, or by that of parricide or
identification of them by the prosecution's principal witnesses, infanticide.
Magno Reposo and Elpidio Babor. Reflected by the transcripts
are their clear, categorical and straightforward testimonies on Distinction between homicide and physical injuries:
the facts which they witnessed.  In attempted or frustrated homicide, there is intent to
kill. In physical injuries, there is none. However, if as
As to the defense of alibi, no jurisprudential rule in criminal a result of the physical injuries inflicted, the victim
case is more settled than that alibi is the weakest of all died, the crime will be homicide because the law
defenses and should be rejected when the identity of the punishes the result, and not the intent of the act.
accused has been sufficiently and positively established by
eyewitnesses to the crime, as in the instant case. The alibi of Note:
the accused cannot prevail against the positive identification  The elements of frustrated homicide are: (1) the
made by the prosecution witnesses. accused intended to kill his victim, as manifested by
his use of a deadly weapon in his assault; (2) the
Moreover, the evidence of the People indisputably established victim sustained fatal or mortal wound/s but did not
the presence of treachery and abuse of superior strength, die because of timely medical assistance; and (3)
either of which qualifies the crime as murder. none of the qualifying circumstance for murder under
Article 248 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended, is
Treachery characterized the killing of Rodrigo who, by reason present. (Giovani Serrano vs. People, 2010)
of his youth, did not pose any danger to appellants. The
qualifying circumstance of treachery exists in the commission *In relation to Parricide, Murder and Homicide
of a crime when an adult person illegally attacks a child of Article 250. Penalty for frustrated parricide, murder or
tender years and causes his death. The killing of a child is homicide. - The courts, in view of the facts of the case, may
murder qualified by treachery, even if the manner of attack impose upon the person guilty of the frustrated crime of
was not shown, because the weakness of the victim due to his parricide, murder or homicide, defined and penalized in the
tender age results in the absence of any danger to the

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-176
preceding articles, a penalty lower by one degree than that (2) Act as conduit or middlemen in drug trafficking or
which should be imposed under the provision of Article 50. pushing; or
(3) Conduct any illegal activities, shall suffer the
The courts, considering the facts of the case, may likewise penalty of prision correccional in its medium
reduce by one degree the penalty which under Article 51 period to reclusion perpetua.
should be imposed for an attempt to commit any of such
crimes. For purposes of this Act, the penalty for the commission of
acts punishable under Articles 248, 249, 262, paragraph 2, and
*In relation to Murder and Homicide 263, paragraph 1 of Act No. 3815, as amended, the Revised
Republic Act No. 7610, Sec. 10. Other Acts of Neglect, Penal Code, for the crimes of murder, homicide, other
Abuse, Cruelty or Exploitation and Other Conditions intentional mutilation, and serious physical injuries,
Prejudicial to the Child's Development. – respectively, shall be reclusion perpetua when the victim is
under twelve (12) years of age. The penalty for the
(a) Any person who shall commit any other acts of child commission of acts punishable under Article 337, 339, 340 and
abuse, cruelty or exploitation or to be responsible for 341 of Act No. 3815, as amended, the Revised Penal Code, for
other conditions prejudicial to the child's development the crimes of qualified seduction, acts of lasciviousness with
including those covered by Article 59 of Presidential the consent of the offended party, corruption of minors, and
Decree No. 603, as amended, but not covered by the white slave trade, respectively, shall be one (1) degree higher
Revised Penal Code, as amended, shall suffer the than that imposed by law when the victim is under twelve (12)
penalty of prision mayor in its minimum period. years age.

(b) Any person who shall keep or have in his company a The victim of the acts committed under this section shall be
minor, twelve (12) years or under or who in ten (10) entrusted to the care of the Department of Social Welfare and
years or more his junior in any public or private place, Development.
hotel, motel, beer joint, discotheque, cabaret, pension
house, sauna or massage parlor, beach and/or other Case:
tourist resort or similar places shall suffer the penalty
of prision mayor in its maximum period and a fine of (12) Giovani Serrano vs. People
not less than Fifty thousand pesos (P50,000): G.R. No. 175023 – July 5, 2010
Provided, That this provision shall not apply to any Brion, J.
person who is related within the fourth degree of
consanguinity or affinity or any bond recognized by Facts: The case stemmed from a brawl involving 15 to 18
law, local custom and tradition or acts in the members of two (2) rival groups that occurred at the
performance of a social, moral or legal duty. University of the Philippines, Diliman, Quezon City (UP) on the
evening of March 8, 1999. The incident resulted in the
(c) Any person who shall induce, deliver or offer a minor stabbing of Anthony Galang (victim). Pinpointed as the victim‘s
to any one prohibited by this Act to keep or have in assailant, the petitioner was charged on March 11, 1999, with
his company a minor as provided in the preceding frustrated homicide.
paragraph shall suffer the penalty of prision mayor in
its medium period and a fine of not less than Forty The prosecution presented the victim, Arlo Angelo Arceo, Sgt.
thousand pesos (P40,000); Provided, however, That Rolando Zoleto, and SPO2 Roderick Dalit. These witnesses
should the perpetrator be an ascendant, stepparent testified that, at around 9:30 p.m. of March 8, 1999, the victim
or guardian of the minor, the penalty to be imposed and his two friends, Arceo and Richard Tan, were on their way
shall be prision mayor in its maximum period, a fine to Fatima II in Pook Dagohoy, UP Campus when they came
of not less than Fifty thousand pesos (P50,000), and across Gener Serrano, the petitioner‘s brother, who was with
the loss of parental authority over the minor. his group of friends. The victim, Arceo and Tan approached
Gener and his friends to settle a previous quarrel between
(d) Any person, owner, manager or one entrusted with Gener and Roberto Comia. While the victim and Gener were
the operation of any public or private place of talking, Comia suddenly appeared and hurled invectives at
accommodation, whether for occupancy, food, drink Gener. Irked, Gener challenged Comia to a fistfight to settle
or otherwise, including residential places, who allows their quarrel once and for all; Comia rose to the challenge.
any person to take along with him to such place or
places any minor herein described shall be imposed a It was at this point that the petitioner appeared with other
penalty of prision mayor in its medium period and a members of his group. He was a guest at a party nearby, and
fine of not less than Fifty thousand pesos (P50,000), was informed that a fight was about to take place between his
and the loss of the license to operate such a place or brother and Comia. Members of the victim‘s group also started
establishment. to show up.

(e) Any person who shall use, coerce, force or intimidate The petitioner watched Gener fight Comia. When Gener lost
a street child or any other child to; the fight, the petitioner sought to get back at the victim and
his friends. Thus, the one-on-one escalated into a rumble
(1) Beg or use begging as a means of living; between the members of the two groups. During the rumble,
and with the aid of the light emanating from two Meralco

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-177
posts, the victim and Arceo saw that the petitioner had a knife abdomen while the latter was held by Gener and Orieta.
and used it to chase away the members of their group. The Immediately after the stabbing, the petitioner, Gener and
petitioner also chased Arceo away, leaving the victim alone; Orieta beat and stoned the victim until he fell into a creek. It
the petitioner‘s group ganged up on him. was only then that the petitioner, Gener and Orieta left. We
consider in this regard that the stabbing occurred at around
The petitioner went to where the victim was being beaten by 9:30 p.m. with only the petitioner, Gener, Orieta, and the
Gener and one Obet Orieta. It was then that the victim was victim as the only persons left in the area. The CA aptly
stabbed. The petitioner stabbed the left side of his stomach observed that a reasonable inference can be made that the
while he was standing, with Gener and Orieta holding his victim was left for dead when he fell into the creek.
arms. The petitioner, Gener and Orieta thereafter continued to
beat and stone the victim until he fell into a nearby creek. The Under these circumstances, we are convinced that the
petitioner and his group left him there. petitioner, in stabbing, beating and stoning the victim,
intended to kill him. Thus, the crime committed cannot be
From his fallen position, the victim inspected his stab wound merely serious physical injuries.
and saw that a portion of his intestines showed. On foot, he
went to find help. The victim was initially taken to the UP Moreover, since the victim did not die, the issue posed to us is
Infirmary, but was referred to the East Avenue Medical Center the stage of execution of the crime. The lower courts differed
where he underwent surgery. The victim stayed at the hospital in their legal conclusions. On one hand, the RTC held that the
for a week, and thereafter stayed home for one month to crime committed reached the frustrated stage since the victim
recuperate. was stabbed on the left side of his stomach and beaten until
he fell into a creek. The RTC also took into account that the
In the investigation that immediately followed, the victim victim had to be referred by the UP Infirmary to the East
identified the petitioner as the person who stabbed him. In Avenue Medical Center for medical treatment.
court, the victim likewise positively identified the petitioner as
his assailant. On the other hand, the CA ruled that the crime committed only
reached the attempted stage as there was lack of evidence
The defense presented the testimonies of the petitioner, that the stab wound inflicted was fatal to cause the victim‘s
Gener, and George Hipolito. The petitioner denied that he death. The CA observed that the attending physician did not
stabbed the victim. While he admitted that he was present testify in court. The CA also considered that the Medical
during the fistfight between Gener and Comia, he claimed that Certificate and the Discharge Summary issued by the East
he and Gener left as soon as the rumble started. The petitioner Avenue Medical Center fell short of "specifying the nature or
testified that as he and Gener were running away from the gravity of the wound."
scene (to get back to the party), bottles and stones were being
thrown at them. The crucial point to consider is the nature of the wound
inflicted which must be supported by independent proof
Hipolito, a participant in the rumble and a member of the showing that the wound inflicted was sufficient to cause the
petitioner‘s group, narrated that the rumble happened fast and victim‘s death without timely medical intervention.
he was too busy defending himself to take note of everything
that happened. He testified that he did not see the petitioner The view from the "frustrated" stage of the crime gives the
and Gener during the fight. He also testified that the place same results. The elements of frustrated homicide are: (1) the
where the rumble took place was near a steel manufacturing accused intended to kill his victim, as manifested by his use of
shop which provided some light to the area. He further a deadly weapon in his assault; (2) the victim sustained fatal
testified that the victim was left alone at the scene and he or mortal wound/s but did not die because of timely medical
alone faced the rival group. assistance; and (3) none of the qualifying circumstance for
murder under Article 248 of the Revised Penal Code, as
RTC – frustrated homicide. amended, is present. Since the prosecution failed to prove the
CA – ruled that the crime committed was attempted homicide, second element, we cannot hold the petitioner liable for
not frustrated homicide. frustrated homicide.

Issue: Whether or not the petitioner is guilty of attempted Final ruling: The petition is DENIED.
homicide.
5. Death caused in a tumultuous affray (Art. 251)
Held: Yes. The intent to kill was sufficiently established. The
petitioner posits that he can only be held liable for serious Elements:
physical injuries since the intent to kill, the necessary element 1. There are several persons;
to characterize the crime as homicide, was not sufficiently 2. They do not compose groups organized for the
proven. The assailant‘s intent to kill is the main element that common purpose of assaulting and attacking each other
distinguishes the crime of physical injuries from the crime of reciprocally;
homicide. The crime can only be homicide if the intent to kill is 3. These several persons quarreled and assaulted one
proven. another in a confused and tumultuous manner;
4. Someone was killed in the course of the affray;
In this case, the records show that the petitioner used a knife 5. It can not be ascertained who actually killed the
in his assault. The petitioner stabbed the victim in the deceased;

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-178
 6. The person or persons who inflicted serious physical At the hospital, Aro was diagnosed to be suffering from "blunt
injuries or who used violence can be identified. abdominal trauma with injury to the jejunum" and was set for
operation. It was then discovered that he sustained a
To be considered death in a tumultuous affray, there must perforation on his ileum, i.e., the point where the small and
be: large intestines meet, that caused intestinal bleeding, and that
(1) a quarrel, a free-for-all, which should not involve his entire abdominal peritoneum was filled with air and fluid
organized group; and contents from the bile. However, Aro suffered cardiac arrest
(2) someone who is injured or killed because of the fight. during the operation, and while he was revived through
cardiopulmonary resuscitation, he lapsed into a coma after the
Notes: operation.
 A tumultuous affray takes place when a quarrel
occurs between several persons and they engage in a Due to financial constraints, Aro was taken out of the hospital
confused and tumultuous affray, in the course of against the doctor's orders and eventually, died the next day.
which some person is killed or wounded and the While Aro's death certificate indicated that the cause of his
author thereof cannot be ascertained. (Guillermo death was "cardiopulmonary arrest antecedent to a perforated
Wacoy vs. People, 2015) ileum and generalized peritonitis secondary to mauling," an
autopsy performed on his remains revealed that the cause of
 Tumultuous affray simply means a commotion in a his death was "rupture of the aorta secondary to blunt
tumultuous and confused manner, to such an extent traumatic injuries."
that it would not be possible to identify who the killer
is if death results, or who inflicted the serious physical In their defense, herein petitioners, Wacoy and Quibac, denied
injury, but the person or persons who used violence the charge against them. They averred that while playing pool,
are known. they saw Aro drunk and lying down. Suddenly, Aro became
unruly and kicked the leg of the pool table, causing Wacoy to
 It is not a tumultuous affray which brings about the shout and pick up a stone to throw at Aro but Quibac pacified
crime; it is the inability to ascertain actual him. They also claimed that Aro almost hit Wacoy with a 2x3
perpetrator. It is necessary that the very person who piece of wood if not for Quibac' s intervention. Wacoy ran but
caused the death cannot be known, not that he Aro chased him and then tripped and fell to the ground.
cannot be identified. Because if he is known but only Quiniquin Carias (Kinikin), Aro's companion, followed Wacoy to
his identity is not known, then he will be charged for the waiting shed nearby, cornered and kicked the latter, and
the crime of homicide or murder under a fictitious the two engaged in a fist fight. Quibac came over to pacify the
name and not death in a tumultuous affray. If there two and told Wacoy to go home.
is a conspiracy, this crime is not committed.
The RTC – found Wacoy and Quibac guilty beyond reasonable
 The fight must be tumultuous. The participants must doubt of the crime of Death Caused in a Tumultuous Affray
not be members of an organized group. This is under Article 251 of the RPC.
different from a rumble which involves organized
groups composed of persons who are to attack The CA – modified Wacoy and Quibac's conviction to that of
others. If the fight is between such groups, even if Homicide under Article 249 of the RPC with the mitigating
you cannot identify who, in particular, committed the circumstance of lack of intent to commit so grave a wrong.
killing, the adverse party composing the organized
group will be collectively charged for the death of that Issue: Whether or not the petitioner is guilty of homicide.
person.
Held: Yes. Proceeding from the foregoing, the Court agrees
Case: with the CA's ruling modifying Wacoy and Quibac' s conviction
from Death Caused in a Tumultuous Affray to that of
(13) Guillermo Wacoy vs. People Homicide, as will be explained hereunder.
G.R. No. 213792 – June 22, 2015
Perlas-Bernabe, J. Article 251 of the RPC defines and penalizes the crime of
Death Caused in a Tumultuous Affray as follows:
Facts: According to prosecution witness Edward Benito
(Benito), at around 3 o'clock in the afternoon of April 11, 2004, Art. 251. Death caused in a tumultuous affray. - When, while
he was eating corn at a sari-sari store located at Bungis several persons, not composing groups organized for the
Ambongdolan, Tublay, Benguet, when he heard a commotion common purpose of assaulting and attacking each other
at a nearby establishment. Upon checking what the ruckus was reciprocally, quarrel and assault each other in a confused and
all about, he saw his cousin, Elner Aro (Aro), already sprawled tumultuous manner, and in the course of the affray someone is
on the ground. While in that position, he saw Wacoy kick Aro's killed, and it cannot be ascertained who actually killed the
stomach twice, after which, Wacoy picked up a rock to throw deceased, but the person or persons who inflicted serious
at Aro but was restrained from doing so. As Aro stood up, physical injuries can be identified, such person or persons shall
Quibac punched him on the stomach, causing him to collapse be punished by prision mayor.
and cry in pain. Thereafter, Aro was taken to the hospital.
If it cannot be determined who inflicted the serious physical
injuries on the deceased, the penalty of prision correccional in

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-179
its medium and maximum periods shall be imposed upon all intended to commit, the penalty corresponding to the latter
those who shall have used violence upon the person of the shall be imposed in its maximum period.
victim. 2. If the penalty prescribed for the felony committed be lower
than that corresponding to the one which the accused
The elements of Death Caused in a Tumultuous Affray are as intended to commit, the penalty for the former shall be
follows: (a) that there be several persons; (b) that they did not imposed in its maximum period.
compose groups organized for the common purpose of 3. The rule established by the next preceding paragraph shall
assaulting and attacking each other reciprocally; (c) that these not be applicable if the acts committed by the guilty person
several persons quarrelled and assaulted one another in a shall also constitute an attempt or frustration of another crime,
confused and tumultuous manner; (d) that someone was killed if the law prescribes a higher penalty for either of the latter
in the course of the affray; (e) that it cannot be ascertained offenses, in which case the penalty provided for the attempt or
who actually killed the deceased; and (j) that the person or the frustrated crime shall be imposed in the maximum period.
persons who inflicted serious physical injuries or who used
violence can be identified. Based on case law, a tumultuous Jurisprudence instructs that such provision should only apply
affray takes place when a quarrel occurs between several where the crime committed is different from that intended and
persons and they engage in a confused and tumultuous affray, where the felony committed befalls a different person (error in
in the course of which some person is killed or wounded and personae); and not to cases where more serious consequences
the author thereof cannot be ascertained. not intended by the offender result from his felonious act
(praeter intentionem), as in this case. It is well-settled that if
On the other hand, the crime of Homicide is defined and the victim dies because of a deliberate act of the malefactors,
penalized under Article 249 of the RPC, which reads: intent to kill is conclusively presumed. In such case, even if
there is no intent to kill, the crime is Homicide because with
Art. 249. Homicide. - Any person who, not falling within the respect to crimes of personal violence, the penal law looks
provisions of Article 246, shall kill another, without the particularly to the material results following the unlawful act
attendance of any of the circumstances enumerated in the and holds the aggressor responsible for all the consequences
next preceding article, shall be deemed guilty of homicide and thereof.
be punished by reclusion temporal. The elements of Homicide
are the following: (a) a person was killed; (b) the accused Be that as it may, the penalty for the crime of Homicide must
killed him without any justifying circumstance; (c) the accused be imposed in its minimum period due to the presence of the
had the intention to kill, which is presumed; and (d) the killing mitigating circumstance of lack of intention to commit so grave
was not attended by any of the qualifying circumstances of a wrong under Article 13 (3) of the RPC in favor of Wacoy and
Murder, or by that of Parricide or Infanticide. Quibac, as correctly appreciated by the CA. In determining the
presence of this circumstance, it must be considered that since
In the instant case, there was no tumultuous affray between intention is a mental process and is an internal state of mind,
groups of persons in the course of which Aro died. On the the accused's intention must be judged by his conduct and
contrary, the evidence clearly established that there were only external overt acts. In this case, the aforesaid mitigating
two (2) persons, Wacoy and Quibac, who picked on one circumstance is available to Wacoy and Quibac, given the
defenseless individual, Aro, and attacked him repeatedly, absence of evidence showing that, apart from kicking and
taking turns in inflicting punches and kicks on the poor victim. punching Aro on the stomach, something else had been done;
There was no confusion and tumultuous quarrel or affray, nor thus, evincing the purpose of merely maltreating or inflicting
was there a reciprocal aggression in that fateful incident. Since physical harm, and not to end the life of Aro.
Wacoy and Quibac were even identified as the ones who
assaulted Aro, the latter's death cannot be said to have been Final ruling: The petition is DENIED.
caused in a tumultuous affray. Therefore, the CA correctly held
that Wacoy and Quibac' s act of mauling Aro was the 6. Physical injuries inflicted in a tumultuous affray
proximate cause of the latter's death; and as such, they must (Art. 252)
be held criminally liable therefore, specifically for the crime of
Homicide. Elements:
1. There is a tumultuous affray;
On this note, the Court does not find merit in Wacoy's 2. A participant or some participants thereof suffered
contention that in view of their intent only to inflict slight serious physical injuries or physical injuries of a less
physical injuries on Aro, they should only be meted the serious nature only;
corresponding penalty therefore in its maximum period, 3. The person responsible thereof cannot be identified;
pursuant to Article 49 of the RPC. The said provision reads: 4. All those who appear to have used violence upon the
person of the offended party are known.
Art. 49. Penalty to be imposed upon the principals when the
crime committed is different from that intended. - In cases in Note:
which the felony committed is different from that which the  If in the course of the tumultuous affray, only serious
offender intended to commit, the following rules shall be or less serious physical injuries are inflicted upon a
observed. participant, those who used violence upon the person
of the offended party shall be held liable.
1. If the penalty prescribed for the felony committed be higher
than that corresponding to the offense which the accused 7. Giving assistance to suicide (Art. 253)

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-180
 victim is three days old or above, the crime is
Acts punished: parricide.
1. Assisting another to commit suicide, whether the
suicide is consummated or not;  Concealment of dishonor is not an element of
2. Lending his assistance to another to commit suicide to infanticide. It merely lowers the penalty. If the child
the extent of doing the killing himself. is abandoned without any intent to kill and death
results as a consequence, the crime committed is not
Notes: infanticide but abandonment under Article 276.
 Giving assistance to suicide means giving means
(arms, poison, etc.) or whatever manner of positive  If the child is born dead, or if the child is already
and direct cooperation (intellectual aid, suggestions dead, infanticide is not committed.
regarding the mode of committing suicide, etc.).
10. Intentional abortion (Art. 256)
 In this crime, the intention must be for the person  Abortion is the violent expulsion of a fetus from the
who is asking the assistance of another to commit maternal womb. If the fetus has been delivered but it
suicide. could not subsist by itself, it is still a fetus and not a
person. Thus, if it is killed, the crime committed is
 In mercy killing, the victim is not in a position to abortion not infanticide.
commit suicide. Whoever would heed his advice is
not really giving assistance to suicide but doing the Acts punished:
killing himself. In giving assistance to suicide, the 1. Using any violence upon the person of the pregnant
principal actor is the person committing the suicide. woman;
In other words, this does not contemplate euthanasia 2. Acting, but without using violence, without the
or mercy killing where the crime is homicide (if consent of the woman. (By administering drugs or
without consent; with consent, covered by Article beverages upon such pregnant woman without her
253). consent.)
3. Acting (by administering drugs or beverages), with
8. Discharge of firearms (Art. 254) FA pointed at a the consent of the pregnant woman.
person wo intent to kill, 155 is not directed
Elements:
Elements: 1. There is a pregnant woman;
1. Offender discharges a firearm against or at another 2. Violence is exerted, or drugs or beverages
person; administered, or that the accused otherwise acts upon
2. Offender had no intention to kill that person. such pregnant woman;
3. As a result of the use of violence or drugs or
Notes: beverages upon her, or any other act of the accused, the
 This crime cannot be committed through imprudence fetus dies, either in the womb or after having been
because it requires that the discharge must be expelled therefrom;
directed at another. 4. The abortion is intended.

 If the firearm is directed at a person and the trigger Distinction between infanticide and abortion:
was pressed but did not fire, the crime is frustrated  It is infanticide if the victim is already a person less
discharge of firearm. that three days old or 72 hours and is viable or
capable of living separately from the mother‘s womb.
 If the discharge is not directed at a person, the crime It is abortion if the victim is not viable but remains to
may constitute alarm and scandal. be a fetus.

Infanticide and abortion Notes:

 Abortion is not a crime against the woman but against
9. Infanticide (Art. 255) the fetus. If mother as a consequence of abortion
suffers death or physical injuries, you have a complex
Elements: crime of murder or physical injuries and abortion.
1. A child was killed by the accused;
2. The deceased child was less than 72 hours old.  In intentional abortion, the offender must know of the
pregnancy because the particular criminal intention is
Notes: to cause an abortion. Therefore, the offender must
 This is a crime based on the age of the victim. The have known of the pregnancy for otherwise, he would
victim should be less than three days old. not try an abortion.

 The offender may actually be the parent of the child.  If the woman turns out not to be pregnant and
But you call the crime infanticide, not parricide, if the someone performs an abortion upon her, he is liable
age of the victim is less than three days old. If the for an impossible crime if the woman suffers no

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-181
 physical injury. If she does, the crime will be from the eyes and nose of Marciana and died right on the spot
homicide, serious physical injuries, etc. where she fell.

 In abortion, the concealment of dishonor as a motive The prosecution presented witnesses, to wit: (1) Dr. Juan L.
of the mother to commit the abortion upon herself is Dyquiangco Jr. who conducted the post-mortem examination
mitigating. It will also mitigate the liability of the on the deceased Marciano Abuyo-Salufrania; (2) Pedro
maternal grandparent of the victim – the mother of Salufrania, 13-year-old son of the accused and the deceased,
the pregnant woman – if the abortion was done with an eyewitness over the incident; and (3) Narciso Abuyo, the
the consent of the pregnant woman. brother of the deceased, who declared that after the burial of
Marciana Abuyo, the three (3) children of his deceased sister
11. Unintentional abortion (Art. 257) went to his house and refused to go home with their father
Filomeno Salufrania; that when asked for the reason why, his
Elements: nephew Alex Salufraña told him that the real cause of death of
1. There is a pregnant woman; their mother was not stomach ailment and headache, rather,
2. Violence is used upon such pregnant woman without she was boxed on the stomach and strangled to death by their
intending an abortion; father.
3. The violence is intentionally exerted;
4. As a result of the violence, the fetus dies, either in CFI of Camarines Norte – found the accused guilty with the
the womb or after having been expelled therefrom. complex crime of parricide with intentional abortion and
sentenced to suffer the penalty of death.
Notes:
 Unintentional abortion requires physical violence Issue: Whether or not the trial court is correct on convicting
inflicted deliberately and voluntarily by a third person the accused with the complex crime of parricide with
upon the person of the pregnant woman. Mere intentional abortion.
intimidation is not enough unless the degree of
intimidation already approximates violence. Held: No. The appellant alleges that, assuming he indeed
killed his wife, there is no evidence to show that he had the
 If the abortive drug used in abortion is a prohibited intention to cause an abortion. In this contention, appellant is
drug or regulated drug under RA 9165, the crimes correct. He should not be held guilty of the complex crime of
committed would be (1) intentional abortion; and (2) Parricide with Intentional Abortion but of the complex crime of
violation of the Dangerous Drugs Act. Parricide with Unintentional Abortion. The elements of
Unintentional Abortion are as follows:
 In the crime of infanticide, it is necessary that the 1. That there is a pregnant woman.
child be born alive and be viable, that is, capable of 2. That violence is used upon such pregnant woman without
independent existence. However, even if the child intending an abortion.
who was expelled prematurely and deliberately were 3. That the violence is intentionally exerted.
alive at birth, the offense is abortion due to the fact 4. That as a result of the violence the foetus dies, either in the
that a fetus with an intrauterine life of 6 months is womb or after having been expelled therefrom.
not viable. In the present case, the unborn fetus was
also killed when the appellant stabbed Lilybeth The Solicitor General's brief makes it appear that appellant
several times. (People vs. Jesus Paycana, Jr., intended to cause an abortion because he boxed his pregnant
supra) wife on the stomach which caused her to fall and then
strangled her. We find that appellant's intent to cause an
 Mere boxing on the stomach, taken together with the abortion has not been sufficiently established. Mere boxing on
immediate strangling of the victim in a fight, is not the stomach, taken together with the immediate strangling of
sufficient proof to show intent to cause an abortion. the victim in a fight, is not sufficient proof to show an intent to
In fact, appellant must have merely intended to kill cause an abortion. In fact, appellant must have merely
the victim but not necessarily to cause an abortion. intended to kill the victim but not necessarily to cause an
(People vs. Filomeno Salufrania, 1988) abortion.

Case: The evidence on record, therefore, establishes beyond

reasonable doubt that accused Filomeno Salufrania committed
(14) People vs. Filomeno Salufrania and should be held liable for the complex crime of parricide
G.R. No. L-50884 – March 30, 1988 with unintentional abortion. The abortion, in this case, was
Padilla, J. caused by the same violence that caused the death of
Marciana Abuyo, such violence being voluntarily exerted by the
Facts: On December 3, 1974, accused Filomeno Salufrania herein accused upon his victim.
and wife Marciana Abuyo (deceased and pregnant at the time
of the killing) quarrelled in their small house at a far away sitio It has also been clearly established (a) that Marciana Abuyo
in barrio Tigbinan, Labo, Camarines Norte. During said quarrel, was seven (7) to eight (8) months pregnant when she was
Filomeno box his pregnant wife Marciana on the stomach and, killed; (b) that violence was voluntarily exerted upon her by
once fallen on the floor, strangled her to death. Blood ooze her husband accused; and (c) that, as a result of said violence,
Marciana Abuyo died together with the foetus in her womb.

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-182
Article 48 of the Revised Penal Code states that the accused Article 260. Responsibility of Participants in a Duel
should be punished with the penalty corresponding to the
more serious came of parricide, to be imposed in its maximum Acts punished:
period which is death. However, by reason of the 1987 1. Killing one‘s adversary in a duel;
Constitution which has abolished the death penalty, appellant 2. Inflicting upon such adversary physical injuries;
should be sentenced to suffer the penalty of reclusion 3. Making a combat although no physical injuries have
perpetua. been inflicted.

Final ruling: The judgment appealed from is AFFIRMED. Persons liable:

1. The person who killed or inflicted physical injuries
(15) People vs. Jesus Paycana, Jr., supra upon his adversary, or both combatants in any other case,
as principals.
Doctrine: As distinguished from infanticide, the elements of 2. The seconds, as accomplices.
unintentional abortion are as follows: (1) that there is a
pregnant woman; (2) that violence is used upon such pregnant Notes:
woman without intending an abortion; (3) that the violence is  A duel may be defined as a formal or regular combat
intentionally exerted; and (4) that as a result of the violence previously consented to by two parties in the
the fetus dies, either in the womb or after having been presence of two or more seconds of lawful age on
expelled therefrom. In the crime of infanticide, it is necessary each side, who make the selection of arms and fix all
that the child be born alive and be viable, that is, capable of the other conditions of the fight to settle some
independent existence. However, even if the child who was antecedent quarrel.
expelled prematurely and deliberately were alive at birth, the
offense is abortion due to the fact that a fetus with an  If these are not the conditions of the fight, it is not a
intrauterine life of 6 months is not viable. In the present case, duel in the sense contemplated in the Revised Penal
the unborn fetus was also killed when the appellant stabbed Code. It will be a quarrel and anyone who killed the
Lilybeth several times. other will be liable for homicide or murder, as the
case may be.
12. Abortion practiced by the woman herself or by her
parents (Art. 258) 15. Challenging to a duel (Art. 261)
Acts punished:
Elements: 1. Challenging another to a duel;
1. There is a pregnant woman who has suffered an 2. Inciting another to give or accept a challenge to a
abortion; duel;
2. The abortion is intended; 3. Scoffing at or decrying another publicly for having
3. Abortion is caused by – refused to accept a challenge to fight a duel.
a. The pregnant woman herself;
b. Any other person, with her consent; or B. Physical Injuries
c. Any of her parents, with her consent for the
purpose of concealing her dishonor. 16. Mutilation (Art. 262)
17. Serious physical injuries (Art. 263)
13. Abortion practiced by a physician or midwife and 18. Administering injurious substances or beverages (Art. 264)
dispensing of abortives (Art. 259) 19. Less serious physical injuries (Art. 265)
20. Slight physical injuries and maltreatment (Art. 266)
Elements:
1. There is a pregnant woman who has suffered an C. Rape
abortion;
2. The abortion is intended; 21. Rape (Art. 266-A to 266-D)
3. Offender, who must be a physician or midwife,
caused or assisted in causing the abortion;
4. Said physician or midwife took advantage of his or
her scientific knowledge or skill. CHAPTER TWO : PHYSICAL INJURIES

Note: CRIMES:
 If the abortion is produced by a physician to save the 1.Mutilation (Art 262)
life of the mother, there is no liability. This is known
2. Serious Physical Injuries (Art 263)
as a therapeutic abortion. But abortion without
medical necessity to warrant it is punishable even 3. Administering injurious substance or beverages (Art 264)
with the consent of the woman or her husband. 4. Less serious physical injuries (Art. 265)
5. Slight physical injuries and maltreatment (Art. 266)
Duel

14. Duel (Art. 260) Physical Injuries vs. Attempted or Frustrated homicide

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-183
 ATTEMPTED OR 2. by beating
FRUSTRATED HOMICIDE 3. by assaulting
PHYSICAL 4. by administering injurious substance
INJURIES
The offender Attempted homicide may be SERIOUS PHYSICAL INJURIES:
inflicts physical committed, even if no physical 1. When the injured person becomes insane, imbecile,
injuries. injuries are inflicted. impotent or blind in consequence of the physical injuries
Offender has no The offender has an intent to kill inflicted.
intent to kill the the offended party. 2. When the injured person
offended party a) loses the use of speech or the power to hear or to
smell, or loses an eye, a hand, a foot, an arm, or a
leg.
ART. 262 – MUTILATION b) loses the use of any such member, or
Mutilation – means the lopping or the clipping of some part of c) becomes incapacitated for the work in which he was
the body. therefore habitually engaged, in consequence of the
physical injuries inflicted.
3. When the person injured
TWO KINDS:
a) becomes deformed, or
1. By intentionally mutilating another by depriving him, either
b) loses any other member of his body, or
totally or partially, of some essential organ for
c) loses the use thereof, or
reproduction. (CASTRATION)
d) becomes ill or incapacitated for the performance of
 penalty – reclusion temporal to reclusion
the work in which he was habitually engaged for
perpetua
more than 90 days, in consequence of the physical
injuries inflicted.
ELEMENTS:
a. That there be castration, that is, mutilation of
organs necessary for generation, such as penis or 4. When the injured person becomes ill or incapacitated for
ovarium. labor for more than 30 days (but must not be more than
b. That the mutilation is caused purposely and 90 days), as a result of the physical injuries inflicted.
deliberately, that is, to deprive the offended
party of some essential organ for reproduction.  There must not be intent to kill, otherwise the crime would
be homicide or murder as the case maybe.
2. By intentionally making other mutilation, that is, by
lopping or clipping off any part of the body of the
offended party, other than the essential organ for REQUISITES OF DEFORMITY
reproduction, to deprive him of that part of the body. 1. Physical ugliness
(MAYHEM) 2. Permanent and definite abnormality
 penalty – prision mayor in its medium and 3. Must be conspicuous and visible
maximum periods)
 Medical Attendance is not important in serious physical
injuries
 Penalty when the victim of other intentional mutilation (art
262,par 2) is under 12 years old is reclusion perpetua QUALIFYING CIRCUMSTANCES:
(Sec. 10, RA 7610) 1. Offense committed against persons enumerated in the
 Offender must have the intention to deprive the offended crime of parricide.
party of a part of his body, otherwise it will be considered 2. With the attendance of circumstance which qualify the
physical injuries falling under Art. 263, par 1 (offended crime to murder.
party becoming impotent) or par 2 (loss of hand, foot,
arm or leg) as the case maybe.  The ―qualified penalties‖ are not applicable to parents who
 Mutilation is always intentional inflict serious physical injuries upon their children by
 Cruelty [art. 14, (21)] is inherent and absorbed in excessive chastisement.
mutilation.

ART. 263 – SERIOUS PHYSICAL INJURIES.

How Committed: ART. 264 – ADMINISTERING INJURIOUS SUBSTANCE
1. by wounding OR BEVERAGES.
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-184
ELEMENTS: ill /Incapacity from 31 to 90 days
1. That the offender inflicted upon another any serious labor
physical injury. LESS Incapacity from 10 to 30 days
2. That it was done by knowingly administering to him any SERIOUS labor / medical
injurious substances or beverages or by taking advantage attendance
of his weakness of mind or credulity. SLIGHT Incapacity from 1-9 days
3. That he had no intent to kill. labor / medical
attendance

ART. 265 – LESS SERIOUS PHYSICAL INJURIES.

Chapter Three: Rape (Arts 266-A – 266-D)
ELEMENTS:
1. The offended party is incapacitated for labor for 10 days
or more but not more than 30 days, or needs attendance THE ANTI-RAPE LAW (RA 8353)
for the same period. ART. 266-A.
2. The physical injuries must not be those described in the
preceding articles. Classification of Rape
1. Rape by Sexual Intercourse under Art. 335
QUALIFIED LESS SERIOUS PHYSICAL INJURIES: 2. Sexual Assault under R.A. 8353
1. A fine not exceeding P500, in addition to arresto mayor,
shall be imposed for less serious physical injuries when-
a) there is manifest intent to insult or offend the injured How rape is committed:
person, or 1. RAPE BY SEXUAL INTERCOURSE
b) there are circumstances adding ignominy to the  By a man who shall have carnal knowledge of a
offense. woman under any of the following circumstances:
2. A higher penalty is imposed when the victim is either- a) Through force, threat or intimidation
a) The offender‘s parents, ascendants, guardians, b) When the offended party is deprived of reason or
curators or teachers; or otherwise unconscious
b) Persons of rank or persons in authority, provided the c) By means of fraudulent machinations or grave abuse
crime is not direct assault. of authority
d) When the offended party is under twelve (12) years
ART. 266. SLIGHT PHYSICAL INJURIES AND of age or is demented, even though none of the
MALTREATMENT circumstances mentioned above be present
PUNISHABLE ACTS:
1. Physical injuries which incapacitated the offended party 2. RAPE through Sexual Assault
from one to nine days, or required medical attendance Elements:
during the same period
2. Physical injuries which did not prevent the offended a. The offender commits an act of sexual
party from engaging in his habitual work or which did not assault:
require medical attendance b. That the sexual assault is committed by any
3. Ill-treatment of another by deed without causing any of the following means:
injury i. by inserting his penis into another
person‘s mouth or anal orifice; or
ii. By inserting any instrument or
 When there is no evidence of actual injury, it is only slight object into the genital or anal
physical injuries. orifice of another person; and
c. That the act of sexual assault is
accomplished under any circumstances
Distinguished Serious, Less Serious and Slight Physical enumerated under the first act of committing
Injuries rape.
INJURY DAYS

GRAVITY  Under R.A. 8353, the crime of rape can now be

SERIOUS Incapacity from Permanent committed by a male or a female.
habitual work
ill /Incapacity from Over 90 days Acts of Execution:
habitual work
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-185
CONSUMATED RAPE disease and the virus or disease is transmitted to the
For the consummation of the crime of rape, it is not essential victim.
that there be a complete penetration of the female organ; 7. When committed by any member of the AFP or
neither it is essential that there be a rupture of the hymen. It para-military units thereof of the PNP or any law
is enough that the labia of the female organ was penetrated. enforcement agency or penal institution, when the
The slightest penetration of the labia consummates the crime offender took advantage of his position to facilitate
of rape. The absence of spermatozoa does not disprove the the commission of the crime.
consummation of rape, the important consideration being, not 8. When by reason or on the occasion of the rape, the
the emission of semen, but penetration. victim has suffered permanent physical mutilation
or disability.
THERE IS NO CRIME OF FRUSTRATED RAPE 9. When the offender knew the pregnancy of the
There is no crime of frustrated rape. The moment the offended party at the time of the commission of the
offender has carnal knowledge, he actually attains that his crime.
purpose and from that moment also, all the essential elements 10. When the offender knew the mental disability,
of rape have been accomplished. Nothing more is left to be emotional disorder and/or physical disability of the
done by the offender, because he has performed the last act offended party at the time of the commission of the crime.
necessary to produce the crime. Thus, the felony is 11. When by reason or on occasion of the rape, homicide is
consummated. committed. (this is a special complex crime).
To take into consideration is the provision under Art. 266-B,
the word ―frustrated‖ has been deleted. Thus, the phrase now STATUTORY RAPE - Sexual intercourse with a girl below 12
reads: ―when the rape is attempted and a homicide is years old
committed by reason or on the occasion thereof xxx.‖ When the woman is under 12 years of age or is demented,
sexual intercourse with her is always rape, even if the sexual
ATTEMPTED RAPE intercourse was with her consent. This is because the law
Attempted rape was committed by the accused after raising presumes that the victim, on account of her tender age, does
the dress of the woman then asleep and placing himself on top not and cannot have a will of her own.
of her, and when the woman was awakened the accused
threatened her with a knife, but because of her continued Sweetheart theory in rape
shouting and offering of resistance, a neighbour came to her As held in People v. Cabanilla, the sweetheart defense is an
rescue. (People v Tayaba, 62 Phil 559) affirmative defense that must be supported by convincing
proof. Having an illicit affair does not rule out rape as it does
ART. 266-B not necessarily mean that consent was present. A love affair
QUALIFIED RAPE: punishable by death does not justify rape for a man does not have an unbridled
(pursuant to RA 9346, penalty of reclusion perpetua shall be license to subject his beloved to his carnal desires against her
imposed without eligibility of parole shall be imposed in lieu of will (People v. Cias, G.R. No. 194379, June 1, 2011).
death)
Rape shield rule
1. When the victim is under 18 years of age and the The character of the woman is immaterial in rape. It is no
offender is a parent, ascendant, step-parent, guardian, defense that the woman is of unchaste character, provided the
relative by consanguinity or affinity within the third civil illicit relations were committed with force and violence.
degree, or the common law spouse of the parent of the
victim.
2. When the victim is under the custody of the police or ART. 266-C
military authorities or any law enforcement or penal EFFECT OF PARDON
institution.
3. When the rape is committed in full view of the EFFECTS OF PARDON
spouse, parent, or any of the children or other 1. The subsequent valid marriage between the offender and
relatives within the third civil degree of consanguinity. the offended party shall extinguish criminal liability (only
4. When the victim is a religious engaged in legitimate as to the husband)
religious vocation or calling and is personally known to 2. The subsequent forgiveness of the wife to the legal
be such by the offender before or at the time of the husband shall extinguish the criminal action or the
commission of the crime. penalty.
5. When the victim is a child below 7 years old.
6. When the offender knows that he is afflicted with PARDON PRINCIPLE is not applicable to accomplices,
HIV/AIDS or any other sexually transmissible accessories and multiple rape.

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-186
 Since rape is now a crime against persons, marriage F: The victim of the crime was a child of 3 years and 11
extinguishes the penal action only as to the principal, i.e. the months old and the evidence is conclusive that the defendant
husband, but not as to the accomplices and accessories. endeavored to have carnal intercourse with her, but there may
be some doubt whether he succeeded in penetrating the
vagina before being disturbed by the timely intervention of the
ART. 266-D mother and the sister of the child. The physician who
PRESUMPTIONS examined the genital organ of the child a few hours after the
commission of the crime found a slight inflammation of the
EVIDENCE WHICH MAY BE ACCEPTED IN THE
exterior parts of the organ, indicating that an effort had been
PROSECUTION OF RAPE:
made to enter the vagina, but in testifying before the court he
1. Any physical overt act manifesting resistance against the
expressed doubts as to whether the entry had been effected.
act of rape in any degree from the offended party; or
2. Where the offended party is so situated as to render
Frustrated rape [NO LONGER EXISTING UNDER PHILIPPINE
him/her incapable of giving his consent
LAW]

CASES:
 There being no conclusive evidence of penetration of
PP vs. Salinas, G.R. No. 107204, May 6, 1994 the genital organ of the offended party, the
defendant is entitled to the benefit of the doubt and
Slightest penetration constitutes rape can only be found guilty of frustrated rape, but in
In rape cases, there are no half measures or even quarter view of the fact that he was living in the house of the
measures nor is their gravity graduated by the inches of entry. parents of the child as their guest, the aggravating
Partial penile penetration is as serious as full penetration; the circumstance of abuse of confidence existed and the
rape is deemed consummated in either case. In a manner of penalty must therefore be imposed in its maximum
speaking, bombardment of the drawbridge is invasion enough degree.
even if the troops do not succeed in entering the castle.
PP vs. Orita, G.R. No. 88724, April 3, 1990
Credibility of victim‘s testimony
At any rate, there is hardly any doubt about the truthfulness F: The trial court convicted the accused of frustrated rape
and reliability of Irene's initial testimony in the trial court which
we find to be positive, credible and convincing. To be sure, she There is no crime of frustrated rape
would not have accused her own father of a serious offense
like rape had she really not been aggrieved. Likewise, a rape
victim's testimony against her father is entitled to much  Clearly, in the crime of rape, from the moment the
credibility since respect for elders is deeply ingrained in Filipino offender has carnal knowledge of his victim he
children and is even recognized by law. actually attains his purpose and, from that moment
also all the essential elements of the offense have
been accomplished. Nothing more is left to be done
by the offender, because he has performed the last
PPI vs. Hernandez, G.R. No. L-23916, October 14, 1925 act necessary to produce the crime. Thus, the felony
F: 70-year old man raped the 9-year old granddaughter of his is consummated. In a long line of cases, We have set
wife the uniform rule that for the consummation of rape,
perfect penetration is not essential. Any penetration
Rupture of hymen or laceration of vagina – not indispensable of the female organ by the male organ is sufficient.
to convict Entry of the labia or lips of the female organ, without
rupture of the hymen or laceration of the vagina is
sufficient to warrant conviction. Necessarily, rape is
 xxx [It] has been held that entry of the labia or lips of attempted if there is no penetration of the female
the female organ, merely, without rupture of the organ because not all acts of execution was
hymen or laceration of the vagina, is sufficient to performed. The offender merely commenced the
warrant conviction of the consummated crime of commission of a felony directly by overt acts. Taking
rape. into account the nature, elements and manner of
execution of the crime of rape and jurisprudence on
PPI vs. Erinia, G.R. No. L-26298, January 20, 1927 the matter, it is hardly conceivable how the frustrated
[ABANDONED] stage in rape can ever be committed.

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-187
  Of course, We are aware of our earlier the person accused, though innocent, to disprove it;
pronouncement in the case of People vs. Eriña (1927) (2) In view of the intrinsic nature of the crime of rape
where We found the offender guilty of frustrated rape where two persons are usually involved, the
there being no conclusive evidence of penetration of testimony of the complainant must be scrutinized with
the genital organ of the offended party. However, it extreme caution; and (3) The evidence for the
appears that this is a ―stray‖ decision inasmuch prosecution must stand or fall on its own merits, and
as it has not been reiterated in Our subsequent cannot be allowed to draw strength from the
decisions. Likewise, We are aware of Article 335 of weakness of the evidence for the defense. (People vs.
the Revised Penal Code, as amended by Republic Act Quintal [1983])
No. 2632 (dated September 12, 1960) and Republic
Act No. 4111 (dated March 29, 1965) which provides, Additionally, we have to take note that in this case,
in its penultimate paragraph, for the penalty of death the judge who heard the evidence for the prosecution
when the rape is attempted or frustrated and a is not the same judge who decided the case. xxx
homicide is committed by reason or on the occasion xxx xxx Even as this Court has
thereof. We are of the opinion that this particular consistently been guided by the precept that findings
provision on frustrated rape is a dead provision. The of trial courts on credibility of witnesses are accorded
Eriña case, supra, might have prompted the law- great weight and must not be disturbed as it was the
making body to include the crime of frustrated rape in trial judge who had the opportunity to observe the
the amendments introduced by said laws. demeanor of the witnesses while they were testifying,
this case should be an exception in view of the fact
PP vs. Campuhan, GR 129433, March 20, 2000 that the judge who decided the case is NOT the same
judge who heard the evidence. (See People vs.
Mere touching of the pudendum does not consummate rape Escalante [1984]) Thus, the Court should all the more
exercise utmost care in evaluating the evidence
 Judicial depiction of consummated rape has not been presented in the instant case so as to render justice
confined to the oft-quoted ―touching of the female not only to the accused, but also to the complainant
organ,‖ but has also progressed into being described and the State as well.
as ―the introduction of the male organ into the labia
of the pudendum,‖ or ―the bombardment of the
drawbridge.‖ But, to our mind, the case at bar merely
constitutes a ―shelling of the castle of orgasmic  Covering the mouth of another with one's own lips is
potency,‖ or as earlier stated, a ―strafing of the certainly not an effective way of preventing the
citadel of passion.‖ former from shouting. Moreover, for a rapist to cover
 A grazing of the surface of the female organ or the mouth of his victim with his own lips is to invite
touching the mons pubis of the pudendum is not the danger of being bitter by the latter. Yet,
sufficient to constitute consummated rape. Absent Macaranas does not seem to have taken the
any showing of the slightest penetration of the female opportunity to ward off her assailant. It has been said
organ, i.e., touching of either labia of the pudendum that a ―woman's most precious asset is the purity of
by the penis, there can be no consummated rape; at her womanhood. She will resist to the last ounce of
most, it can only be attempted rape, if not acts of her strength any attempt to defile it.‖ (People vs.
lasciviousness. Tapao [1981]) It seems more likely that, as appellant
claims, they were kissing each other as they were
PP vs. Eduardo Antonio y Villapaña, G.R. No. L-53984, engaged in the sexual act.
May 5, 1988
PP vs. Dulay, G.R. No. 144344 to 68, July 23, 2002
F: Alleged victim says she was raped, while the accused insists
there was consent F: Twenty (25) Informations, each providing a different date of
commission of the offense, indicted accused for having sexual
Principles in reviewing rape cases intercourse with his daughter against her will

Presence of resistance = lack of consent; resistance in any

 There are three (3) settled principles to guide an degree is admissible; neither tenacious resistance nor
appellate court in reviewing the evidence in rape determined and persistent physical struggle is necessary to
cases: (1) An accusation for rape can be made with prove lack of consent
facility; it is difficult to prove it but more difficult for

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-188
 The traditional concept of rape is that carnal gathered the guts to refuse her father's immoral
knowledge is gained against or without the consent of advances. True enough, accused-appellant beat her
the victim. If the rape is made by force, violence or and her mother, who was then even carrying the
intimidation, it is self-evident that it was made against newborn baby in her arms.
or without the victim's consent. To prove lack of
consent, the law requires resistance by the victim. PP vs. Jumawan, G.R. No. 187495, April 21, 2014
R.A. No. 8353 specifies the kind of resistance and its
proof, viz: F: Husband forced himself into his wife

―Article 266-D. Presumptions - Any physical The marital exemption rule (Lord Hale's notion of an
overt act manifesting resistance against the irrevocable implied consent by a married woman) is not
act of rape in any degree from the offended recognized by RA 8353
party, or where the offended party is so
situated as to render her/him incapable of  Husbands do not have property rights over their
giving valid consent, may be accepted as wives‘ bodies. Sexual intercourse, albeit within the
evidence in the prosecution of the acts realm of marriage, if not consensual, is rape. This is
punished under Article 266-A.‖ the clear State policy expressly legislated in Section
266-A of the Revised Penal Code (RPC), as amended
by Republic Act (R.A.) No. 8353 or the Anti-Rape Law
Any physical overt act manifesting resistance of 1997.
against the rape in any degree from the victim
is admissible as evidence of lack of consent.
Tenacious resistance, however, is not required.  RA 8353 reclassified rape as a crime against person
Neither is a determined and persistent physical and removed it from the ambit of crimes against
struggle on the part of the victim necessary. chastity. More particular to the present case, and
perhaps the law's most progressive proviso is the 2nd
paragraph of Section 2 thereof recognizing the reality
of marital rape and criminalizing its perpetration, viz:
 At the Bicameral Conference Committee Meeting on ―Article 266-C. Effect of Pardon. - The
the disagreeing provisions of S.B. No. 950 and H.B. subsequent valid marriage between the
No. 6265, the forerunners of R.A. No. 8353, the offended party shall extinguish the criminal
legislators agreed that Article 266-D is intended to action or the penalty imposed.
―soften the jurisprudence of the 1970's" when In case it is the legal husband who is the
resistance to rape was required to be offender, the subsequent forgiveness by the
tenacious. The lawmakers took note of the fact that wife as the offended party shall extinguish
rape victims cannot mount a physical struggle in the criminal action or the penalty: Provided,
cases where they were gripped by overpowering fear That the crime shall not be
or subjugated by moral authority. Article 266-D extinguished or the penalty shall not be
tempered the case law requirement of physical abated if the marriage is void ab initio.‖
struggle by the victim with the victim's fear of the
rapist or incapacity to give valid consent. Thus, the
law now provides that resistance may be proved Read together with Section 1 of the law, which
by any physical overt act in any degree from unqualifiedly uses the term ―man‖ in defining rape, it
the offended party. is unmistakable that R.A. No. 8353 penalizes the
crime without regard to the rapist's legal relationship
 In all the twenty-five (25) incidents, there is no doubt with his victim, thus:
that accused-appellant forced his daughter to submit
to his carnal desires. His daughter bore everything ―Article 266-A. Rape: When And How
silently, terrorized by the thought that if she struggled Committed. - Rape is committed:
tenaciously, her father would get violent. She also
wanted to save her then pregnant mother from her 1) By a man who shall have carnal
father's wrath. From experience, she knew that knowledge of a woman under any of the
whenever accused-appellant got angry, he would kick following circumstances: xxx xxx
everyone in the house, bring out his samurai sword xxx.‖
and threaten to kill all of them. It was only four
months later, after Lilia gave birth, that [the victim]
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-189
  The explicit intent to outlaw marital rape is deducible
from the records of the deliberations of the 10th Ricalde vs. PP, G.R. No. 211002, January 21, 2015.
Congress on the law's progenitors, House Bill No. F: Penis allegedly inserted into the anus of a 10-year old boy.
6265 and Senate Bill No. 650. In spite of qualms on
tagging the crime as ―marital rape‖ due to Men can become victims of rape
conservative Filipino impressions on marriage, the
consensus of our lawmakers was clearly to include  Rape under the second paragraph of Article 266-A is
and penalize marital rape under the general definition also known as ―instrument or object rape,‖ ―gender-
of ―rape.‖ free rape,‖ or ―homosexual rape.‖ The gravamen of
rape through sexual assault is ―the insertion of the
 The paradigm shift on marital rape in the Philippine penis into another person‘s mouth or anal orifice, or
jurisdiction is further affirmed by R.A. No. 9262, any instrument or object, into another person‘s
which regards rape within marriage as a form of genital or anal orifice.‖
sexual violence that may be committed by a man
against his wife within or outside the family abode.,  In People vs. Soria (2012), this court discussed that a
victim need not identify what was inserted into his or
her genital or anal orifice for the court to find that
PP vs. Chingh, G.R. No. 178323, March 16, 2011 rape through sexual assault was committed.
F: Allegedly inserting his fingers and, afterwards, his penis in
10-year old girl‘s vagina.  People vs. Bonaagua (2011) considers a woman‘s
private organ since most if not all existing
RA 7610 (1992) is still applicable despite the effectivity of RA jurisprudence on rape involves a woman victim.
8353 (October 22, 1997) Nevertheless, this interpretation can apply by analogy
when the victim is a man in that the slightest
 It is undisputed that at the time of the commission of penetration to the victim’s anal orifice
the sexual abuse, VVV was ten (10) years old. This consummates the crime of rape through sexual
calls for the application of R.A. No. 7610, or The assault.
Special Protection of Children Against Child Abuse,
Exploitation and Discrimination Act. x x x Paragraph The gravamen of the crime is the violation of the
(b) punishes sexual intercourse or lascivious conduct victim‘s dignity. The degree of penetration is not
not only with a child exploited in prostitution, but also important. Rape is an ―assault on human dignity.‖
with a child subjected to other sexual abuses. It
covers not only a situation where a child is abused for
profit, but also where one through coercion, Rape of a child is child abuse
intimidation or influence engages in sexual
 In enacting Republic Act No. 7610, the legislature
intercourse or lascivious conduct with a child.
intended to impose a higher penalty when the victim
is a child.
 The Court is not unmindful to the fact that the
accused who commits acts of lasciviousness under
 The fact that XXX was only 10 years old when the
Article 366, in relation to Section 5 (b), Article III of
incident happened was established by his birth
R.A. No. 7610, suffers the more severe penalty of
certificate, and this was admitted by the defense. His
reclusion temporal in its medium period than the one
age of 10 years old was alleged in the Information.
who commits Rape Through Sexual Assault, which is
The higher penalty under Republic Act No. 7610, as
merely punishable by prision mayor. This is
discussed in People vs. Chingh (2011), applies in this
undeniably unfair to the child victim. To be sure, it
case.
was not the intention of the framers of R.A. No. 8353
to have disallowed the applicability of R.A. No. 7610
 Having sex with a 10-year-old is child abuse and is
to sexual abuses committed to children. Despite the
punished by a special law (Republic Act No. 7610). It
passage of R.A. No. 8353, R.A. No. 7610 is still good
is a progression from the Revised Penal Code to
law, which must be applied when the victims are
provide greater protection for children. Justice
children or those persons below eighteen (18) years
Velasco suggests that this is not so. He anchors his
of age or those over but are unable to fully take care
view on his interpretation that Republic Act No. 7610
of themselves or protect themselves from abuse,
requires a showing that apart from the actual coerced
neglect, cruelty, exploitation or discrimination
sexual act on the 10-year-old, the child must also be
because of a physical or mental disability or condition.
exploited by prostitution or by other sexual acts. This
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-190
 view is inaccurate on grounds of verba legis and We have often conceded the difficulty of proving the
ratione legis. commission of rape when only the victim is left to testify on
the circumstances of its commission. The difficulty heightens
The first paragraph of Article III, Section 5 of and complicates when the crime is rape with homicide,
Republic Act No. 7610 clearly provides that ―children . because there may usually be no living witnesses if the rape
. . who . . . due to the coercion . . . of any adult . . . victim is herself killed. Yet, the situation is not always hopeless
indulge in sexual intercourse . . . are deemed to be for the State, for the Rules of Court also allows circumstantial
children exploited in prostitution and other sexual evidence to establish the commission of the crime as well as
abuse.‖ The label ―children exploited in . . . other the identity of the culprit. Direct evidence proves a fact in issue
sexual abuse‖ inheres in a child who has been the directly without any reasoning or inferences being drawn on
subject of coercion and sexual intercourse. the part of the factfinder; in contrast, circumstantial evidence
indirectly proves a fact in issue, such that the factfinder must
Thus, paragraph (b) refers to a specification only as draw an inference or reason from circumstantial evidence. To
to who is liable and the penalty to be imposed. The be clear, then, circumstantial evidence may be resorted to
person who engages in sexual intercourse with a child when to insist on direct testimony would ultimately lead to
already coerced is liable. setting a felon free.

 It does not make sense for the law not to consider Victim‘s testimony can be the sole basis for conviction
rape of a child as child abuse. The proposal of Justice Due to its intimate nature, rape is usually a crime bereft of
Velasco implies that there has to be other acts of a witnesses, and, more often than not, the victim is left to testify
sexual nature other than the rape itself that will for herself. Thus, in the resolution of rape cases, the victim‘s
characterize rape as child abuse. One count of rape is credibility becomes the primordial consideration. It is settled
not enough. Child abuse, in his view, is not yet that when the victim‘s testimony is straightforward, convincing,
present with one count of rape. and consistent with human nature and the normal course of
things, unflawed by any material or significant inconsistency, it
This is a dangerous calculus which borders on judicial passes the test of credibility, and the accused may be
insensitivity to the purpose of the law. If we adopt his convicted solely on the basis thereof.
view, it would amount to our collective official
sanction to the idea that a single act of rape is not PP vs. Dela Cerna, GR 136899-904, October 9, 2002
debilitating to a child. That a single act of rape is not
a tormenting memory that will sear into a child‘s When Art. 344, RPC is still applicable in rape cases
memory, frame his or her view of the world, rob him
or her of the trust that will enable him or her to have  It is worthy to note that the rape incidents in this
full and diverse meaningful interactions with other case occurred prior to the effectivity of RA 8353, "The
human beings. In my view, a single act of sexual Anti-Rape Law of 1997" which took effect on October
abuse to a child, by law, is already reprehensible. Our 22, 1997 and classified the crime of rape as a crime
society has expressed that this is conduct which against persons. Such being the case, we shall apply
should be punishable. The purpose and text of the the old law and treat the acts of rape herein
law already punish that single act as child abuse. committed as private crimes. Thus, their institution,
prosecution and extinction should still be governed by
 Rape is rape. Rape of a child is clearly, definitely, and Article 344 of the Revised Penal Code (RPC).
universally child abuse.

 It must be stressed that private complainant in this

case filed her complaint on May 16, 1997 and even
PP vs. Dela Cruz, GR 183091, June 19, 2013
testified against accused-appellant on March 25,
1998. On the other hand, she executed her affidavit
Nature of Rape with Homicide
of desistance only on July 3, 1998. Clearly, the
Appellant was charged and convicted of the complex crime of
pardon extended by the victim to her father was
rape with homicide. The felony of rape with homicide is a
made after the institution of the criminal action.
special complex crime, that is, two or more crimes that the law
Consequently, it cannot be a ground to dismiss the
treats as a single indivisible and unique offense for being the
action in these cases. The reason for this rule is that
product of a single criminal impulse.
the true aggrieved party in a criminal prosecution is
the People of the Philippines whose collective sense
of morality, decency and justice has been outraged.
Proving guilt through circumstantial evidence
In such a case, the offended party becomes merely a
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-191
 complaining witness. The complaint required by party would have positively stated that
Article 344 of the Revised Penal Code is but a intercourse took place unless it did actually take
condition precedent to the exercise by the proper place.‖
authorities of the power to prosecute the guilty
parties in the name of the People of the Philippines. This opinion borders on the fallacy of non
Such condition is imposed out of consideration for the sequitor. And while the factual setting back
offended woman and her family who might prefer to then would have been appropriate to say it is
suffer the outrage in silence rather than go through natural for a woman to be reluctant in
with the scandal of a public trial. Hence, once filed, disclosing a sexual assault; today, we simply
control of the prosecution is removed from the cannot be stuck to the Maria Clara stereotype
offended party's hands and any change of heart by of a demure and reserved Filipino woman. We,
the victim will not affect the state's right to vindicate should stay away from such mindset and
the atrocity committed against itself. accept the realities of a woman's dynamic role
in society today; she who has over the years
Credibility of rape victim‘s testimony transformed into a strong and confidently
intelligent and beautiful person, willing to fight
 At any rate, there is hardly any doubt about the for her rights.
truthfulness and reliability of Irene's initial testimony
in the trial court which we find to be positive, credible In this way, we can evaluate the testimony of a
and convincing. To be sure, she would not have private complainant of rape without gender bias or
accused her own father of a serious offense like rape cultural misconception. It is important to weed out
had she really not been aggrieved. Likewise, a rape these unnecessary notions because an accused may
victim's testimony against her father is entitled to be convicted solely on the testimony of the victim,
much credibility since respect for elders is deeply provided of course, that the testimony is credible,
ingrained in Filipino children and is even recognized natural, convincing, and consistent with human
by law. nature and the normal course of things. Thus, in
order for us to affirm a conviction for rape, we must
PP vs. Amarela and Racho, GR 225642, January 17, believe beyond reasonable doubt the version of
2018 events narrated by the victim.

The Women‘s Honor / Maria Clara Doctrine

 Although we cannot acquit Amarela solely based on
 More often than not, where the alleged victim an inconsistency, this instance already puts AAA's
survives to tell her story of sexual· depredation, rape credibility in question. Again, we must remember that
cases are solely decided based on the credibility of if we were to convict based solely on the lone
the testimony of the private complainant. In doing so, testimony of the victim, her testimony must be clear,
we have hinged on the impression that no young straightforward, convincing, and consistent with
Filipina of decent repute would publicly admit that she human experience. We must set a high standard
has been sexually abused, unless that is the truth, for in evaluating the credibility of the testimony of
it is her natural instinct to protect her honor. a victim who is not a minor and is mentally
However, this misconception, particularly in this day capable.
and age, not only puts the accused at an unfair
disadvantage, but creates a travesty of justice.

The ―women's honor‖ doctrine surfaced in our

jurisprudence sometime in 1960. In the case of
People vs. Tana, the Court affirmed the conviction of ANTI-HAZING LAW
three (3) armed robbers who took turns raping a R.A. No. 8049
person named Herminigilda Domingo. The Court,
speaking through Justice Alejo Labrador, said: HAZING – is an initiation rite or practice as a prerequisite for
admission into membership in a fraternity, sorority or
―It is a well-known fact that women, especially organization by placing the recruit, neophyte or applicant in
Filipinos, would not admit that they have been some embarrassing or humiliating situations such as forcing
abused unless that abuse had actually happened. him to do menial, silly, foolish, and similar activities or
This is due to their natural instinct to protect
their honor. We cannot believe that the offended
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-192
otherwise subjecting him to physical or psychological suffering
or injury. (Sec. 1)

Initiation Rites (Sec. 2)

 No hazing in any form or manner shall be allowed without
prior written notice to the school authorities seven (7) CASES:
days before the conduct of such initiation. DUNGO vs PEOPLE (G.R. No. 209464, 1 July 2015)
 The written notice shall indicate the period of the Facts:
initiation activities which shall not exceed three (3) On January 14, 2006, at Villa Novaliches, Brgy.
days and shall contain an undertaking that no physical Pansol, Calamba City, Laguna, the Alpha Phi Omega
violence shall be employed during the rites. Fraternity in conspiracy with more or less twenty
other members and officers conducted initiation rite.
Punishable acts: If the person subjected to hazing suffers MARLON VILLANUEVA y MEJILLA, a neophyte was
any physical injury or dies as a result thereof. subjected to physical harm.
After the initiation rites, accused Sibal inquired about
Persons Liable (Sec. 4) Villanueva's condition but he was ignored by Castillo.
He then called co-accused Dungo for help. After
1) Principals: Dungo arrived at the resort, they hailed a tricycle and
a. officers and members of the fraternity, sorority or brought Villanueva to JP Rizal Hospital. There, he
organization who actually participated in the infliction gave a false name to the security guard as he heard
of physical harm shall be liable as principals. that Dungo had done the same.
b. If the hazing is held in the home of one of the officers
or members of the fraternity, sorority or organization, RTC found Dungo and Sibal guilty of the crime of
the parents shall be liable as principals when they violating Section 4 of the Anti-Hazing Law and
have actual knowledge of the hazing conducted sentenced them to suffer the penalty of reclusion
therein but failed to prevent the same. perpetua.
c. The officers, former officers, or alumni of the
organization, group, fraternity or sorority who actually The CA ruled that the appeal of Dungo and Sibal was
planned the hazing although not present when the bereft of merit.
acts constituting the hazing were committed
d. fraternity or sorority's adviser who is present when Issue: Whether or not herein accused were guilty of
the acts constituting the hazing were committed and violation of R.A. No. 8049.
failed to take action to prevent the same from
occurring Ruling: Yes, they are guilty of violation of R.A. No.
8049.
Section 1 of R.A. No. 8049 defines hazing as an
2) Accomplice:
initiation rite or practice as a prerequisite for
a. The owner of the place where the hazing is
admission into membership in a fraternity, sorority or
conducted, when he has actual knowledge of the
organization by placing the recruit, neophyte or
hazing conducted therein but failed to take any action
applicant in some embarrassing or humiliating
to prevent the same from occurring.
situations such as forcing him to do menial, silly,
b. The school authorities including faculty members who
foolish and other similar tasks or activities or
consent to the hazing or who have actual knowledge
otherwise subjecting him to physical or psychological
thereof, but failed to take any action to prevent the
suffering or injury. From the said definition, the
same from occurring.
elements of the crime of hazing can be determined:
1. That there is an initiation rite or practice as a
prerequisite for admission into membership in a
 The presence of any person during the hazing is
fraternity, sorority or organization;
prima facie evidence of participation therein as a
2. That there must be a recruit, neophyte or applicant
principal unless he prevented the commission of
of the fraternity, sorority or organization; and
the prohibited acts.
3. That the recruit, neophyte or applicant is placed in
some embarrassing or humiliating situations such as
 The mitigating circumstance that there was no
forcing him to do menial, silly, foolish and other
intention to commit so grave a wrong shall not
similar tasks or activities or otherwise subjecting him
apply. (Sec. 4e)
to physical or psychological suffering or injury.

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-193
 the victim.
Classes of direct participants are: the first class of - Furthermore, RA8049 provides that the presence of any
principals would be the actual participants in the person during the hazing is a prima
hazing. If the person subjected to hazing or other facie evidence of participation as principal unless he prevented
forms of initiation rites suffers any physical injury or the commission of the
dies as a result thereof, the officers and members of punishable act.
the fraternity, sorority or organization who actually
participated in the infliction of physical harm shall be
liable as principals. The second class of principals
would be the officers, former officers, or alumni of the PEOPLE vs BAYABOS (G.R. No. 171222, 18 Feb 2015)
organization, group, fraternity or sorority who actually The failure by school authorities to take any action to prevent
planned the hazing. The third class of principals would the offenses as provided by
be the officers or members of an organization group, the law exposes them to criminal liability as accomplices in the
fraternity or sorority who knowingly cooperated in criminal acts. Thus, the institution and its officers cannot stand
carrying out the hazing by inducing the victim to be idly by in the face of patently criminal acts committed within
present thereat due to their indispensable cooperation their sphere of responsibility. They bear the commensurate
in the crime by inducing the victim to attend the duty to ensure that the crimes covered by the Anti-Hazing Law
hazing. The next class of principals would be the are not committed.
fraternity or sorority's adviser. The last class of
principals would be the parents of the officers or FACTS:
members of the fraternity, group, or organization. Fernando C. Balidoy, Jr. was admitted as a
probationary midshipman at the Philippine Merchant
Exceptionally, under R.A. No. 8049, the participation Marine Academy (PMMA). In order to reach active
of the offenders in the criminal conspiracy can be status, all new entrants were required to successfully
proven by the prima facie evidence due to their complete the mandatory ―Indoctrination and
presence during the hazing, unless they prevented Orientation Period,‖ which was set from 2 May to 1
the commission of the acts therein. June 2001. Balidoy died on 3 May 2001. PMMA were
criminally charged before the Sandiganbayan as
***************** accomplices to hazing under the Anti-Hazing Law.
-The SC ruled that Dungo and Sibal can be convicted of Before they were arraigned, the Sandiganbayan
violation of RA 8049 despite the lack quashed the Information against them on the basis of
of evidence in their direct participation. the dismissal of the criminal case against the principal
- The crime of hazing RA 8049 is a mala prohibita. The act of accused and, the failure to include in the Information
hazing itself is not inherently the material averments required by the Anti-Hazing
immoral, but the law deems the same to be against public Law.
policy and must be prohibited.
Accordingly, the existence of criminal intent is immaterial in Consequently, this petition was filed before this Court
the crime of hazing. Also, the questioning the Sandiganbayan‘s quashal of the
defense of good faith cannot be raised in its prosecution. Information.
- The argument of Dungo and Sibal that they were not
properly informed of the accusation ISSUE: May the dismissal of the criminal case of the
against them was also not accepted by the court. According to principal accused be invoked as a ground to dismiss
the Rules of Court, the the criminal case of the accomplices, some school
information need not use the exact language of the statute in authorities herein?
alleging the acts or omissions
complained of as constituting the offense. The test is whether RULING:
it enables a person of common No. That the case against those charged as
understanding to know the charge against him, and the court accomplices is not ipso facto dismissed in the absence
to render judgment properly. of trial of the purported principals; the dismissal of
-The court said that the act of inducing the victim to attend the the case against the latter; or even the latter‘s
initiation rite is necessarily acquittal, especially when the occurrence of the crime
part of a ―planned initiation rite.‖ Not only did they induce the has in fact been established.
victim, they also brought him
to the location. They fulfilled their role in the planned hazing In the case of school authorities and faculty members
rite which led to the death of who have had no direct participation in the act, they

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-194
 may nonetheless be charged as accomplices if it is dignity of Michael Ryan as a human being.
 
Hence, petitioner
shown that Rosaldes is guilty of the crime of child abuse punished under
(1) hazing, as established by the above elements, RA 7610.
occurred;
(2) the accused are school authorities or faculty
members; and DOMINGO VS. RAYALA
(3) they consented to or failed to take preventive Rayala committed sexual harassment. The law penalizing
action against hazing in spite actual knowledge sexual harassment in our jurisdiction is RA 7877. Section 3
thereof. thereof defines work-related sexual harassment.

First, the Court rejects the contention of respondents Even if we were to test Rayala‘s acts strictly by the standards
that PMMA should not be considered an organization. set in Section 3, RA 7877, he would still be administratively
Under the Anti-Hazing Law, the breadth of the term liable. It is true that this provision calls for a ―demand, request
organization includes – but is not limited to – groups, or requirement of a sexual favor.‖ But it is not necessary that
teams, fraternities, sororities, citizen army training the demand, request or requirement of a sexual favor be
corps, educational institutions, clubs, societies, articulated in a categorical oral or written statement. It may be
cooperatives, companies, partnerships, corporations, discerned, with equal certitude, from the acts of the offender.
the PNP, and the AFP. Holding and squeezing Domingo‘s shoulders, running his
fingers across her neck and tickling her ear, having
Attached to the Department of Transportation and inappropriate conversations with her, giving her money
Communications, the PMMA is a government-owned allegedly for school expenses with a promise of future
educational institution established for the primary privileges, and making statements with unmistakable sexual
purpose of producing efficient and well-trained overtones – all these acts of Rayala resound with deafening
merchant marine officers. Clearly, it is included in the clarity the unspoken request for a sexual favor.
term organization within the meaning of the law.
ATTY. SUSAN M. AQUINO VS. HON. ERNESTO D.
Nevertheless, the Court finds – albeit for a different ACOSTA
reason – that the Motion to Quash must be granted, Judge Acosta is not guilty of sexual harassment. He is
as the Information does not include all the material exonerated of the charges against him and is advised to be
facts constituting the crime of accomplice to hazing. more circumspect in his deportment.

Rationale: ―A mere casual
Failure to aver this crucial ingredient would prevent buss on the cheek is not a sexual conduct or favor and does
the successful prosecution of the criminal not fall within the purview of sexual harassment under Section
responsibility of the accused, either as principal or as 3 (a) R.A. No. 7877.
accomplice, for the crime of hazing.
"Clearly, under the foregoing provisions, the elements of
sexual harassment are as follows:
1) The employer, employee,
CASES in SEXUAL ASSAULT, RA9262 & RA 7610 manager, supervisor, agent of the employer, teacher,
instructor, professor, coach, trainor, or any other person has
FELINA ROSALDES V. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES authority, influence or moral ascendancy over another;
2) The
Petitioner Rosaldes is guilty of violation of RA 7610. Although authority, influence or moral ascendancy exists in a working
the petitioner, as a schoolteacher, could duly discipline Michael environment; 
3) The employer, employee, manager,
Ryan as her pupil, her infliction of the physical injuries on him
supervisor, agent of the employer, teacher, instructor,
was unnecessary, violent and excessive. The boy even fainted
professor, coach, or any other person having authority,
from the violence suffered at her hands.
 
In the crime charged
influence or moral ascendancy makes a demand, request or
against the petitioner, therefore, the maltreatment may consist requirement of a sexual favor.‖

Indeed, from the records on
of an act by deeds or by words that debases, degrades or
hand, there is no showing that respondent judge demanded,
demeans the intrinsic worth and dignity of a child as a human
requested or required any sexual favor from complainant in
being. The act need not be habitual. The physical pain
exchange for favorable compensation, terms, conditions,
experienced by the victim had been aggravated by an
promotion or privileges specified under Section 3 of R.A. 7877.
emotional trauma that caused him to stop going to school
Nor did he, by his actuations, violate the Canons of Judicial
altogether out of fear of the petitioner, compelling his parents
Ethics or the Code of Professional Responsibility.
to transfer him to another school where he had to adjust
again. Such established circumstances proved beyond
GARCIA V. DRILON
reasonable doubt that the petitioner was guilty of child abuse
The equal protection clause in our Constitution does not
by deeds that degraded and demeaned the intrinsic worth and
guarantee an absolute prohibition against classification. The
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-195
non-identical treatment of women and men under RA 9262 is
justified to put them on equal footing and to give substance to
the policy and aim of the state to ensure the equality of
women and men in light of the biological, historical, social, and
culturally endowed differences between men and women.

RA 9262, by affording special and exclusive protection to

women and children, who are vulnerable victims of domestic
violence, undoubtedly serves the important governmental
objectives of protecting human rights, insuring gender
equality, and empowering women. The gender-based
classification and the special remedies prescribed by said law
in favor of women and children are substantially related, in fact
essentially necessary, to achieve such objectives. Hence, said
Act survives the intermediate review or middle-tier judicial
scrutiny. The gender-based classification therein is therefore
not violative of the equal protection clause embodied in the
1987 Constitution.

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-196
 ART 266-A R.A. 9262 R.A. 7610 R.A. 7877

RAPE as amended by R.A. 8353 ANTI-VIOLENCE AGAINST Special Protection of Children against ANTI-SEXUAL HARASSMENT
WOMEN AND THEIR CHILDREN Child Abuse, Exploitation and
ACT Discrimination Act

Kinds of rape under RA 8353 Violence against women and Children refers to: Sexual harassment in RA 7877
1. The traditional concept under Art. 335 – their children refers to any act or a a. Persons below eighteen (18) years of age; happens when sexual favors are
carnal knowledge with a woman against series of acts committed by any or demanded, requested or otherwise
her will. The offended party is always a b. Those over but are unable to fully take
person against a woman who is his required of a person by another who
woman and the offender is always a man. care of themselves or protect themselves
wife, former wife, or against a woman is a teacher, employer, manager,
from abuse, neglect, cruelty, exploitation or
2. Sexual assault – committed with an with whom the person has or had a discrimination because of a physical or supervisor, trainer, coach, instructor,
instrument or an object or use of the penis sexual or dating relationship, or with mental disability or condition (Sec. 3(a), RA professor or has any form of
with penetration of the mouth or anal whom he has a common child, or 7610). authority, moral ascendancy or
orifice. The offended party or offender can against her child whether legitimate influence over the former. It doesn't
either be a man or a woman, that is, if the or illegitimate, within or without the matter if the request, demand or
woman or a man uses an instrument in the Child abuse - refers to the maltreatment,
family abode, which result in or is requirement was accepted or not.
anal orifice of a male, she or he can be whether habitual or not, of the child which
liable for rape. likely to result in physical, sexual, includes any of the following: Also, the person requiring sexual
psychological harm or suffering, or 1. Psychological and physical abuse, neglect, favors doesn't necessarily have to be
economic abuse including threats of cruelty, sexual abuse and emotional an immediate superior; and if the
such acts, battery, assault, coercion, maltreatment; offender is another employee, he
harassment or arbitrary deprivation of 2. Any act by deeds or words which debases, must belong to a position higher than
liberty (Sec. 3, RA 9262). degrades or demeans the intrinsic worth and the victim's. It could also be someone
dignity of a child as a human being;
in authority and the person being
3. Unreasonable deprivation of his basic
needs for survival, such as food and shelter; harassed is someone who needs the
or former's approval or actions.
Four (4) Acts included under
4. Failure to immediately give medical
Sec.3:
treatment to an injured child resulting in
1. Physical violence - refers to acts
serious impairment of his growth and
that include bodily or physical harm
development or in his permanent incapacity
2. Economic abuse - refers to acts
or death (Sec. 3(b), RA 7610).
that make or attempt to make a
woman financially dependent
Child prostitution
3. Psychological violence - Refers
Children, whether male or female, are
to acts or omissions causing or likely
deemed to be exploited in prostitution and
to cause mental or emotional
other sexual abuse when, for money, profit, Work, Education or Training–
suffering of the victim
or any other consideration or due to the related Sexual Harassment
4. Sexual violence - refers to an act
coercion or influence of any adult, syndicate
which is sexual in nature, committed
or group, they indulge in sexual intercourse –is committed by an employer,
against a woman or her child
or lascivious conduct.
employee, manager, supervisor,
agent of the employer, teacher,
instructor, professor, coach, trainor,
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-197
 or any other person who, having
authority, influence or moral
ascendancy over another in a work or
training or education environment,
RA 7610 recognizes the existence of a male
demands, requests or otherwise
prostitute as a victim and not an offender
requires any sexual favor from the
(Sec. 5).
other, regardless of whether the
demand, request or requirement for
submission is accepted by the object
of said Act. (sec. 3)

Punishable Acts
Rape through sexual intercourse (Art. The crime of violence against women 1. Child prostitution and other sexual abuse 1. In a work-related or employment
266-A [1], RPC) and their children is committed (Sec. 5); environment:
through any of the following acts: 2. Attempt to commit child prostitution (sec. a. The sexual favor is made as a
Any man having carnal knowledge of a 1. Causing physical harm to the 6); condition in the hiring or in the
woman: woman or her child. 3. Child trafficking (Sec. 7) employment, re-employment or
(a) by using force or intimidation; 2. Threatening to cause the woman 4. Attempt to commit child trafficking (sec. continued employment of said
(b) who is deprived of reason or otherwise or her child physical harm. 8) individual, or in granting said
unconscious; 3. Attempting to cause the woman or 5. Engagement of children in the worst forms individual favorable compensation,
(c) by means of fraudulent machination or her child physical harm. of child Labor (sec. 12-D) terms, conditions, promotions, or
grave abuse of authority, or 4. Placing the woman or her child in 6. Engagement of children in obscene privileges; or the refusal to grant
(d) who is under twelve years of age, even fear of imminent physical harm. publications and indecent shows (sec. 9) the sexual favor results in limiting,
though the above circumstances 5. Attempting to compel or 7. Other acts of neglect, abuse, cruelty or segregating or classifying the
mentioned are absent. compelling the woman or her child exploitation and other conditions employee which in a way would
to engage in conduct which the prejudicial to the child's development discriminate, deprive or diminish
woman or her child has the right (sec. 10) employment opportunities or
to desist from or conduct which 8. Employment of children as model in otherwise adversely affect said
the woman or her child has the Advertisement directly or indirectly employee (Quid Pro Quo Sexual
Rape through sexual assault (Art.
right to engage in, or attempting promoting alcoholic beverages, Harassment);
266-A [2], RPC)
to restrict or restricting the intoxicating drinks, tobacco, and its b. The above acts would impair the
woman's or her child's freedom of byproducts, gambling, or any form of employee‘s rights or privileges
movement or conduct by force or violence or pornography (sec. 14) under existing labor laws; or
a. Insertion of penis into another
person‘s mouth or anal orifice; or threat of force, physical or other 9. Discrimination of children of c. The above acts would result in
harm or threat of physical or other Indigenous Cultural Communities an intimidating, hostile, or offensive
b. Insertion of any instrument or object
harm, or intimidation directed (sec. 20) environment for the employee
into the genital or anal orifice, under (Hostile Environment Harassment).
against the woman or child. This
any of the circumstances in Art. 266-A shall include, but not limited to,
[1], RPC) the following acts committed with 2. In an education or training
the purpose or effect of environment sexual harassment is
controlling or restricting the employed:
woman's or her child's movement a. Against one who is under the
or conduct: care, custody or supervision of the
a. Threatening to deprive or offender;

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-198
 actually depriving the b. Against one whose education,
woman or her child of training, apprenticeship or tutorship
custody to her/his family is entrusted to the offender;
b. Depriving or threatening to c. When sexual favor is made a
deprive the woman or her condition to the giving of a passing
children of financial grade, or the granting of honors
support legally due her or and scholarships, or the payment of
her family, or deliberately a stipend, allowance or other
providing the woman's benefits, privileges, or
children insufficient considerations; or
financial support d. When sexual advances result in
c. Depriving or threatening to an intimidating, hostile or offensive
deprive the woman or her environment for the student,
child of a legal right trainee or apprentice.
d. Preventing the woman in
engaging in any legitimate
profession, occupation,
business or activity or
controlling the victim's own
money or properties, or
solely controlling the
conjugal or common
money, or properties

6. Inflicting or threatening to inflict

physical harm on oneself for the
purpose of controlling her actions
or decisions.

7. Causing or attempting to cause the

woman or her child to engage in
any sexual activity which does not
constitute rape, by force or threat
of force, physical harm, or
through intimidation directed
against the woman or her child or
her/his immediate family.

8. Engaging in purposeful, knowing,

or reckless conduct, personally or
through another that alarms or
causes substantial emotional or
psychological distress to the
woman or her child. This shall
include, but not be limited to, the
following acts:
a. Stalking or following the
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-199
 woman or her child in public
or private places
b. Peering in the window or
lingering outside the
residence of the woman or
her child
c. Entering or remaining in
the dwelling or on the
property of the woman or
her child against her/his will
d. Destroying the property
and personal belongings or
inflicting harm to animals or
pets of the woman or her
child
e. Engaging in any form of
harassment or violence;

9. Causing mental or emotional

anguish, public ridicule or humiliation
to the woman or her child, including,
but not limited to, repeated verbal
and emotional abuse, and denial of
financial support or custody of minor
children of access to the woman's
child/children (Sec. 5, RA 9262).

ELEMENTS

Elements of rape by a man who shall Elements of the crime of violence Elements of Sexual Abuse under Sec 5(a) Elements of sexual harassment are
have carnal knowledge of a woman against women through as follows:
1. Offender is a man; harassment are: 1. The accused engage in or
2. Offender had carnal knowledge of the 1. The offender has or had a sexual promote, facilitate or induce
woman; and or dating relationship with the child prostitution 1) The employer, employee,
3. Such act is accomplished under any of offended woman; manager, supervisor, agent of the
2. The is done through, but not limited
the following circumstances: 2. The offender, by himself or to the following means: employer, teacher, instructor,
a. Through force, threat or through another, commits an act or professor, coach, trainor, or any other
a. Acting as a procurer of a child
intimidation; series of acts of harassment against prostitute; person has authority, influence or
b. When the offended party is deprived the woman; and b. Inducing a person to be a client moral ascendancy over another;
of reason or is otherwise unconscious; 3. The harassment alarms or causes of a child prostitute by means of
c. By means of fraudulent machination substantial emotional or psychological written or oral advertisements or 2) The authority, influence or moral
or grave abuse of authority; or distress to her (Ang v. CA, G.R. No. other similar means; ascendancy exists in a working
d. When the offended party is under 182835, April 20, 2010). c. Taking advantage of influence or environment;
12 years of age or is demented, even relationship to procure a child as
though none of the above NOTE: A single act of harassment is prostitute;

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-200
 circumstances mentioned above be enough to convict an offender. d. Threatening or using violence 3) persons in #1 makes a demand,
present. Section 3(a) of RA 9262 punishes towards a child to engage him as a request or requirement of a sexual
―any act or series of acts‖ that prostitute; or favor.
Elements of rape by sexual assault e. Giving monetary consideration
constitutes violence against women. A
1. Offender commits an act of sexual goods or other pecuniary benefit to
assault; single act of harassment, which a child with intent to engage such
translates into violence, would be child in prostitution.
2. The act of sexual assault is committed enough. Punishing only violence that
by any of the following means: is repeatedly committed would license 3. The child is exploited or intended to
a. By inserting his penis into another isolated ones (Ang v. CA, G.R. No. be exploited in prostitution; and
person‘s mouth or anal orifice, or 182835, April 20, 2010). 4. The child, whether male or female,
b. By inserting any instrument or is below 18 years of age. (People vs
object into the genital or anal orifice of
Dulay, G.R. No. 193854, Sept 24,
another person
2012)
3. The act of sexual assault is
accomplished under any of the following
circumstances:
a. By using force or intimidation, or
b. When the woman is deprived of
reason or otherwise unconscious, or Elements of Sexual Abuse under Sec 5(b)
c. By means of fraudulent machination
or grave abused of authority, or 1. The accused commits the act of
d. When the woman is under 12 years sexual intercourse or lascivious
of age or demented. conduct;
2. The said act is performed with a
child exploited in prostitution or
subjected to other sexual abuse;
and
3. The child, whether male or female,
is below 18 years of age

As to Persons liable
Any person who commits any act or Persons liable for child prostitution In a work, education or training-
series of acts who is related to the 1. Those who engage in or promote, related environment Sexual
victim by reason of marriage, former facilitate or induce child prostitution Harassment may be committed by an:
which include, but are not limited to, the 1. Employer
marriage, or a sexual dating
following: 2. Manager
relationship. a. Acting as a procurer of a child 3. Supervisor
prostitute; 4. Agent of the Employer
b. Inducing a person to be a client of a 5. Teacher, instructor, professor
child prostitute by means of written or 6. Coach, trainer, or
oral advertisements or other similar 7. Any other person who, having

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-201
 means; authority, influence or moral
c. Taking advantage of influence or ascendancy over another in a work or
relationship to procure a child as training or education environment:
prostitute; a. Demands
d. Threatening or using violence towards b. Requests or
a child to engage him as a prostitute; or c. Requires any sexual favor from
e. Giving monetary consideration goods the other, regardless of whether
or other pecuniary benefit to a child with the demand, request or
intent to engage such child in requirement for submission is
prostitution. accepted by the object of R.A.
7877 (Sec. 3 R.A. 7877).

2. Those who commit the act of sexual

intercourse or lascivious conduct with a
child exploited in prostitution or subject to
other sexual abuse;

Provided, that when the victim is

under twelve (12) years of age, the
perpetrators shall be prosecuted
under Article 335, paragraph 3, for
rape and Article 336 of the Revised
Penal Code, for rape or lascivious
conduct, as the case may be; and

3. Those who derive profit or advantage

therefrom, whether as manager or owner
of the establishment where the prostitution
takes place, or of the sauna, disco, bar,
resort, place of entertainment or
establishment serving as a cover or which
engages in prostitution in addition to the
activity for which the license has been issued
to said establishment. (sec. 5)

Persons liable for other acts of neglect,

abuse, cruelty or exploitation and other
conditions prejudicial to the child's
development
1. Any person who shall commit any other
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-202
acts of child abuse, cruelty or exploitation or
to be responsible for other conditions
prejudicial to the child's development;

2. Any person who shall keep or have in

his company a minor, twelve (12) years
or under or who in ten (10) years or more
his junior, in any public or private place,
hotel, motel, beer joint, discotheque,
cabaret, pension house, sauna or massage
parlor, beach and/or other tourist resort or
similar places, Provided, That this provision
shall not apply to any person who is related
within the fourth degree of consanguinity or
affinity or any bond recognized by law, local
custom and tradition or acts in the
performance of a social, moral or legal duty;

3. Any person who shall induce, deliver or

offer a minor to any one prohibited by
this Act to keep or have in his company a
minor as provided in the preceding
paragraph;

4. Any person, owner, manager or one

entrusted with the operation of any
public or private place of
accommodation, whether for occupancy,
food, drink or otherwise, including residential
places, who allows any person to take along
with him to such place or places any minor
herein described; or

5. Any person who shall use, coerce, force

or intimidate a street child or any other
child to;
a. Beg or use begging as a means of living;
b. Act as conduit or middlemen in drug
trafficking or pushing; or
c. Conduct any illegal activities (Sec. 10, RA
7610)

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-203
 of 1948, and that the acts or two sets of acts that gave rise to
the crimes of adultery complained of in both cases constitute
TITLE X- CRIMES AGAINST PROPERTY one and the same offense, within the scope and meaning of
the constitutional provision that "No person shall be twice put
in jeopardy of punishment for the same offense.".
TITLE XI- CRIMES AGAINST CHASTITY
HELD:
"Adu
Chapter One ltery
Forcible Abduction Grave Coercion
is a
Article 333 – ADULTERY crim
In both cases e of
Persons Liable:
resul
1. The married woman who engages in sexual intercourse (1) There is violence or intimidation used by t
with a man not her husband; and the offender and
2. The man who, knowing of the marriage of the woman, not
has sexual intercourse with her. of
(2) The offended party is compelled to do tend
something against her will ency
Elements:
. It
1. That the woman is married; (3) There is lewd (3) There is no lewd is an
2. That she has sexual intercourse with a man not her design design, provided insta
husband; and that there is no ntan
3. That as regards the man with whom she has sexual deprivation of liberty eous
intercourse, he must know her to be married. for appreciable crim
length of time. e
CASES: whic
h is
People v. Zapata, G.R. No. L-3047, 16 May, 1951 consummated and exhausted or completed at the moment
of the carnal
FACTS: union. Therefore, each sexual intercourse constitutes a
A complaint for adultery was filed by Andres Bondoc against crime of adultery. There is
Guadalupe Zapata, his wife, and Dalmacio Bondoc, her no constitutional or legal provision which bars the filing of
paramour, for cohabiting and having repeated sexual as many complaints for
intercourse during the period from the year 1946 14 March adultery as there were adulterous acts committed, each
1947, the date of the filing of the complaint, Dalmacio Bondoc constituting one crime."
knowing his codefendant to be a married woman (criminal
case No. 426). The defendant wife entered the plea of guilty Another reason why a second complaint charging the
and was sentenced to suffer four months of arresto commission of adulterous acts not included in the first
mayor which penalty she served. In the same court, on 17 complaint does not constitute a violation of the double
September 1948, the offended husband filed another jeopardy clause of the constitution is that, if the second places
complaint for adulterous acts committed by his wife and her complaint the defendants twice in jeopardy of punishment for
paramour from 15 March 1947 to 17 September 1948, the date the same offense, the adultery committed by the male
of the filing of the second complaint (criminal case No. 735). defendant charged in the second complaint, should he be
On 21 February 1949, each of the defendants filed a motion to absolved from, or acquitted of, the first charge upon the
quash the complaint of the ground that they would be twice evidence that he did not know that his codefendant was a
put in jeopardy of punishment for the same offense. The trial married woman, would remain or go unpunished. The defense
court upheld the contention of the defendants and quashed set up by him against the first charge upon which he was
the second complaint. From the other sustaining the motions acquitted would no longer be available, because at the time of
to quash the prosecution has appealed. the commission of the crime charged in the second complaint,
he already knew that this defendant was a married woman and
The trial court held that the adulterous acts charged in the first he continued to have carnal knowledge of her.
and second complains must be deemed one continuous
offense, the defendants in both complaints being the same and
identical persons and the two sets of unlawful acts having United States v. Feliciano, G.R. No. 12724. August 10,
taken place continuously during the years 1946, 1947 and part
1917
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-204
 Margarita Feliciano, the accused, was married to the
FACTS: complainant Felix Atacador on January 15, 1911. She
Felix Atacador filed a complaint against his wife Margarita left her husband on February 15, 1916. During the
Feliciano and one Pedro Velasquez, charging them with the months of May, June, and a part of July of the same
crime of adultery. After a few witnesses had been called in the year, she lived in a rented house in Manila with Pedro
separate trial of Velasquez, on motion of the prosecution the Velasquez. The owner, who lived in the upper part of
case was dismissed. On the trial of Margarita Feliciano, she the same house, considered them to be man and
was found guilty and sentenced to three years six months and wife. A photograph shows their intimate relations. A
twenty-one days of prision correccional, with the costs. From witness testified to having seen the accused and
this sentence she has appealed, making four assignments of Velasquez in scant apparel and sleeping together. The
error. woman her paramour had the opportunity to satisfy
their adulterous inclination. We think that a finding to
1. One assignment of error is that the trial court should the elect that Velasquez and the accused had carnal
have dismissed the case against the accused in view relations is sufficiently in accord with the probabilities
of having dismissed the case against her coaccused of the case and the proof.
Velasquez. The argument that the charge of adultery,
necessarily under one complaint, is indivisible
impresses one strongly. PILAPIL vs. HON IBAY-SOMERA, G.R. No. 80116, June
30, 1989
―Where a man and a woman are charged in the same
FACTS:
complaint with adultery, and Petitioner Imelda Pilapil, a Filipino citizen, and private
on separate trial the case against the man is dismissed, respondent Erich Geiling, a German national, were married in
the acquittal of the man Germany. After about three and a half years of marriage, such
does not necessarily carry with it the acquittal of the connubial disharmony eventuated in Geiling initiating a divorce
woman. Thus, that under a proceeding against Pilapil in Germany. The Local Court,
Federal Republic of Germany, promulgated a decree of divorce
complaint for adultery the acquittal of the man does not
on the ground of failure of marriage of the spouses.
necessarily carry with it
More than five months after the issuance of the divorce
the acquittal of the woman because, among other decree, Geiling filed two complaints for adultery before the City
reasons, the man may not have Fiscal of Manila alleging in one that, while still married to said
known that the woman was married.‖ (U. S. v. Topino and Geiling, Pilapil ―had an affair with a certain William Chia.‖ The
Guzman [1916], 35 Phil., Assistant Fiscal, after the corresponding investigation,
901.) recommended the dismissal of the cases on the ground of
insufficiency of evidence. However, upon review, the
respondent city fiscal Victor approved a resolution directing the
2. Another assignment of error is that the husband was filing of 2 complaint for adultery against the petitioner. The
not competent to give testimony as to the pregnancy case entitled ―PP Philippines vs. Pilapil and Chia‖ was assigned
of the wife. to the court presided by the respondent judge Ibay-Somera.

As a general rule, the husband can testify against the

A motion to quash was filed in the same case which was
wife in an adultery case because while adultery is in
denied by the respondent. Pilapil filed this special civil action
one sense a public crime, it can only be prosecuted for certiorari and prohibition, with a prayer for a TRO, seeking
with a few exceptions on the complaint of the the annulment of the order of the lower court denying her
aggrieved party. motion to quash.

3. The other assignments of error go to the merits of the

As cogently argued by Pilapil, Article 344 of the RPC thus
case. The nature of the crime of adultery is such that
presupposes that the marital relationship is still subsisting at
it will not be often when it can be established by the time of the institution of the criminal action for adultery.
direct evidence. Nevertheless, strong circumstantial
and corroborative evidence such as will lead the
guarded discretion of a reasonable and just man to ISSUE: Did Geiling have legal capacity at the time of the filing
of the complaint for adultery, considering that it was done
the conclusion that the alleged act has been
after obtaining a divorce decree?
committed is sufficient to sustain a conviction for
adultery. What is the proof, direct or circumstantial, in HELD:
the present case? ―Under Article 344 of the RPC, the crime of adultery
cannot be prosecuted except upon a sworn written
complaint filed by the offended spouse. It has long

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-205
 since been established, with unwavering consistency, Hence, the instant petition for CERTIORARI,
that compliance with this rule is a jurisdictional, and PROHIBITION and mandamus with preliminary
not merely a formal, requirement. injunction praying for the annulment of:
Corollary to such exclusive grant of power to the
offended spouse to institute the action, it necessarily (1) all the proceedings conducted by the
follows that such initiator must have the status, respondent City Fiscal that led to the filing of the
capacity or legal representation to do so at the time challenged information;
of the filing of the criminal action. This is a logical
consequence since the raison d‘etre of said provision
(2) the Order of the Honorable respondent Judge
of law would be absent where the supposed offended
dated December 3, 1973 denying petitioners'
party had ceased to be the spouse of the alleged
motion to quash as well as the Order dated
offender at the time of the filing of the criminal case.‖
January 14, 1974 denying petitioners' motion for
reconsideration; and
People v. Infante, et al, G.R. No. L-36270 August 31,
1921 (3) commanding the respondent Trial Judge and
respondent City Fiscal to desist from taking any
FACTS: further action.

Consolacion Infante and Emeterio Ramos were charged with The petition is devoid of merit. Hence, its
the crime of adultery by Manuel Artigas, Jr., the offended dismissal is in order.
party. After first pleading not guilty on arraignment, later when
the case was called for trial the accused asked permission to HELD:
withdraw their plea of not guilty and substitute therefor the ―In cases of adultery, the complaint cannot be prosecuted de
plea of guilty. Thereupon, the trial judge found them guilty. oficio without compliance with the jurisdictional requirement
The appeal taken by Consolacion Infante from this judgment is for the proper filing of the complaint. But the complaint
without merit, for obviously the appellate court cannot go into contemplated under the rule refers to the complaint filed with
the question of whether or not the plea was made on the the court and not that filed with the fiscal‘s office. In this case,
assurance given by her attorney that she would only be although the first complaint filed by Teves lacked an affidavit,
sentenced to the maximum penalty which she believed would that was still alright because it was merely filed with the
not exceed six months. fiscal‘s office. The rule was already complied with when Teves
filed his second complaint with the attached affidavit.‖
HELD:
―After the case had been submitted, a motion to The complaint referred to which is required by
dismiss was filed on behalf of the appellant predicated way of initiating the criminal prosecution of
on an affidavit executed by Manuel Artigas, jr., in crimes which cannot be prosecuted de oficio is,
which he pardoned his guilty spouse for her infidelity. however, that one filed with the Court and not
But this attempted pardon cannot prosper for two that which is necessary to start the required
reasons. The second paragraph of article 344 of the preliminary investigation by the fiscal's
Revised Penal Code which is in question reads: "The office. 10 In the latter case, a letter of complaint
offended party cannot institute criminal prosecution sufficed for the purpose.
without including both the guilty parties, if they are
both alive, nor in any case, if he shall have consented Coming back to the case at bar, the desire of the
or pardoned the offenders." This provision means that offended party Julian L. Teves to bring his wife
the pardon afforded the offenders must come before and her alleged paramour before the bar of
the institution of the criminal prosecution, and means, justice is only too evident. Such determination of
further, that both the offenders must be pardoned by purpose on his part is amply demonstrated in the
the offended party.‖ strong and unequivocal statement contained in
his first complaint of July 13, 1972 making clear
Milagros Donio-Teves and Manuel Moreno vs. Vamenta, and implicit his purpose, which is no other than
G.R. No. L-38308 December 26, 1984 "to file a criminal complaint for ADULTERY
against my wife Milagros Donio-Teves and her
FACTS: paramour Manuel Moreno"... plus the fact that he
filed no less than three (3) complaints in order to
meet the objections of the petitioner herein as to
Petitioners Milagros Donio-Teves and Manuel Moreno are
the sufficiency of his first complaint dated July
accused of and charged with 'ADULTERY'. The day before the
13, 1972.
scheduled arraignment, petitioner Milagros Donio-Teves filed a
Motion to Quash challenging the jurisdiction of the respondent
Court over the offense charged and the persons of both Petitioners' submission — that there is no sufficient and valid
accused. The motion to quash was denied for lack of merit. complaint — instituted in the instant case so as to confer
jurisdiction over the offense and persons of the accused
(herein petitioners), hardly convince Us. The second complaint
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-206
dated January 16, 1973 filed with the Fiscal's Office and that
filed with the respondent Court on March 26, 1973, are both 2. When there is consent, whether implied or expressed,
sufficient and valid complaints. of the husband, he cannot institute a criminal complaint
for adultery.
Notes:
3. Consent applies to future acts while pardon refers to
1. Adultery is committed even if the marriage is
past acts. (People v. Schneckenburger et. al., G.R. No.
subsequently declared void (RPC, Art. Par. 1)
48183, November 10, 1941)

2. The death of the paramour will not bar prosecution

Recrimination- Husband‘s illicit relationship does not
against the unfaithful wife, because the requirement that
absolve but may mitigate wife‘s liability for adultery.
both offenders be included in the complaint is absolute
(People v, Florez, C.A. G.R. No. 26089-CR, April 6, 1964)
only when the offenders are alive (RPC, Art. 344, Par. 2)
Article 334 – CONCUBINAGE
3. The death of the offended party will not terminate the
proceedings (People v. Diego, CA., 38 O.G. 2537) Persons Liable:

4. Each occasion of sexual intercourse constitutes a crime 1. The married man; and
of adultery. (People v. Zapata and Bondoc, G.R. No.L- 2. The woman who knew that the man was married.
3047, May 16, 1951)
Elements:
5. The criminal liability is mitigated when adultery is
1. That the man must be married;
committed while abandoned by spouse without
2. That he committed any of the following acts:
justification. (RPC, Art. 333, last par.)
a. Keeping a mistress in the conjugal dwelling (mistress
must live therein as such);
6. There is no crime of frustrated adultery.
b. Having sexual intercourse under scandalous
circumstances with a woman who is not his wife (proof of
7. Under the law, there can be no accomplice in the crime
actual sexual relations not required as long as it can be
of adultery, although in fact there can be such an
inferred); and; or
accomplice. (Reyes, Book Two, supra at 904)
c. Cohabiting with her in any other place (as husband and
wife); and
Acquittal of one of the defendants will not
3. As regards the woman, she must know him to be
automatically acquit the other:
married.

1. There may not be a joint criminal intent, although there Conjugal Dwelling
is a joint physical act.
It is the home of the husband and wife even if the
2. One of the parties may be insane and the other is sane. wife happens to be temporarily absent on any
account. (REYES, Book Two, supra at 906)
3. The man may not know that the woman is married.

4. The death of the woman during pendency of the action

cannot defeat the trial and conviction of the man. (U.S. v. Cases:
De la Torre and Gregorio, G.R. No. 8144, August 6, 1913)
United States v. Macabagbag, 31 Phil 257 (1915)
Pardon by the Offended Party
FACTS:
1. Must come before the institution of the criminal
These defendants were charged with the crime of
prosecution; and
amancebamiento. The complaint alleged: "That on or about,
2. Both offenders must be pardoned.
and for some five months prior to, July 11, 1914, in the
Notes on Pardon: municipality of Tuguegarao, Province of Cagayan, P. I., the
said Tomas Macababbag, being legally married to Dominga
1. The act of intercourse with the offending spouse Bulaqui, did willfully, unlawfully, and criminally, with gross
subsequent to the adulterous conduct is an implied insult to and contempt of the latter, take into the conjugal
pardon. (People v. Muguerza, et. al., 13 C.A. Rep. 1079) home and there keep the other accused, Maria Balisi, as his
mistress, with scandal to the public and in violation of the law."
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-207
Upon the said complaint the defendants were duly arrested, FACTS:
arraigned, tried, found guilty of the crime charged. Tomas February 21, 1921, the defendant, Pedro Pitoc, was legally
Macabagbag was sentenced with imprisonment while Maria married to Petronila Roque in the city of Manila. For several
Balisi was sentenced with destierro. From that sentence each years prior to their marriage, the defendant, Pedro Pitoc, had
sustained illicit relations with Marcians del Basco. In a short
of the defendants appealed to this court.
time after the marriage, the defendant, Pedro Pitoc, and his
wife left the city of Manila and went to Calumpit, Bulacan, to
reside. Later Pedro Pitoc returned to Manila, leaving his wife at
From that sentence each of the defendants appealed to this Calumpit, promising to return March 15, 1921. For his failure
court. to return on March 17, 1921, his wife came to Manila to look
for him, and later with Angel Roque verified the following
complaint against her husband and his paramour:
―A married man who keeps a mistress in his conjugal dwelling For the purposes of the law establishing divorce, the
is guilty of the crime of concubinage."Scandalous undersigned denounce and accuse Pedro Pitoc and Marciana
circumstances" are not necessary to make him guilty of said del Basco of the crime of concubinage.
crime. It is only when the mistress (concubine) is kept
elsewhere (outside conjugal dwelling) that scandalous They were both found guilty as charged. Pedro Pitoc filed an
circumstances become an element of the crime.‖ appeal claiming that the evidence was not sufficient to prove
him guilty of the crime of concubinage, beyond a reasonable
doubt, and that there was no evidence that the crime was
committed "under scandalous circumstances." His codefendant
United States v. Campos Rueda, 35 Phil 51 (1916) did not appeal.

FACTS: HELD:
Luisa Goitia de la Camara presented a complaint in the Court ―Initially the questions involved here is the legal construction
of First Instance of the city of Manila, in which she charged the of article 437 of the Penal Code and the amendment thereof
said defendants with the crime of "amancebamiento." The
by section 1 of Act No. 2716, as they both relate to Act No.
complaint alleged:
2710.

That on or about and during the period comprised between the

1st of June, 1915, and the date of the filing of this complaint, The purpose and intent of the amendment was to add a third
the said accused, Jose Campos y Rueda, being united in lawful ground for the commission of the crime. When analyzed, the
marriage to the complainant, Luisa Goitia y de la Camara, in two acts should read. First, that, if any married man shall keep
the city of Manila, Philippine Islands, within the jurisdiction of a mistress in his conjugal dwelling or second, should keep a
this court, willfully, unlawfully, criminally and maliciously, and mistress elsewhere under "scandalous circumstance," or, third,
with scandal, did have, outside his conjugal home, a concubine if he should "cohabit with a woman who is not his wife." In
named Aurora Arroyo, his coaccused, with whom the said either event, he would then be guilty of the crime charged in
accused lived in concubinage; an act committed in violation of article 437, and a conviction of either one of them would be
law. sufficient to entitle a spouse to a divorce under the provisions
of Act No. 2710.
On that complaint the defendants were duly arrested,
arraigned, pleaded not guilty, and were tried. Hence, the question involved here is whether within the
meaning of the law, the defendant cohabited "with a woman
who is not his wife."
HELD: ―If the appellant and his codefendant had been
associated together under scandalous circumstances, it would
seem that at least some of the neighbors or persons living in The word cohabit has many different meanings, each
that vicinity might have been found, who had observed such depending upon the sense in which it is used. Here, we have a
conduct. If the conduct of the appellant in relation with his law intended to prohibit a married man from keeping a
codefendant had been con escandalo in fact, it would seem to mistress in his dwelling or anywhere else under "scandalous
have been unnecessary for the prosecution to have gone into circumstances." Hence, the meaning of the word cohabit here
another part of the city to find witnesses to prove that fact. must relate and be confined to the subject matter of the law
The mere fact that it was necessary to employ spies for the itself. When used in that sense, it should be construed to mean
purpose of watching the conduct of the appellant, in relation "to dwell or live together as husband and wife; to live together
with the fact that none of the people living in the vicinity had as husband and wife although not legally married; to live
observed any suspicious conduct on his part in relation with his together in the same house, claiming to be married; to live
codefendant, gives rise to a serious doubt that the acts were together at bed and board."
committed con escandalo.‖

Notes:
People v. Pitoc , 43 Phil 760 (1922)
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-208
1. Scandalous circumstances are not necessary to make a Cases:
husband guilty of concubinage by keeping a mistress in the
conjugal dwelling. (United States v. Macabagbag and Balisi, Norberto Cruz v. People, G.R. No. 166441, October 8,
G.R. No. 10564, August 6, 1915) 2014

Scandal – it consist of any reprehensible word or FACTS:

deed that offends public conscience, redounds to the The petitioner Norberto Cruz was charged with attempted rape
and acts of lasciviousness involving different victims.
detriment of the feelings of honest persons, and gives
occasion to the neighbor‘s spiritual damage or ruin. Norberto and his wife employed AAA and BBB to help them in
(People v. Santos et. al., 45 O.G. 2116) selling their plastic wares and glass wares in La Union. Upon
reaching the place, they set up their tents to have a place to
Cohabit- It means to dwell together, in the manner sleep. Petitioner‘s wife and their driver went back to Manila to
of husband and wife, for some period of time, as get more goods. While sleeping, AAA felt that somebody was
distinguished from occasional transient interviews for on top of her mashing her breast and touching her private
unlawful intercourse. (People v. Pitoc, G.R. No. part. Norberto ordered her not to scream or she will be killed.
AAA fought back and Norberto was not able to pursue his
18513, September 18, 1922)
lustful desires. AAA left the tent to seek for help. When she
returned to their tent, she saw Norberto touching the private
2. Adultery is more severely punished than concubinage
parts of BBB. This prompted Norberto to leave the tent.
because adultery makes possible the introduction of another
man‘s blood into the family so that the offended husband may Norberto denies the commission of the crime alleging that he
have another man‘s son bearing his (husband‘s) name and could not possibly do the acts imputed out in the open as there
receiving support from him. (REYES, Book Two, supra 908) were many people preparing for the ―simbang gabi‖. He
further assails the credibility AAA for the crime of rape, alleging
Article 335- RAPE that the complaints were filed only for the purpose of extorting
money from him. The RTC and CA found Cruz guilty of both
Article 335 has been repealed by R.A. 8353 (Anti-Rape Law of crimes charged, hence, this appeal.
1997) effective October 22, 1997. Provisions on Rape are
ISSUE: Is petitioner guilty of attempted rape against AAA?
found in Arts. 266-A to 266-D under Crimes against Persons.
HELD: NO. ―The intent to penetrate is manifest only through
the showing of the penis capable of consummating the sexual
act touching the external genitalia of the female. Without such
showing, only the felony of acts of lasciviousness is committed.
Petitioner‘s embracing and touching the victim‘s vagina and
breasts did not directly manifest his intent to lie with her. The
lack of evidence showing his erectile penis being in the position
to penetrate her when he was on top of her deterred any
inference about his intent to lie with her. At most, his acts
reflected lewdness and lust for her. The intent to commit rape
should not easily be inferred against the petitioner, even from
his own declaration of it, if any, unless he committed overt
acts leading to rape. Hence, Cruz is guilty only of acts of
Chapter Two lasciviousness and not attempted rape.‖
NOTES:
Article 336 – Acts of Lasciviousness 1. The crime is unjust vexation in the absence of any
of the circumstances above-mentioned (circumstance
Elements: of rape);

1. That the offender commits any act of 2. Lewd- It is defined as obscene, lustful, indecent,
lasciviousness or lewdness; lecherous, signifying that form of immorality which
2. That the act of lasciviousness is committed against
has relation to moral impurity; or that which is carried
a person of either sex; and
3. That it is done under any of the following on a wanton manner. (People v. Lizada, G.R. Nos.
circumstances: 143468-71, January 24, 2003)
a. By using force or intimidation;
b. When the offended party is deprived of What constitutes lewd or lascivious conduct must be
reason or otherwise unconscious; or determined from the circumstances of each case. The
d. When the offended party is under 12 years of presence or absence of the lewd designs is inferred
age or is demented.
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-209
 from the nature of the acts themselves and the 1. Seduction of a virgin over twelve (12) years and under
environmental circumstances. eighteen (18) years of age by persons who abuse their
authority or the confidence reposed in them; and
3. Lascivious Conduct- ―The intentional touching,
either directly or through clothing, of the genitalia, 2. Seduction of a sister by her brother or descendant by her
anus, groin, breast, inner thigh or buttocks; or the ascendant, regardless of her age or reputation.
introduction of any object into the genitalia, anus or
mouth of any person, whether of the same or Elements:
opposite sex, with an intent to abuse, humiliate,
1. That the offended party is a virgin;
harass, degrade, or arouse or gratify the sexual desire
2. She must be over 12 and under 18 years of age;
of any person, bestiality, masturbation, lascivious, 3. That the offender had sexual intercourse with her; and
exhibition of the genitals or public area of a person.‖ 4. That there is abuse of authority, confidence or relationship
(People v. Jalosjos, G.R. No. 132876-279, November on the part of the offender.
16, 2001)
The following are the OFFENDERS:
4. There can be no attempted and frustrated acts of
lasciviousness. 1. Those who abused their authority:
a. Persons in public authority;
ATTEMPTED RAPE ACTS OF LASCIVIOUSNESS b. Guardian;
c. Teacher; or
d. Person who, in any capacity, is entrusted with the
Manner of commission is the same
education or custody of the woman seduced;
2. Those who abused confidence reposed in them:
The performance of lascivious character is common to
a. Priest;
both b. House servant; or
c. Domestic. (Any person living under the same roof as a
When the acts There is no intent to have member of the household, and includes boarders or house-
performed by offender sexual intercourse. The guests but not transients or visitors)
clearly indicate that his lascivious acts are the final 3. Those who abused their relationship:
purpose was to lie with objective sought by the a. Brother who seduced his sister; or
b. Ascendant who seduced his descendant.
the offended woman, offender.
the lascivious acts are
but the preparatory
acts to the commission
of the rape.

Cases:

People v. Fontanilla, 23 SCRA 1227, June 28, 1968

FACTS:
Fontanilla (52 yrs old) is the husband of the victim‘s, Castro
(15 yrs old), aunt. They were childless although Fontanilla has
children from his previous marriage. Castro was brought into
Chapter Three Fontanilla‘s house in Sempteber 1986 to work as a maid. It
was a week after she arrived that the first ofa numerous
Article 337- Qualified Seduction sexual intercourse happened. The lockin her room did not
prevent him from entering. She testified that she eventually
Seduction yielded as he promised to marry her and she was frightened
by his acts of intimidation. They had sex during the night and
It means enticing a woman to unlawful sexual intercourse by
day when the wife was away or sleeping. The acts continued
promise of marriage or other means of persuasion without
for 3 months until the wife caught them inthe act on the
use of force.
kitchen floor. Afterwards, she returned to her parents and told
Two Classes: them of the incident 2 days after.Fontanilla testified that it is
impossible for him to have sex with Castro. First, because he
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-210
was out in the farm during the day and, second, her room was HELD: ―The complaint alleged that the accused abused his
locked. He also claims that at his age, his sexual capabilities position as a policeman, that Leonida Dagohoy was of the
had waned. He avers that he only madelove with his wife once tender age of 13, and that the accused had carnal knowledge
of the complainant. However, there is no allegation that the
a week so it is impossible for him to make love to Castro twice
complainant was a ―virgin‖. It is true that virginity is presumed
a day. Finally, he tried to impute ill will to Castro alleging that if the girl is over 12 and under 18
she is just envious of his children from his first marriagewho years of age, is unmarried and of good reputation.
are now earning salary. He also imputed ill will to Castro‘s uncle The presumption
who allegedly has strong influence over her. The wife notwithstanding, virginity is still an essential element of the cri
corroborated his statements. The municipal trial court me of qualified seduction and must be alleged in the
convicted him of qualified seduction. He now raises for the first complaint. A conviction for the crime of qualified seduction
without the allegation of virginity would violate the
time the issue of the MTC‘s lack jurisdiction.
petitioner‘s right to be informed of the nature and cause of
the accusation against him.‖
ISSUES: WON 1.MTC has jurisdiction
2.Conviction proper Perez vs CA, 168 SCRA 236 (1988)

HELD: ―Deceit, although an essential element of ordinary or FACTS:

simple seduction, does not need to be proved in a charge of On 21 October 1974, Yolanda Mend
oza filed a criminal complaint for
qualified seduction. It is replaced by abuse of confidence.
consented abduction against petitioner Eleuterio
When the offender is a public officer, a priest or minister, a Perez in the CFI of Pampanga for having sexual
servant, domestic, tutor, teacher, or under any title is in charge intercourse with her twice but reneged on his promise
of the education or keeping of the offended woman, as in the to marry her. Subsequently, he was convicted for the
present case, the act is punishable although fraud or deceit same. On appeal, the CA reversed and acquitted
may not have been used. The seduction of a virgin over twelve Perez of Consented Abduction. On 22 July
1983, the same complainant charged Perez of
and under eighteen years of age, committed by any of the
qualified seduction in the MTC of Pampanga. Perez
persons enumerated in Art. 337 "is constitutive of the crime of filed a motion to quash invoking double jeopardy and
qualified seduction ... even though no deceit intervenes or waiver and/or estoppels on the part of the
even when such carnal knowledge were voluntary on the part complainant but was denied. His motion for
of the virgin, because in such a case, the law takes for granted reconsideration was likewise denied. Following a
the existence of the deceit as an integral element of the said series of unsuccessful judicial remedies, Perez filed a
crime and punishes it with greater severity than it does the petition for review as his last resort.
simple seduction ... taking into account the abuse of
ISSUE:
confidence on the part of the agent (culprit), an abuse of Are consented abduction and
confidence which implies deceit or fraud.‖ qualified seduction separate and
distinct offenses in that petitioner
may not properly invoke the
constitutional right against double
jeopardy?
Babanto vs. Zosa, 120 SCRA 844 (1968)
HELD: ―Consented abduction and qualified seduction are
FACTS: separate and distinct offenses. The very nature of these two
The victim, Leonila Dagohoy, a 13 year old girl of considerably offenses would negate any identity between them as would
low mentality, was seated in the market when accused, make applicable the rule on double jeopardy. It is true that
Eusebio Babanto, a policeman, approached and held her right the offenses for which the petitioner was charged arose from
hand and brought her to the ABC Hall. There was no one in the same facts. This, however, does not preclude e the filing
the ABC Hall and it was dark. When they arrived there, of another information against him if from those facts, two
accused made her lie down with her face upward. While in that distinct offenses, each requiring different elements, arose. An
position, the accused lifted the girl‘s dress and removed her examination of the elements of these two crimes would show
panty. The girl tried to kick him but he held her down. The that although they may have arisen from the same set of
accused exposed laid down facts, they are not identical offenses as would make
on top of the girl and commenced the sexual act. Afterwards, applicable double jeopardy.
he threatened to shoot her if she was going to tell parents and
left. The girl felt pain in her vagina which emitted blood. She There are similar elements between co
confided her ordeal to her mother after the latter observed her n s e n t e d a b d u c t i o n a n d q u a l i f i e d seduction,
to be weak and feverish. Initially, accused was charged with namely:
rape but the RTC found him guilty of the lesser offense of
qualified seduction due to lack of violence or intimidation. (1) that the offended party is a virgin, and,
(2) that she must be over twelve (12) and under eighteen
(18) years of age.

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-211
 carnal knowledge, would circumstances which, had
However, two elements differentiate the two amount to rape. there been carnal
crimes. Consented Abduction, in addition to the two knowledge, would amount
common elements, requires that:
to either qualified
(1) the taking away of the offended party must be with her seduction or simple
consent, after solicitation or cajolery from the offender, and, seduction.
(2) the taking away of the offended party must be with
lewd designs.

On the other hand, an information for Article 340 – CORRUPTION OF MINORS (as amended
qualified seduction also requires that: by BP No. 92)

(1) the crime be committed by abuse of authority, Punishable Acts:

confidence or relationship, and,
(2) the offender has sexual intercourse with the Promoting or facilitating the prostitution or corruption
woman.‖
of persons under age to satisfy the lust of another.

Article 338 – SIMPLE SEDUCTION

Republic Act 7610
Elements:
Special Protection of Children against Abuse,
1. That the offended party is over 12 and under 18
Exploitation and Discrimination Act
years of age;
2. That she must be of good reputation, single or
widow; Section 5. Child Prostitution and Other Sexual Abuse-
3. That the offender has sexual intercourse with her;
and ―Children, whether male or female, who for money,
4. That it is committed by means of deceit. profit, or any other consideration or due to the
coercion or influence of any adult, syndicate or group,
Article 339 – ACTS OF LASCIVIOUSNESS WITH THE indulge in sexual intercourse or lascivious conduct,
CONSENT OF THE OFFENDED PARTY are deemed to be children exploited in prostitution
and other sexual abuse.
Elements:
The penalty of reclusion temporal in its medium
1. That the offender commits acts of lasciviousness or period to reclusion perpetual shall be imposed upon
lewdness; the following:

2. That the acts are committed upon a woman who is (a) Those who engage in or promote, facilitate or
a virgin or single or a widow of good reputation, induce child prostitution which include, but are not
under 18 years of age but over 12 years, or a sister limited to, the following:
or descendant regardless of her reputation or age;
and

3. That the offender accomplishes the acts by abused

of authority, confidence, relationship or deceit.

Acts of Lasciviousness Acts of Lasciviousness (1) Acting as a procurer of a child prostitute;

with Consent of the
Offended Party (2) Inducing a person to be a client of a
child prostitute by means of written or oral
Both treat of acts of lasciviousness advertisements or other similar means;

The offended party is a The offended party should (3) Taking advantage of influence or
female or a male only be female relationship to procure a child as prostitute;

The acts are committed The acts of (4) Threatening or using violence towards a
under circumstances lasciviousness are child to engage him as a prostitute; or
which, had there been committed under the

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-212
 (5) Giving monetary consideration goods or Penalty:
other pecuniary benefit to a child with intent
to engage such child in prostitution. Prision Correcional in its medium and maximum periods.

(b) Those who commit the act of sexual intercourse Notes:

of lascivious conduct with a child exploited in
prostitution or subject to other sexual abuse;
1. The first two modes require the element of profit and
Provided, That when the victims is under twelve (12)
habituality. In the third mode, the profit motive is not required,
years of age, the perpetrators shall be prosecuted
nor is habituality an element thereof. (REGALADO, at 769)
under Article 335, paragraph 3, for rape and Article
336 of Act No. 3815, as amended, the Revised Penal
Code, for rape or lascivious conduct, as the case may 2. White slave trade may be with or without the consent of the
be: Provided, That the penalty for lascivious conduct woman, while slavery for the purpose of assigning the woman
when the victim is under twelve (12) years of age to immoral traffic (Art. 272) is committed against her will (Id).
shall be reclusion temporal in its medium period; and

(c) Those who derive profit or advantage therefrom,

whether as manager or owner of the establishment Corruption of Minors White Slave Trade
where the prostitution takes place, or of the sauna,
disco, bar, resort, place of entertainment or It is essential that victims Minority need not be
establishment serving as a cover or which engages in are minors. involved.
prostitution in addition to the activity for which the
license has been issued to said establishment.‖ May have victims of either Limited only to females
sex.
Section 6. Attempt To Commit Child Prostitution. –
May not necessarily be for Generally for profit.
―There is an attempt to commit child prostitution profit.
under Section 5, paragraph (a) hereof when any
person who, not being a relative of a child, is found Committed by a single Generally committed
alone with the said child inside the room or cubicle of
act. habitually.
a house, an inn, hotel, motel, pension house,
apartelle or other similar establishments, vessel,
vehicle or any other hidden or secluded area under
circumstances which would lead a reasonable person
to believe that the child is about to be exploited in Abduction – the taking away of a woman from her house or
prostitution and other sexual abuse. the place where she may be for the purpose of carrying her to
another place with intent to marry or corrupt her.
There is also an attempt to commit child prostitution,
under paragraph (b) of Section 5 hereof when any
person is receiving services from a child in a sauna
parlor or bath, massage clinic, health club and other Kinds of Abduction
similar establishments. A penalty lower by two (2)
degrees than that prescribed for the consummated 1. Forcible Abduction (Art 342)
felony under Section 5 hereof shall be imposed upon 2. Consented Abduction (Art 343)
the principals of the attempt to commit the crime of
child prostitution under this Act, or, in the proper
case, under the Revised Penal Code.‖ Article 342. Forcible abduction

Elements:
Article 341 – WHITE SLAVE TRADE
1. The person abducted is any woman, regardless of her
Prohibited Acts: age, civil status, or reputation;
2. The abduction is against her will;
Engaging in the business of prostitution; 3. The abduction is with lewd designs.

Profiting by prostitution; and

Enlisting the services of women for the purpose of

prostitution

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-213
 Forcible Abduction Kidnapping and
serious illegal
 Crimes against chastity where age and reputation are
immaterial: detention
o Rape
o Acts of lasciviousness against the will or without the
(1) Forcibly taking (1) There is
consent of the offended party
o Qualified seduction of a sister/descendant someone away deprivation of
o Forcible abduction against her will with liberty and no lewd
 The taking away of the woman may be accomplished by lewd design designs
means of deceit first and then by means of violence and
intimidation.
woman is motivated by
 If the female abducted is under 12 years of age, the crime
is forcible abduction, even if she voluntarily goes with her lewd designs
abducter.
 Sexual intercourse is not necessary in forcible abduction Crime against chastity Crime against liberty
 Where there are several defendants, it is enough that one
of them had lewd designs
 When there is deprivation of liberty and no lewd designs,
the crime is kidnapping and serious illegal detention.
 Attempt to rape is absorbed in the crime of forcible
abduction, thus there is no complex crime of forcible People vs. Sunpongco (1988)
abduction with attempted rape (the attempt is evidence of
the lewd designs)
 Consummated rape may absorb forcible abduction if the
main objective was to rape the victim. Facts: Sunpongco et, al. abducted Angeles from the jeepney
from the jeepney she‘s riding, forced into a car, and brought in
Tagaytay. In Tagaytay, Sunpongco succeeded having carnal
knowledge with her by using force. Defense was that he and
Angeles is supposed to elope but Angeles did not arrive.
Forcible abduction Corruption of minors

Purpose is to effect his Purpose is to lend the

lewd designs on the victim to illicit intercourse Held: Forcible Abduction with rape is accomplished when
victim with others offenders abducted a woman with a lewd design and succeed
Forci in having carnal knowledge of her, both against her will and
ble Abduction with Rape with the use of force and intimidation.

Elements:

1. The person abducted is any woman, regardless of her age, People vs. Jose (1971)
civil status or reputation;

2. She is taken against her will;

Facts: Maggie‘s car collided with another, then the driver of
3. The abduction is with lewd design; and the other car dragged her in his car. Inside the car, Jose and
Aquino kissed and touched her. She was blindfolded, brought
4. The abducted woman is raped under any circumstance in a hotel, made to dance naked, then raped by four men. She
provided in Art. 335 was later set free.

Held: Forcible Abduction was established. She was dragged

against her will. Also, lewd designs are manifested by actions
Forcible abduction Kidnapping (with inside the car and the act of raping her.
with rape rape)

The violent taking of the Not so motivated

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-214
Rape was also established. Absence of spermatozoa does not
disprove rape; penetration and not emission is the important
consideration. Elements:

1. Offended party is a virgin;

2. She is over 12 and under 18 years of age;
3. Offender takes her away with her consent, after
solicitation or cajolery;
People vs. Alburo (1990) 4. The taking away is with lewd designs.

 Purpose of the law: to prescribe punishment for the

disgrace to her family and the alarm caused therein by the
Facts: Alburo insisted that Evelyn and her friends board his
disappearance of one who is, by her age and sex,
jeepney to whch the girls complied. When Evelyn was about to
susceptible to cajolery and deceit.
alight, she was threatened that her skirt will be raised. They
 If the virgin is under 12, the crime is forcible abduction.
sped off. She was again threatened with a knife. Alburo
(because law assumes that a person of such age cannot
succeeded having carnal knowledge with her while she was
give consent, so this also applies to those deprived of
unconscious because her head bumped in the steering wheel.
reason)
The jeepney on the way back was flagged down.
 The taking away of the girl need not be with some
character of permanence.
Held: Taking a person against her will and forcing the person
 When there was no solicitation or cajolery and no deceit
to engage in sexual intercourse constitutes the complex crime and the girl voluntarily went with the man, there is no
of forcible abduction with rape. crime committed even if they had sexual intercourse.

People vs. Marvin Cayanan (2003)

Chapter 5. Provisions Relative to the Preceding

Facts: Cayanan forced AAA to have sex with him on February Chapters of Title XI
1, 2001 and threatened her and her family with physical harm.
On February 26, 2001, Cayanan forcibly took AAA by the
school campus gate and thereafter raped her.
Article 344. Prosecution of the crimes of adultery,
concubinage, seduction, abduction, rape and acts of
lasciviousness.
Held: The Court finds that Cayanan should be convicted only
of Qualified Rape. Forcible abduction is absorbed in the crime
of rape if the real objective of the accused is to rape the
victim. In this case, circumstaces show that the victim‘s Who may file complaint:
abduction was with the purpose of raping her. Thus, after
Cayanan dragged her into the tricycle, he took her to several
places until they reached his sister‘s house where he raped her
1. For adultery and concubinage – must be prosecuted upon
inside the bedroom. Under this circumstances, the rape
complaint signed by the offended person
absorbed the abduction.

2. For seduction, abduction or acts of lasciviousness – must

be prosecuted upon complaint signed by :
a. the offended party
b. her parents
Article 343. Consented abduction c. her grandparents or
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-215
 d. guardians, in the order in which they are named  Pardon must be given before the institution of criminal
above. proceedings (bar to prosecution). Marriage may take
place after criminal proceedings have commenced, or
even after conviction (extinguishes criminal action and
 Reason why the crimes against chastity cannot be remits penalty).
prosecuted de officio – offended woman might prefer to
suffer the outrage in silence rather than go through with
the scandal of a public trial

Pilapil vs. Ibay-Somera (1951)

Adultery and concubinage

Geiling, a German, and Pilapil, a Filipina were married in

 Offended party cannot institute criminal proceedings Germany and cohabited for some years. Geiling was able to
without including BOTH guilty parties, if they are both obtain a decree of divorce in Germany against his wife. Five
alive.
months after the issuance of the divorce decree, Geiling filed 2
 Offended party cannot institute criminal proceedings if he
shall have consented or pardoned the offenders. complaints for adultery against Pilapil.
 Pardon in adultery and concubinage must come before the
institution of the criminal action and both offenders must
be pardoned by the offended party if said pardon is to be
effective. She challenged the complaint on the ground that the
 Consent – given before the adultery or concubinage was complainant, her husband, does not qualify as an offended
committed. Example: agreement to live separately. spouse having obtained a final divorce decree under his
 Delay in the filing of the complaint does not indicate national law prior to his filing the criminal complaint.
pardon.

Seduction, abduction, acts of lasciviousness HELD: The crime of adultery, as well as four other crimes
against chastity, cannot be prosecuted except upon a sworn
written complaint filed by the offended spouse. It has long
since been established, with unwavering consistency, that
 Offended party cannot institute criminal proceedings if the
offender has been EXPRESSLY pardoned by the offended compliance with this rule is a jurisdictional, and not merely a
party, or her parents, grandparents or guardian. formal, requirement. Now, the law specifically provides that in
 Pardon by the parent, grandparent or guardian must be prosecutions for adultery and concubinage the person who can
accompanied by the express pardon of the offended legally file the complaint should be the offended spouse, and
woman herself. nobody else. Unlike the offenses of seduction, abduction, rape
 The right to file action of the parents, grandparents and
and acts of lasciviousness, no provision is made for the
guardian shall be exclusive of other persons and shall be
exercised successively in the order provided. prosecution of the crimes of adultery and concubinage by the
 When the offended party is a minor, her parents may file parents, grandparents or guardian of the offended party. The
the complaint. so-called exclusive and successive rule in the prosecution of
 When the offended party is of age and is in complete the first four offenses do not apply to adultery and
possession of her mental or physical faculties, she alone concubinage.
can file the complaint.
 The guardian must be legally appointed by the court.
 Rape complexed with another crime against chastity need
not be signed by the offended woman, since rape is a It necessarily follows that such initiator must have the status,
public crime.
capacity or legal representation to do so at the time of the
 When the evidence fails to prove a complex crime of rape
with another crime, and there is no complaint signed by filing of the criminal action. Lack of legal capacity to sue, as a
the offended woman, the accused cannot be convicted of ground for a motion to dismiss in civil cases, is determined as
rape. of the filing of the complaint or petition.
 Marriage of the offender with the offended party in
seduction, abduction, acts of lasciviousness and rape,
extinguishes criminal action or remits the penalty already
imposed. Hence, with reference to adultery cases, the status of the
 The marriage extinguishes the criminal action even as to complainant vis-à-vis the accused must be determined as of
co-principals, accomplices and accessories of the crime. the time the complaint was filed. The person who initiates the
 Marriage must be entered into in good faith and with the
adultery case must be an offended spouse, and by this is
intent of fulfilling the marital duties and obligations.
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-216
meant that HE IS STILL MARRIED to the accused spouse, at relatives) is jurisdictional, what is meant is that it is the
the time of the filing of the complaint. complaint that starts the prosecutory proceding. It is not the
complaint which confers jurisdiction in the court to try the
case. The courts jurisdiction is vested in it by the Judiciary
Law.
The divorce obtained by Geiling and its legal effects may be
recognized in the Phils. In view of the nationality principle in
our civil law on the matter of status of persons. (Aliens of
Filipino spouses may obtain divorces abroad, which may be
recognized in the Phils. if they are valid according to their
national law._

Article 345. Civil liability of persons guilty of crimes

against chastity
Being no longer the husband of Pilapil, Geiling had no legal
standing to commence the adultery case under the imposture
that he was the offended spouse at the time he filed the suit.
Civil liabilities of persons guilty of rape, seduction, or
abduction:

People vs. Yparraguire (2000) 1. To indemnify the offended woman;

2. To acknowledge the offspring, unless the law shall prevent
him from so doing;
3. In every case to support the offspring
Facts: The accused Elmer Yparraguire alias ―Lalo‖ raped
Charmelita D. Ruina, an invalid and mentally retarded. The
 The adulterer and concubine can be sentenced only to
complaint was signed and filed by the chief of police and not indemnify for damages caused to the offended spouse.
by the complainant.  No civil liability of acts of lasciviousness under this article.
 Only indemnity is possible in adultery and concubinage
because only children born of parents who could marry at
the time of conception may not be acknowledged.
Held: Once the violation of the law becomes known through a Support is also not possible because the person who gives
direct original participation initiated by the victim, the birth is one of the offenders.
requirements of Art 344, RPC are satisfied. Said provision is  Moral damages may be recovered in seduction, abduction,
not determinative of the jurisdiction of courts over the private rape or other lascivious acts, as well as adultery and
concubinage (Art. 2219, Civil Code). The parents of the
offenses because the same is governed by the Judiciary Law,
female seduced, raped or abused may also recover moral
not the RPC which deals with the definition of felonies and damages.
their punishment. Stated differently, the complaint required in  All offenders in multiple rape must support the offspring,
Art 344 is but a condition precedent to the exercise by the as any one of them may be the father.
proper authorities of the power to prosecute the guilty parties.  Under the Civil Code, judgment to recognize the offspring
may only be given if there is pregnancy within the period
of conception, which is within 120 days from the
commission of the offense (Article 283)
Such condition was imposed out of consideration for the  In rape of a married woman, only indemnity is allowed.
offended woman and her family who might prefer to suffer the Defendant cannot be sentenced to acknowledge the
offspring, because the woman is married. Support cannot
outrage in silence rather than go through with the scandal of a
also be given, because the offender cannot enter
public trial. The complaint simply starts the prosecutory periodically the house of the married woman to give such
proceeding but does not confer jurisdiction on the court to try support. This will cause disturbance to the family rights of
the case because the overriding consideration is determining the married couple.
whether the condition precedent in Art 344 has been complied
with is the intent of the aggrieved party to seek judicial redress
for the affront committed.

Article 346. Liability of ascendants, guardians, teacher

or other persons entrusted with the custody of the
Art 344 was not enacted for the specific purpose of benefitting offended party
the accused. When it is said that the requirement in Art 344
(that there should be a complaint of the offended party or her
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-217
Persons who cooperate as accomplices but are punished as or pattern, intended to cause a person to believe that if he or
principals in rape, seduction, abduction, acts of lasciviousness she did not enter into or continue in such condition, he or she
etc (chapters 2, 3 and 4 of this title): or another person would suffer serious harm or other forms of
abuse or physical restraint, or threat of abuse or harm, or
1. ascendants coercion including depriving access to travel documents and
2. guardians withholding salaries, or the abuse or threatened abuse of the
3. curators legal process.
4. teachers ―(g) Sex Tourism – refers to a program organized by travel and
5. any other person, who cooperates as accomplice with tourism-related establishments and individuals which consists
abuse of confidence or confidential relationship . of tourism packages or activities, utilizing and offering escort
and sexual services as enticement for tourists. This includes
sexual services and practices offered during rest and recreation
periods for members of the military.
―(h) Sexual Exploitation – refers to participation by a person in
prostitution, pornography or the production of pornography, in
exchange for money, profit or any other consideration or
where the participation is caused or facilitated by any means of
Republic Act No. 9208 or the Anti-Trafficking in
intimidation or threat, use of force, or other forms of coercion,
Persons Act of 2003, as amended by Republic Act No. abduction, fraud, deception, debt bondage, abuse of power or
10364 also known as the Expanded Anti-Trafficking in of position or of legal process, taking advantage of the
Persons Act of 2012 vulnerability of the person, or giving or receiving of payments
or benefits to achieve the consent of a person having control
SEC. 3. Definition of Terms. – As used in this Act: over another person; or in sexual intercourse or lascivious
―(a) Trafficking in Persons – refers to the recruitment, conduct caused or facilitated by any means as provided in this
obtaining, hiring, providing, offering, transportation, transfer, Act.
maintaining, harboring, or receipt of persons with or without ―(i) Debt Bondage – refers to the pledging by the debtor of
the victim‘s consent or knowledge, within or across national his/her personal services or labor or those of a person under
borders by means of threat, or use of force, or other forms of his/her control as security or payment for a debt, when the
coercion, abduction, fraud, deception, abuse of power or of length and nature of services is not clearly defined or when the
position, taking advantage of the vulnerability of the person, value of the services as reasonably assessed is not applied
or, the giving or receiving of payments or benefits to achieve toward the liquidation of the debt.
the consent of a person having control over another person for ―(j) Pornography – refers to any representation, through
the purpose of exploitation which includes at a minimum, the publication, exhibition, cinematography, indecent shows,
exploitation or the prostitution of others or other forms of information technology, or by whatever means, of a person
sexual exploitation, forced labor or services, slavery, servitude engaged in real or simulated explicit sexual activities or any
or the removal or sale of organs. representation of the sexual parts of a person for primarily
―The recruitment, transportation, transfer, sexual purposes.
harboring, adoption or receipt of a child for the purpose of
exploitation or when the adoption is induced by any form of
consideration for exploitative purposes shall also be considered SEC. 4. Acts of Trafficking in Persons. – It shall be
as ‗trafficking in persons‘ even if it does not involve any of the unlawful for any person, natural or juridical, to commit any of
means set forth in the preceding paragraph. the following acts:
―(b) Child – refers to a person below eighteen (18) years of ―(a) To recruit, obtain, hire, provide, offer, transport, transfer,
age or one who is over eighteen (18) but is unable to fully take maintain, harbor, or receive a person by any means, including
care of or protect himself/herself from abuse, neglect, cruelty, those done under the pretext of domestic or overseas
exploitation, or discrimination because of a physical or mental employment or training or apprenticeship, for the purpose of
disability or condition. prostitution, pornography, or sexual exploitation;
―(c) Prostitution – refers to any act, transaction, scheme or ―(b) To introduce or match for money, profit, or material,
design involving the use of a person by another, for sexual economic or other consideration, any person or, as provided
intercourse or lascivious conduct in exchange for money, profit for under Republic Act No. 6955, any Filipino woman to a
or any other consideration. foreign national, for marriage for the purpose of acquiring,
―(d) Forced Labor – refers to the extraction of work or services buying, offering, selling or trading him/her to engage in
from any person by means of enticement, violence, prostitution, pornography, sexual exploitation, forced labor,
intimidation or threat, use of, force or coercion, including slavery, involuntary servitude or debt bondage;
deprivation of freedom, abuse of authority or moral ―(c) To offer or contract marriage, real or simulated, for the
ascendancy, debt-bondage or deception including any work or purpose of acquiring, buying, offering, selling, or trading them
service extracted from any person under the menace of to engage in prostitution, pornography, sexual exploitation,
penalty. forced labor or slavery, involuntary servitude or debt bondage;
―(e) Slavery – refers to the status or condition of a person over ―(d) To undertake or organize tours and travel plans consisting
whom any or all of the powers attaching to the right of of tourism packages or activities for the purpose of utilizing
ownership are exercised. and offering persons for prostitution, pornography or sexual
―(f) Involuntary Servitude – refers to a condition of enforced exploitation;
and compulsory service induced by means of any scheme, plan

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-218
―(e) To maintain or hire a person to engage in prostitution or ―(a) Facilitating the travel of a child who travels alone to a
pornography; foreign country or territory without valid reason therefor and
―(f) To adopt persons by any form of consideration for without the required clearance or permit from the Department
exploitative purposes or to facilitate the same for purposes of of Social Welfare and Development, or a written permit or
prostitution, pornography, sexual exploitation, forced labor, justification from the child‘s parent or legal guardian;
slavery, involuntary servitude or debt bondage; ―(b) Executing, for a consideration, an affidavit of consent or a
―(g) To adopt or facilitate the adoption of persons for the written consent for adoption;
purpose of prostitution, pornography, sexual exploitation, ―(c) Recruiting a woman to bear a child for the purpose of
forced labor, slavery, involuntary servitude or debt bondage; selling the child;
―(h) To recruit, hire, adopt, transport, transfer, obtain, harbor, ―(d) Simulating a birth for the purpose of selling the child; and
maintain, provide, offer, receive or abduct a person, by means ―(e) Soliciting a child and acquiring the custody thereof
of threat or use of force, fraud, deceit, violence, coercion, or through any means from among hospitals, clinics, nurseries,
intimidation for the purpose of removal or sale of organs of daycare centers, refugee or evacuation centers, and low-
said person; income families, for the purpose of selling the child.‖
―(i) To recruit, transport, obtain, transfer, harbor, maintain,
offer, hire, provide, receive or adopt a child to engage in SEC. 6. A new Section 4-B is hereby inserted in Republic
armed activities in the Philippines or abroad; Act No. 9208, to read as follows:
―(j) To recruit, transport, transfer, harbor, obtain, maintain, ―SEC. 4-B. Accomplice Liability. – Whoever knowingly aids,
offer, hire, provide or receive a person by means defined in abets, cooperates in the execution of the offense by previous
Section 3 of this Act for purposes of forced labor, slavery, debt or simultaneous acts defined in this Act shall be punished in
bondage and involuntary servitude, including a scheme, plan, accordance with the provisions of Section 10(c) of this Act.‖
or pattern intended to cause the person either:
―(1) To believe that if the person did not perform such labor or SEC. 7. A new Section 4-C is hereby inserted in Republic
services, he or she or another person would suffer serious Act No. 9208, to read as follows:
harm or physical restraint; or ―SEC. 4-C. Accessories. – Whoever has the knowledge of
―(2) To abuse or threaten the use of law or the legal the commission of the crime, and without having participated
processes; and therein, either as principal or as accomplices, take part in its
―(k) To recruit, transport, harbor, obtain, transfer, maintain, commission in any of the following manners:
hire, offer, provide, adopt or receive a child for purposes of ―(a) By profiting themselves or assisting the offender to profit
exploitation or trading them, including but not limited to, the by the effects of the crime;
act of baring and/or selling a child for any consideration or for ―(b) By concealing or destroying the body of the crime or
barter for purposes of exploitation. Trafficking for purposes of effects or instruments thereof, in order to prevent its
exploitation of children shall include: discovery;
―(1) All forms of slavery or practices similar to slavery, ―(c) By harboring, concealing or assisting in the escape of the
involuntary servitude, debt bondage and forced labor, principal of the crime, provided the accessory acts with abuse
including recruitment of children for use in armed conflict; of his or her public functions or is known to be habitually guilty
―(2) The use, procuring or offering of a child for prostitution, of some other crime.
for the production of pornography, or for pornographic ―Acts defined in this provision shall be punished in accordance
performances; with the provision of Section 10(d) as stated thereto.‖
―(3) The use, procuring or offering of a child for the production
and trafficking of drugs; and
―(4) The use, procuring or offering of a child for illegal
activities or work which, by its nature or the circumstances in Section 5. Acts that Promote Trafficking in Persons. -
which it is carried out, is likely to harm their health, safety or The following acts which promote or facilitate trafficking in
morals; and persons, shall be unlawful:
―(l) To organize or direct other persons to commit the offenses (a) To knowingly lease or sublease, use or allow to be used
defined as acts of trafficking under this Act.‖ any house, building or establishment for the purpose of
promoting trafficking in persons;
SEC. 5. A new Section 4-A is hereby inserted in Republic (b) To produce, print and issue or distribute unissued,
Act No. 9208, to read as follows: tampered or fake counseling certificates, registration stickers,
―SEC. 4-A. Attempted Trafficking in Persons. – Where overseas employment certificates or other certificates of any
there are acts to initiate the commission of a trafficking government agency which issues these certificates, decals and
offense but the offender failed to or did not execute all the such other markers as proof of compliance with government
elements of the crime, by accident or by reason of some cause regulatory and pre-departure requirements for the purpose of
other than voluntary desistance, such overt acts shall be promoting trafficking in persons;
deemed as an attempt to commit an act of trafficking in (c) To advertise, publish, print, broadcast or distribute, or
persons. As such, an attempt to commit any of the offenses cause the advertisement, publication, printing, broadcasting or
enumerated in Section 4 of this Act shall constitute attempted distribution by any means, including the use of information
trafficking in persons. technology and the internet, of any brochure, flyer, or any
―In cases where the victim is a child, any of the propaganda material that promotes trafficking in persons;
following acts shall also be deemed as attempted trafficking in (d) To assist in the conduct of misrepresentation or fraud for
persons: purposes of facilitating the acquisition of clearances and
necessary exit documents from government agencies that are
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-219
mandated to provide pre-departure registration and services ―(h) When the offender commits one or more violations of
for departing persons for the purpose of promoting trafficking Section 4 over a period of sixty (60) or more days, whether
in persons; those days are continuous or not; and
(e) To facilitate, assist or help in the exit and entry of persons ―(i) When the offender directs or through another manages the
from/to the country at international and local airports, trafficking victim in carrying out the exploitative purpose of
territorial boundaries and seaports who are in possession of trafficking.‖
unissued, tampered or fraudulent travel documents for the
purpose of promoting trafficking in persons;
(f) To confiscate, conceal, or destroy the passport, travel
documents, or personal documents or belongings of trafficked
persons in furtherance of trafficking or to prevent them from
leaving the country or seeking redress from the government or
SEC. 7. Confidentiality. – At any stage of the investigation,
appropriate agencies; and
rescue, prosecution and trial of an offense under this Act, law
(g) To knowingly benefit from, financial or otherwise, or make
enforcement officers, prosecutors, judges, court personnel,
use of, the labor or services of a person held to a condition of
social workers and medical practitioners, as well as parties to
involuntary servitude, forced labor, or slavery.
the case, shall protect the right to privacy of the trafficked
―(h) To tamper with, destroy, or cause the destruction of
person. Towards this end, law enforcement officers,
evidence, or to influence or attempt to influence witnesses, in
prosecutors and judges to whom the complaint has been
an investigation or prosecution of a case under this Act;
referred may, whenever necessary to ensure a fair and
―(i) To destroy, conceal, remove, confiscate or possess, or
impartial proceeding, and after considering all circumstances
attempt to destroy, conceal, remove, confiscate or possess,
for the best interest of the parties, order a closed-door
any actual or purported passport or other travel, immigration
investigation, prosecution or trial. The name and personal
or working permit or document, or any other actual or
circumstances of the trafficked person or any other information
purported government identification, of any person in order to
tending to establish the identity of the trafficked person and
prevent or restrict, or attempt to prevent or restrict, without
his or her family shall not be disclosed to the public.
lawful authority, the person‘s liberty to move or travel in order
―It shall be unlawful for any editor, publisher, and
to maintain the labor or services of that person; or
reporter or columnist in case of printed materials, announcer
―(j) To utilize his or her office to impede the investigation,
or producer in case of television and radio, producer and
prosecution or execution of lawful orders in a case under this director of a film in case of the movie industry, or any person
Act.‖ utilizing tri-media facilities or electronic information technology
to cause publicity of the name, personal circumstances, or any
information tending to establish the identity of the trafficked
person except when the trafficked person in a written
SEC. 6. Qualified Trafficking in Persons. – Violations of statement duly notarized knowingly, voluntarily and willingly
Section 4 of this Act shall be considered as qualified trafficking: waives said confidentiality.
(a) When the trafficked person is a child; ―Law enforcement officers, prosecutors, judges,
(b) When the adoption is effected through Republic Act No. court personnel, social workers and medical practitioners shall
8043, otherwise known as the "Inter-Country Adoption Act of be trained on the importance of maintaining confidentiality as
1995" and said adoption is for the purpose of prostitution,
a means to protect the right to privacy of victims and to
pornography, sexual exploitation, forced labor, slavery,
involuntary servitude or debt bondage; encourage victims to file complaints.‖
(c) When the crime is committed by a syndicate, or in large
scale. Trafficking is deemed committed by a syndicate if
carried out by a group of three (3) or more persons conspiring
or confederating with one another. It is deemed committed in SEC. 7. Confidentiality. – At any stage of the investigation,
large scale if committed against three (3) or more persons, rescue, prosecution and trial of an offense under this Act, law
individually or as a group; enforcement officers, prosecutors, judges, court personnel,
(d) When the offender is a spouse, an ascendant, parent, social workers and medical practitioners, as well as parties to
sibling, guardian or a person who exercises authority over the the case, shall protect the right to privacy of the trafficked
person. Towards this end, law enforcement officers,
trafficked person or when the offense is committed by a public
prosecutors and judges to whom the complaint has been
officer or employee; referred may, whenever necessary to ensure a fair and
impartial proceeding, and after considering all circumstances
(e) When the trafficked person is recruited to engage in for the best interest of the parties, order a closed-door
prostitution with any member of the military or law investigation, prosecution or trial. The name and personal
enforcement agencies; circumstances of the trafficked person or any other information
(f) When the offender is a member of the military or law tending to establish the identity of the trafficked person and
enforcement agencies; and his or her family shall not be disclosed to the public.
(g) When by reason or on occasion of the act of trafficking in ―It shall be unlawful for any editor, publisher, and
persons, the offended party dies, becomes insane, suffers reporter or columnist in case of printed materials, announcer
mutilation or is afflicted with Human Immunodeficiency Virus or producer in case of television and radio, producer and
(HIV) or the Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS); director of a film in case of the movie industry, or any person
utilizing tri-media facilities or electronic information technology

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-220
to cause publicity of the name, personal circumstances, or any partner or manager thereof shall not be allowed to operate
information tending to establish the identity of the trafficked similar establishments in a different name;
person except when the trafficked person in a written ―(i) If the offender is a foreigner, he or she shall be
statement duly notarized knowingly, voluntarily and willingly immediately deported after serving his or her sentence and be
waives said confidentiality. barred permanently from entering the country;
―Law enforcement officers, prosecutors, judges, ―(j) Any employee or official of government agencies who shall
court personnel, social workers and medical practitioners shall issue or approve the issuance of travel exit clearances,
be trained on the importance of maintaining confidentiality as passports, registration certificates, counseling certificates,
marriage license, and other similar documents to persons,
a means to protect the right to privacy of victims and to
whether juridical or natural, recruitment agencies,
encourage victims to file complaints.‖ establishments or other individuals or groups, who fail to
observe the prescribed procedures and the requirement as
provided for by laws, rules and regulations, shall be held
administratively liable, without prejudice to criminal liability
under this Act. The concerned government official or employee
shall, upon conviction, be dismissed from the service and be
SEC. 10. Penalties and Sanctions. – The following penalties barred permanently to hold public office. His or her retirement
and sanctions are hereby established for the offenses and other benefits shall likewise be forfeited; and
enumerated in this Act: ―(k) Conviction, by final judgment of the adopter for any
―(a) Any person found guilty of committing any of the acts offense under this Act shall result in the immediate rescission
enumerated in Section 4 shall suffer the penalty of
of the decree of adoption.‖
imprisonment of twenty (20) years and a fine of not less than
One million pesos (P1,000,000.00) but not more than Two
million pesos (P2,000,000.00);
―(b) Any person found guilty of committing any of the acts
enumerated in Section 4-A of this Act shall suffer the penalty
of imprisonment of fifteen (15) years and a fine of not less
than Five hundred thousand pesos (P500,000.00) but not more SEC. 11. Use of Trafficked Persons. – Any person who
than One million pesos (P1,000,000.00); buys or engages the services of a trafficked person for
―(c) Any person found guilty of Section 4-B of this Act shall prostitution shall be penalized with the
suffer the penalty of imprisonment of fifteen (15) years and a following: Provided, That the Probation Law (Presidential
fine of not less than Five hundred thousand pesos Decree No. 968) shall not apply:
(P500,000.00) but not more than One million pesos ―(a) Prision Correccional in its maximum period to prision
(P1,000,000.00); mayor or six (6) years to twelve (12) years imprisonment and
―In every case, conviction shall cause and carry the a fine of not less than Fifty thousand pesos (P50,000.00) but
automatic revocation of the license or registration of the not more than One hundred thousand pesos
recruitment agency involved in trafficking. The license of a (P100,000.00): Provided, however, That the following acts
recruitment agency which trafficked a child shall be shall be exempted thereto:
automatically revoked. ―(1) If an offense under paragraph (a) involves sexual
―(d) Any person found, guilty of committing any of the acts intercourse or lascivious conduct with a child, the penalty shall
enumerated in Section 5 shall suffer the penalty of be reclusion temporal in its medium period to reclusion
imprisonment of fifteen (15) years and a fine of not less than perpetua or seventeen (17) years to forty (40) years
Five hundred thousand pesos (P500,000.00) but not more than imprisonment and a fine of not less than Five hundred
One million pesos (P1,000,000.00); thousand pesos (P500,000.00) but not more than One million
―(e) Any person found guilty of qualified trafficking under pesos (P1,000,000.00);
Section 6 shall suffer the penalty of life imprisonment and a ―(2) If an offense under paragraph (a) involves carnal
fine of not less than Two million pesos (P2,000,000.00) but not knowledge of, or sexual intercourse with, a male or female
more than Five million pesos (P5,000,000.00); trafficking victim and also involves the use of force or
―(f) Any person who violates Section 7 hereof shall suffer the intimidation, to a victim deprived of reason or to an
penalty of imprisonment of six (6) years and a fine of not less unconscious victim, or a victim under twelve (12) years of age,
than Five hundred thousand pesos (P500,000.00) but not more instead of the penalty prescribed in the subparagraph above
than One million pesos (P1,000,000.00); the penalty shall be a fine of not less than One million pesos
―(g) If the offender is a corporation, partnership, association, (P1,000,000.00) but not more than Five million pesos
club, establishment or any juridical person, the penalty shall be (P5,000,000.00) and imprisonment of reclusion perpetua or
imposed upon the owner, president, partner, manager, and/or forty (40) years imprisonment with no possibility of parole;
any responsible officer who participated in the commission of except that if a person violating paragraph (a) of this section
the crime or who shall have knowingly permitted or failed to knows the person that provided prostitution services is in fact
prevent its commission; a victim of trafficking, the offender shall not be likewise
―(h) The registration with the Securities and Exchange penalized under this section but under Section 10 as a person
Commission (SEC) and license to operate of the erring agency, violating Section 4; and if in committing such an offense, the
corporation, association, religious group, tour or travel agent, offender also knows a qualifying circumstance for trafficking,
club or establishment, or any place of entertainment shall be the offender shall be penalized under Section 10 for qualified
cancelled and revoked permanently. The owner, president, trafficking. If in violating this section the offender also violates
Section 4, the offender shall be penalized under Section 10
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-221
and, if applicable, for qualified trafficking instead of under this
section; Section 15. Trust Fund. - All fines imposed under this Act
―(b) Deportation. – If a foreigner commits any offense and the proceeds and properties forfeited and confiscated
described by paragraph (1) or (2) of this section or violates pursuant to Section 14 hereof shall accrue to a Trust Fund to
any pertinent provision of this Act as an accomplice or be administered and managed by the Council to be used
accessory to, or by attempting any such offense, he or she exclusively for programs that will prevent acts of trafficking
shall be immediately deported after serving his or her sentence and protect, rehabilitate, reintegrate trafficked persons into the
and be barred permanently from entering the country; and mainstream of society. Such programs shall include, but not
―(c) Public Official. – If the offender is a public official, he or limited to, the following:
she shall be dismissed from service and shall suffer perpetual (a) Provision for mandatory services set forth in Section 23 of
absolute disqualification to hold public, office, in addition to this Act;
(b) Sponsorship of a national research program on trafficking
any imprisonment or fine received pursuant to any other
and establishment of a data collection system for monitoring
provision of this Act.‖ and evaluation purposes;
(c) Provision of necessary technical and material support
services to appropriate government agencies and non-
government organizations (NGOs);
(d) Sponsorship of conferences and seminars to provide venue
for consensus building amongst the public, the academe,
―SEC. 12. Prescriptive Period. – Trafficking cases under this government, NGOs and international organizations; and
Act shall prescribe in ten (10) years: Provided, however, That (e) Promotion of information and education campaign on
trafficking cases committed by a syndicate or in a large scale trafficking.
as defined under Section 6, or against a child, shall prescribe in
twenty (20) years.
―The prescriptive period shall commence to run from the day
on which the trafficked person is delivered or released from
the conditions of bondage, or in the case of a child victim,
from the day the child reaches the age of majority, and shall SEC. 16. Programs that Address Trafficking in
be interrupted by the filing of the complaint or information and Persons. – The government shall establish and implement
shall commence to run again when the proceedings terminate preventive, protective and rehabilitative programs for trafficked
without the accused being convicted or acquitted or are persons. For this purpose, the following agencies are hereby
mandated to implement the following programs:
unjustifiably stopped for any reason not imputable to the
―(a) Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA) – shall make
accused.‖ available its resources and facilities overseas for trafficked
persons regardless of their manner of entry to the receiving
country, and explore means to further enhance its assistance
in eliminating trafficking activities through closer networking
with government agencies in the country and overseas,
particularly in the formulation of policies and implementation of
Section 13. Exemption from Filing Fees. - When the relevant programs. It shall provide Filipino victims of trafficking
trafficked person institutes a separate civil action for the overseas with free legal assistance and counsel to pursue legal
recovery of civil damages, he/she shall be exempt from the action against his or her traffickers, represent his or her
payment of filing fees. interests in any criminal investigation or prosecution, and assist
in the application for social benefits and/or regular immigration
Section 14. Confiscation and Forfeiture of the Proceeds status as may be allowed or provided for by the host country.
and Instruments Derived from Trafficking in Persons. - The DFA shall repatriate trafficked Filipinos with the consent of
In addition to the penalty imposed for the violation of this Act, the victims.
the court shall order the confiscation and forfeiture, in favor of ―The DFA shall take necessary measures for the
the government, of all the proceeds and properties derived efficient implementation of the Electronic Passporting System
from the commission of the crime, unless they are the property to protect the integrity of Philippine passports, visas and other
of a third person not liable for the unlawful act; Provided, travel documents to reduce the incidence of trafficking through
however, That all awards for damages shall be taken from the the use of fraudulent identification documents.
personal and separate properties of the offender; Provided, ―In coordination with the Department of Labor and
further, That if such properties are insufficient, the balance Employment, it shall provide free temporary shelters and other
shall be taken from the confiscated and forfeited properties. services to Filipino victims of trafficking overseas through the
When the proceeds, properties and instruments of migrant workers and other overseas Filipinos resource centers
the offense have been destroyed, diminished in value or established overseas under Republic Act No. 8042, as
otherwise rendered worthless by any act or omission, directly amended.
or indirectly, of the offender, or it has been concealed, ―(b) Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD) –
removed, converted or transferred to prevent the same from shall implement rehabilitative and protective programs for
being found or to avoid forfeiture or confiscation, the offender trafficked persons. It shall provide counseling and temporary
shall be ordered to pay the amount equal to the value of the shelter to trafficked persons and develop a system for
proceeds, property or instruments of the offense. accreditation among NGOs for purposes of establishing centers
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-222
and programs for intervention in various levels of the ―The POEA shall create a blacklist of recruitment
community. It shall establish free temporary shelters, for the agencies, illegal recruiters and persons facing administrative,
protection and housing of trafficked persons to provide the civil and criminal complaints for trafficking filed in the receiving
following basic services to trafficked persons: country and/or in the Philippines and those agencies, illegal
―(1) Temporary housing and food facilities; recruiters and persons involved in cases of trafficking who
―(2) Psychological support and counseling; have been rescued by the DFA and DOLE in the receiving
―(3) 24-hour call center for crisis calls and technology-based country or in the Philippines even if no formal administrative,
counseling and referral system; civil or criminal complaints have been filed: Provided, That the
―(4) Coordination with local law enforcement entities; and rescued victims shall execute an affidavit attesting to the acts
―(5) Coordination with the Department of Justice, among violative of the anti-trafficking law. This blacklist shall be
others. posted in conspicuous places in concerned government
―The DSWD must conduct information campaigns agencies and shall be updated bi-monthly.
in communities and schools teaching parents and families that ―The blacklist shall likewise be posted by the POEA
receiving consideration in exchange for adoption is punishable in the shared government information system, which is
under the law. Furthermore, information campaigns must be mandated to be established under Republic Act No. 8042, as
conducted with the police that they must not induce poor amended.
women to give their children up for adoption in exchange for ―The POEA and OWWA shall accredit NGOs and
consideration. other service providers to conduct PEOS and PDOS,
―(c) Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE) – shall respectively. The PEOS and PDOS should include the
ensure the strict implementation and compliance with the rules discussion and distribution of the blacklist.
and guidelines relative to the employment of persons locally ―The license or registration of a recruitment
and overseas. It shall likewise monitor, document and report agency that has been blacklisted may be suspended by the
cases of trafficking in persons involving employers and labor POEA upon a review of the complaints filed against said
recruiters. agency.
―(d) Department of Justice (DOJ) – shall ensure the ―(i) Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG) –
prosecution of persons accused of trafficking and designate shall institute a systematic information and prevention
and train special prosecutors who shall handle and prosecute campaign in coordination with pertinent agencies of
cases of trafficking. It shall also establish a mechanism for free government as provided for in this Act. It shall provide training
legal assistance for trafficked persons, in coordination with the programs to local government units, in coordination with the
DSWD, Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) and other NGOs Council, in ensuring wide understanding and application of this
and volunteer groups. Act at the local level.
―(e) Philippine Commission on Women (PCW) – shall actively ―(j) Commission on Filipinos Overseas – shall conduct pre-
participate and coordinate in the formulation and monitoring of departure counseling services for Filipinos in intermarriages. It
policies addressing the issue of trafficking in persons in shall develop a system for accreditation of NGOs that may be
coordination with relevant government agencies. It shall mobilized for purposes of conducting pre-departure counseling
likewise advocate for the inclusion of the issue of trafficking in services for Filipinos in intermarriages. As such, it shall ensure
persons in both its local and international advocacy for that the counselors contemplated under this Act shall have the
women‘s issues. minimum qualifications and training of guidance counselors as
―(f) Bureau of Immigration (BI) – shall strictly administer and provided for by law.
enforce immigration and alien administration laws. It shall ―It shall likewise assist in the conduct of
adopt measures for the apprehension of suspected traffickers information campaigns against trafficking in coordination with
both at the place of arrival and departure and shall ensure local government units, the Philippine Information Agency, and
compliance by the Filipino fiancés/fiancées and spouses of NGOs.
foreign nationals with the guidance and counseling ―(k) Local government units (LGUs) – shall monitor and
requirement as provided for in this Act. document cases of trafficking in persons in their areas of
―(g) Philippine National Police (PNP) and National Bureau of jurisdiction, effect the cancellation of licenses of
Investigation (NBI) – shall be the primary law enforcement establishments which violate the provisions of this Act and
agencies to undertake surveillance, investigation and arrest of ensure effective prosecution of such cases. They shall also
individuals or persons suspected to be engaged in trafficking. undertake an information campaign against trafficking in
They shall closely coordinate with each other and with other persons through the establishment of the Migrants Advisory
law enforcement agencies to secure concerted efforts for and Information Network (MAIN) desks in municipalities or
effective investigation and apprehension of suspected provinces in coordination with the DILG, Philippine Information
traffickers. They shall also establish a system to receive Agency (PIA), Commission on Filipinos Overseas (CFO), NGOs
complaints and calls to assist trafficked persons and conduct and other concerned agencies. They shall encourage and
rescue operations. support community-based initiatives which address the
―(h) Philippine Overseas Employment Administration (POEA) trafficking in persons.
and Overseas Workers and Welfare Administration (OWWA) – ―In implementing this Act, the agencies concerned
POEA shall implement Pre-Employment Orientation Seminars may seek and enlist the assistance of NGOs, people‘s
(PEOS) while Pre-Departure Orientation Seminars (PDOS) shall organizations (POs), civic organizations and other volunteer
be conducted by the OWWA. It shall likewise formulate a groups.‖
system of providing free legal assistance to trafficked persons,
in coordination with the DFA. SEC. 16. A new Section 16-A is hereby inserted into
Republic Act No. 9208, to read as follows:

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-223
―SEC. 16-A. Anti-Trafficking in Persons Database. – An
anti-trafficking in persons central database shall be established SEC. 19. A new Section 17-B is hereby inserted into Republic
by the Inter-Agency Council Against Trafficking created under Act No. 9208, to read as follows:
Section 20 of this Act. The Council shall submit a report to the ―SEC. 17-B. Irrelevance of Past Sexual Behavior, Opinion
President of the Philippines and to Congress, on or before Thereof or Reputation of Victims and of Consent of Victims in
January 15 of every year, with respect to the preceding year‘s Cases of Deception, Coercion and Other Prohibited Means. –
programs and data on trafficking-related cases. The past sexual behavior or the sexual predisposition of a
―All government agencies tasked under the law to trafficked person shall be considered inadmissible in evidence
undertake programs and render assistance to address for the purpose of proving consent of the victim to engage in
trafficking in persons shall develop their respective monitoring sexual behavior, or to prove the predisposition, sexual or
and data collection systems, and databases, for purposes of otherwise, of a trafficked person. Furthermore, the consent of
ensuring efficient collection and storage of data on cases of a victim of trafficking to the intended exploitation shall be
trafficking in persons handled by their respective offices. Such irrelevant where any of the means set forth in Section 3(a) of
data shall be submitted to the Council for integration in a this Act has been used.‖
central database system.
―For this purpose, the Council is hereby tasked to SEC. 20. A new Section 17-C is hereby inserted into
ensure the harmonization and standardization of databases, Republic Act No. 9208, to read as follows:
including minimum data requirements, definitions, reporting ―SEC. 17-C. Immunity from Suit, Prohibited Acts and
formats, data collection systems, and data verification systems. Injunctive Remedies. – No action or suit shall be brought,
Such databases shall have, at the minimum, the following instituted or maintained in any court or tribunal or before any
information: other authority against any: (a) law enforcement officer; (b)
―(a) The number of cases of trafficking in persons, sorted social worker; or (c) person acting in compliance with a lawful
according to status of cases, including the number of cases order from any of the above, for lawful acts done or
being investigated, submitted for prosecution, dropped, and statements made during an authorized rescue operation,
filed and/or pending before the courts and the number of recovery or rehabilitation/intervention, or an investigation or
convictions and acquittals; prosecution of an anti-trafficking case: Provided, That such
―(b) The profile/information on each case; acts shall have been made in good faith.
―(c) The number of victims of trafficking in persons referred to ―The prosecution of retaliatory suits against victims
the agency by destination countries/areas and by area of of trafficking shall be held in abeyance pending final resolution
origin; and and decision of criminal complaint for trafficking.
―(d) Disaggregated data on trafficking victims and the ―It shall be prohibited for the DFA, the DOLE, and the POEA
accused/defendants.‖ officials, law enforcement officers, prosecutors and judges to
urge complainants to abandon their criminal, civil and
administrative complaints for trafficking.
―The remedies of injunction and attachment of
properties of the traffickers, illegal recruiters and persons
involved in trafficking may be issued motu proprio by judges.‖
SEC. 17. Legal Protection to Trafficked Persons. –
Trafficked persons shall be recognized as victims of the act or
acts of trafficking and as such, shall not be penalized for
unlawful acts committed as a direct result of, or as an incident
or in relation to, being trafficked based on the acts of
trafficking enumerated in this Act or in obedience to the order Section 18. Preferential Entitlement Under the Witness
made by the trafficker in relation thereto. In this regard, the Protection Program. - Any provision of Republic Act No.
consent of a trafficked person to the intended exploitation set 6981 to the contrary notwithstanding, any trafficked person
forth in this Act shall be irrelevant. shall be entitled to the witness protection program provided
―Victims of trafficking for purposes of prostitution therein.
as defined under Section 4 of this Act are not covered by
Article 202 of the Revised Penal Code and as such, shall not be Section 19. Trafficked Persons Who are Foreign
prosecuted, fined, or otherwise penalized under the said law.‖ Nationals. - Subject to the guidelines issued by the Council,
trafficked persons in the Philippines who are nationals of a
SEC. 18. A new Section 17-A is hereby inserted into
Republic Act No. 9208, to read as follows: foreign country shall also be entitled to appropriate protection,
―SEC. 17-A. Temporary Custody of Trafficked Victims. – assistance and services available to trafficked persons under
The rescue of victims should be done as much as possible with this Act: Provided, That they shall be permitted continued
the assistance of the DSWD or an accredited NGO that services presence in the Philippines for a length of time prescribed by
trafficked victims. A law enforcement officer, on a reasonable the Council as necessary to effect the prosecution of offenders.
suspicion that a person is a victim of any offense defined
under this Act including attempted trafficking, shall
immediately place that person in the temporary custody of the
local social welfare and development office, or any accredited
or licensed shelter institution devoted to protecting trafficked
persons after the rescue.‖
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-224
SEC. 20. Inter-Agency Council Against Trafficking. – (i) Secure from any department, bureau, office, agency, or
There is hereby established an Inter-Agency Council Against instrumentality of the government or from NGOs and other
Trafficking, to be composed of the Secretary of the civic organizations such assistance as may be needed to
Department of Justice as Chairperson and the Secretary of the effectively implement this Act;
Department of Social Welfare and Development as Co- (j) Complement the shared government information system for
Chairperson and shall have the following as members: migration established under Republic Act No. 8042, otherwise
―(a) Secretary, Department of Foreign Affairs; known as the "Migrant Workers and Overseas Filipinos Act of
―(b) Secretary, Department of Labor and Employment; 1995" with data on cases of trafficking in persons, and ensure
―(c) Secretary, Department of the Interior and Local that the proper agencies conduct a continuing research and
Government; study on the patterns and scheme of trafficking in persons
―(d) Administrator, Philippine Overseas Employment which shall form the basis for policy formulation and program
Administration; direction;
―(e) Commissioner, Bureau of Immigration; (k) Develop the mechanism to ensure the timely, coordinated,
―(f) Chief, Philippine National Police; and effective response to cases of trafficking in persons;
―(g) Chairperson, Philippine Commission on Women; (l) Recommend measures to enhance cooperative efforts and
―(h) Chairperson, Commission on Filipinos Overseas; mutual assistance among foreign countries through bilateral
―(i) Executive Director, Philippine Center for Transnational and/or multilateral arrangements to prevent and suppress
Crimes; and international trafficking in persons;
―(j) Three (3) representatives from NGOs, who shall include (m) Coordinate with the Department of Transportation and
one (1) representative each from among the sectors Communications (DOTC), Department of Trade and Industry
representing women, overseas Filipinos, and children, with a (DTI), and other NGOs in monitoring the promotion of
proven record of involvement in the prevention and advertisement of trafficking in the internet;
suppression of trafficking in persons. These representatives (n) Adopt measures and policies to protect the rights and
shall be nominated by the government agency representatives needs of trafficked persons who are foreign nationals in the
of the Council, for appointment by the President for a term of Philippines;
three (3) years. (o) Initiate training programs in identifying and providing the
―The members of the Council may designate their necessary intervention or assistance to trafficked persons; and
permanent representatives who shall have a rank not lower (p) Exercise all the powers and perform such other functions
than an assistant secretary or its equivalent to meetings, and necessary to attain the purposes and objectives of this Act.
shall receive emoluments as may be determined by the Council
in accordance with existing budget and accounting rules and
regulations.
SEC. 22. Secretariat to the Council. – The Department of
Justice shall establish the necessary Secretariat for the Council.
―The secretariat shall provide support for the functions and
projects of the Council. The secretariat shall be headed by an
executive director, who shall be appointed by the Secretary of
the DOJ upon the recommendation of the Council. The
Section 21. Functions of the Council. - The Council shall executive director must have adequate knowledge on, training
have the following powers and functions: and experience in the phenomenon of and issues involved in
(a) Formulate a comprehensive and integrated program to trafficking in persons and in the field of law, law enforcement,
prevent and suppress the trafficking in persons; social work, criminology, or psychology.
(b) Promulgate rules and regulations as may be necessary for ―The executive director shall be under the supervision of the
the effective implementation of this Act; Inter-Agency Council Against Trafficking through its
(c) Monitor and oversee the strict implementation of this Act; Chairperson and Co-Chairperson, and shall perform the
(d) Coordinate the programs and projects of the various following functions:
member agencies to effectively address the issues and ―(a) Act as secretary of the Council and administrative officer
problems attendant to trafficking in persons; of its secretariat;
(e) Coordinate the conduct of massive information ―(b) Advise and assist the Chairperson in formulating and
dissemination and campaign on the existence of the law and implementing the objectives, policies, plans and programs of
the various issues and problems attendant to trafficking the Council, including those involving mobilization of
through the LGUs, concerned agencies, and NGOs; government offices represented in the Council as well as other
(f) Direct other agencies to immediately respond to the relevant government offices, task forces, and mechanisms;
problems brought to their attention and report to the Council ―(c) Serve as principal assistant to the Chairperson in the
on action taken; overall supervision of council administrative business;
(g) Assist in filing of cases against individuals, agencies, ―(d) Oversee all council operational activities;
institutions or establishments that violate the provisions of this ―(e) Ensure an effective and efficient performance of council
Act; functions and prompt implementation of council objectives,
(h) Formulate a program for the reintegration of trafficked policies, plans and programs;
persons in cooperation with DOLE, DSWD, Technical Education ―(f) Propose effective allocations of resources for implementing
and Skills Development Authority (TESDA), Commission on council objectives, policies, plans and programs;
Higher Education (CHED), LGUs and NGOs; ―(g) Submit periodic reports to the Council on the progress of
council objectives, policies, plans and programs;
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-225
―(h) Prepare annual reports of all council activities; and ―SEC. 26-A. Extra-Territorial Jurisdiction. – The State
―(i) Perform other duties as the Council may assign.‖ shall exercise jurisdiction over any act defined and penalized
under this Act, even if committed outside the Philippines and
whether or not such act or acts constitute an offense at the
place of commission, the crime being a continuing offense,
having been commenced in the Philippines and other elements
having been committed in another country, if the suspect or
Section 23. Mandatory Services to Trafficked Persons. - accused:
To ensure recovery, rehabilitation and reintegration into the ―(a) Is a Filipino citizen; or
mainstream of society, concerned government agencies shall ―(b) Is a permanent resident of the Philippines; or
make available the following services to trafficked persons: ―(c) Has committed the act against a citizen of the Philippines.
(a) Emergency shelter or appropriate housing; ―No prosecution may be commenced against a
(b) Counseling; person under this section if a foreign government, in
(c) Free legal services which shall include information about accordance with jurisdiction recognized by the Philippines, has
the victims' rights and the procedure for filing complaints, prosecuted or is prosecuting such person for the conduct
claiming compensation and such other legal remedies available constituting such offense, except upon the approval of the
to them, in a language understood by the trafficked person; Secretary of Justice.
(d) Medical or psychological services; ―The government may surrender or extradite
(e) Livelihood and skills training; and persons accused of trafficking in the Philippines to the
(f) Educational assistance to a trafficked child. appropriate international court if any, or to another State
Sustained supervision and follow through mechanism that will pursuant to the applicable extradition laws and treaties.‖
track the progress of recovery, rehabilitation and reintegration
of the trafficked persons shall be adopted and carried out.

Section 24. Other Services for Trafficked Persons. -

(a) Legal Assistance. - Trafficked persons shall be considered
under the category "Overseas Filipino in Distress" and may
Section 27. Reporting Requirements. - The Council shall
avail of the legal assistance created by Republic Act No. 8042,
subject to the guidelines as provided by law. submit to the President of the Philippines and to Congress an
(b) Overseas Filipino Resource Centers. - The services annual report of the policies, programs and activities relative to
available to overseas Filipinos as provided for by Republic Act the implementation of this Act.
No. 8042 shall also be extended to trafficked persons
regardless of their immigration status in the host country.
(c) The Country Team Approach. - The country team approach
under Executive Order No. 74 of 1993, shall be the operational
scheme under which Philippine embassies abroad shall provide
protection to trafficked persons insofar as the promotion of ―SEC. 28. Funding. – The amount necessary to implement
their welfare, dignity and fundamental rights are concerned. the provisions of this Act shall be charged against the current
year‘s appropriations of the Inter-Agency Council Against
Section 25. Repatriation of Trafficked Persons. - The Trafficking under the budget of the DOJ and the appropriations
DFA, in coordination with DOLE and other appropriate of the other concerned departments. Thereafter, such sums as
agencies, shall have the primary responsibility for the may be necessary for the continued implementation of this Act
repatriation of trafficked persons, regardless of whether they shall be included in the annual General Appropriations Act.‖
are documented or undocumented.
If, however, the repatriation of the trafficked persons shall SEC. 25. A new Section 28-A is hereby inserted into
expose the victims to greater risks, the DFA shall make Republic Act No. 9208, to read as follows:
representation with the host government for the extension of ―SEC. 28-A. Additional Funds for the Council. – The
appropriate residency permits and protection, as may be amount collected from every penalty, fine or asset derived
legally permissible in the host country. from any violation of this Act shall be earmarked as additional
funds for the use of the Council. The fund may be augmented
by grants, donations and endowment from various sources,
domestic or foreign, for purposes related to their functions,
subject to the existing accepted rules and regulations of the
Commission on Audit.‖
Section 26. Extradition. - The DOJ, in consultation with
DFA, shall endeavor to include offenses of trafficking in
persons among extraditable offenses.

Section 29. Implementing Rules and Regulations. - The

Council shall promulgate the necessary implementing rules and

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-226
regulations within sixty (60) days from the effectivity of this imaginary, or any act, omission, condition, status, or
Act. circumstance tending to cause the dishonor, discredit, or
Section 30. Non-restriction of Freedom of Speech and contempt of a natural or juridical person, or to blacken the
of Association, Religion and the Right to Travel. -
memory of one who is dead.
Nothing in this Act shall be interpreted as a restriction of the
freedom of speech and of association, religion and the right to
Elements:
travel for purposes not contrary to law as guaranteed by the
Constitution.
Section 31. Separability Clause. - If, for any reason, any 1. It must be Malicious;
section or provision of this Act is held unconstitutional or
2. That the imputation must be directed at a natural person or
invalid, the other sections or provisions hereof shall not be
a juridical person, or one who is dead;
affected thereby.
3. That the imputation must tend to cause to dishonor,
discredit, or contempt of the person defamed;

4. That there must be an Imputation of a crime, or a vice or

―SEC. 32. Repealing Clause. – Article 202 of the Revised defect, real or imaginary, or any act or omission, condition,
Penal Code, as amended, and all laws, acts, presidential status or circumstance; and
decrees, executive orders, administrative orders, rules and
5. The imputation must be made publicly.
regulations inconsistent with or contrary to the provisions of
this Act are deemed amended, modified or repealed Note: Dishonor means disgrace, shame or ignominy;
accordingly: Provided, That this Act shall not in any way Discredit means loss of credit of reputation; Contempt
amend or repeal the provisions of Republic Act No. 7610, means state of being despised.
otherwise known as the ‗Special Protection of Child Against
Child Abuse, Exploitation and Discrimination Act.'‖ Test of defamatory imputation

In determining whether a statement is defamatory, the words

used are construed in their entirety and taken in their plain,
natural and ordinary meaning as they would be understood by
persons reading them unless it appears they were used and
―SEC. 33. Effectivity. – This Act shall take effect fifteen (15)
understand in another sense.
days following its complete publication in at least two (2)
newspapers of general circulation.‖ Note: The meaning of the writer is immaterial

A charge is sufficient if the words are calculated to induce

hearers to suppose and understand that the person against
Approved: FEB 06 2013
whom they were uttered was guilty of certain offenses or are
sufficient to impeach the honesty, virtue or reputation.

TITLE XII- CRIMES AGAINST CIVIL STATUS OF Note: Criminal intention is imputed against another, not
PERSONS libelous.

Publication

It is the communication of the defamatory matter to some

TITLE XIII- CRIMES AGAINST HONOR third persons. Sending a letter containing defamatory words
against another to third persons is sufficient.

Title Thirteen: Crimes against Honor Malice

Chapter One: Libel (Article 353-362) Two types: (1) Malice in fact - positive desire and an intention
to annoy or injure; (2) Malice in law - presumption of law
Section 1
Note: If communication is privileged, malice not presumed.
Article 353 - Libel
Guidelines when several persons are defamed:
Art. 353. Definition of libel. — A libel is public and
malicious imputation of a crime, or of a vice or defect, real or
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-227
1. Defamation made on different occasions or independent With regard to the other imputations made by petitioner
acts, there are as many crime of libel as there persons directly against complainant, it must be noted that what petitioner
addressed with such statements stated was that various charges (for attempted murder against
petitioner, gambling, theft of fighting cocks) had been filed by
2. If made on a single occasion: (1) directed to a class or the residents against their barangay chairman but these had all
group in general terms, no actionable libel; (2) If statement is been dismissed. For that matter, even if the defamatory
sweeping as to apply every individual in a group or class, that statement is false, no liability can attach if it relates to
individual may prove that the statement specifically pointed to official conduct, unless the public official concerned
him, he can bring his actions separately; (3) several proves that the statements was made with actual
identifiable victims, there as many crimes of libel as there are malice — that is, with knowledge that it was false or
with reckless disregard of whether it was false or not.
person defamed.

Cases:
Art. 354. Requirement for publicity. — Every defamatory
Vasquez v. CA imputation is presumed to be malicious, even if it be true, if no
good intention and justifiable motive for making it is shown,
Facts: except in the following cases:

 Petitioner and some 37 families from the area went 1. A private communication made by any person to
to see then National Housing Authority (NHA) another in the performance of any legal, moral or
General Manager Lito Atienza regarding their social duty; and
complaint against their Barangay Chairman,
Jaime Olmedo. 2. A fair and true report, made in good faith, without
 After their meeting with Atienza and other NHA any comments or remarks, of any judicial, legislative
officials, petitioner and his companions were or other official proceedings which are not of
met and interviewed by newspaper reporters at confidential nature, or of any statement, report or
the NHA compound concerning their complaint. speech delivered in said proceedings, or of any other
act performed by public officers in the exercise of
 The next day, a news article entitled ―38 Pamilya
their functions.
Inagawan ng Lupa‖ appeared in the newspaper Ang
Tinig ng Masa:
General Rule: Every defamatory is presumed to be malicious,
Based on the newspaper article, Olmedo filed a complaint even if true
for libel against petitioner alleging that the latter's
statements cast aspersions on him and damaged his Note: Presumption is rebutted if it shown that: (1) defamatory
reputation. TC convicted the petitioner for libel imputation is true, in case the law allows proof of the truth of
the imputation; (2) published with good intention; (3)
Issue: Whether or not petitioner is liable for libel justifiable motive for making it.

Held: No. Exceptions (Privileged Communications):

To find a person guilty of libel under Art. 353 of the Revised A. A private communication made by any person to
Penal Code, the following elements must be proved: another in the performance of any legal, moral or social
duty; and
1. the allegation of a discreditable act or condition
concerning another; Elements:
2. publication of the charge
3. identity of the person defamed; and 1. That the person who made the communication had a legal,
4. existence of malice. moral or social duty to make the communication or at least, he
had an interest to be upheld;
In this case, there is no doubt that the first three
elements are present. In this case, contrary to the findings 2. That the communication is addressed to an officer or a
of the trial court, on which the Court of Appeals relied, board or superior, having some interest or duty in the matter;
petitioner was able to prove the truth of his charges and
against the barangay official/ His allegation that, through
connivance with NHA officials, complainant was able to obtain 3. Statements made are made in good faith without malice.
title to several lots at the Tondo Foreshore Area was based on
the letter of NHA Inspector General Hermogenes Fernandez to B.
petitioner's counsel
Elements:

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-228
1. That it is fair and true report of a judicial, legislative, or on the question of whether his statements were made
other official proceedings which are not of confidential nature, with malice.
or of a statement, report or speech delivered in said GR: every defamatory imputation is presumed to be malicious,
proceedings, or of any other act performed by a public officer even if true, if no good intention and justifiable motive is
in the exercise of his functions; shown.
XPN: the presumption of malice is done away with when the
2. Made in good faith; and defamatory imputation qualifies as privileged communication.

3. Without any comments or remarks. Brillante's statements were not privileged. As the
Solicitor General noted, Brillantes statements were based
Note: qualified privileged comm. must be made with malice merely on unconfirmed intelligence reports. In the cases
and bad faith to be actionable. Absolutely privileged comm. is at bar, although the open letter was primarily
not actionable even with malice and bad faith. addressed to then President Aquino, the
communication thereof was not limited to her alone. It
Doctrine of Fair Comment was also published in several newspapers of general circulation
and was thus made known to the general public. As a rule, it
Every false imputation directed against a public person in his is the right and duty of a citizen to make a complaint of
public capacity, is not necessarily actionable. any misconduct on the part of public officials, which
comes to his notice, to those charged with supervision over
Criticism them. Such a communication is qualifiedly privileged and the
author is not guilty of libel.
Deals only with such things as shall invite public attention or
call for public comment. It does not follow public man into his The rule on privilege, however, imposes an additional
private life nor pry into his domestic concerns. requirement. Such complaints should be addressed solely to
some official having jurisdiction to inquire into the charges, or
Note: Retaliation cannot be a basis of self defense in power to redress the grievance or has some duty to perform or
defamation. interest in connection therewith.

Brillante v. Court of Appeals Alonzo v. Court of Appeals

Facts:
Facts:
 Dra. Merle A. Alonzo was the Field Operations
Petitioner Roberto Brillante (Brillante), also known as Officer of the Philippine Medical Care
Bobby Brillante, questions his convictions for libel for
Commission (PMCC) for Region XI.
writing and causing to be published in 1988 an open letter
 accused was directed by Executive Officer of
addressed to then President of the Republic of the Philippines
Corazon C. Aquino discussing the alleged participation of Atty. the PMCC, Rossi Castro, to conduct inspections
Jejomar Binay (Binay), then the OIC Mayor and a candidate for of Medicare-accredited clinics and hospitals.
the position of Mayor in the Municipality (now City) of Makati, Among the Medicare-accredited clinics inspected by
and Dr. Nemesio Prudente (Prudente), then President of the accused were the Sto. Niño Medical Clinic and Our
Polytechnic University of the Philippines, in an assassination Lady of Fatima Medical Clinic in Guihing. The clinics
plot against Augusto Syjuco (Syjuco), another candidate for were owned and managed by complainant Dra.
Mayor of Makati at that time. Angeles Velasco, married to Judge Dan Velasco of the
MTC-Hagonoy, Davao del Sur.
Issue: Whether or not Brillante is guilty  After the inspection, accused submitted her
report on her findings to Dr. Jesus Tamesis,
Held: Yes PMCC Vice-Chairman.
 On the basis of said report and other
Ratio: To be liable for libel, the following elements must be documents, Executive Director Rossi Castro,
shown to exist: filed a complaint with the PMCC against the
Sto. Niño Medical Clinic for "Misrepresentation by
(a) the allegation of a discreditable act or condition Extending Confinement of Patients, Misrepresentation
concerning another; by Claiming for Non-Existing Patients, Breach of
(b) publication of the charge; Warranty of Accreditation"
(c) identity of the person defamed; and  Finding that the last portions of the report to
(d) existence of malice. be libelous, complainant Judge Velasco and
There could be no dispute as to the existence of the first complainant Dra. Angeles Velasco filed a
three elements of libel in the cases at bar. Thus, the complaint for libel against the petitioner with the
determination of Brillantes culpability for libel hinges Office of the City Fiscal of Davao City
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-229
  After due trial, the trial court promulgated its
decision finding the petitioner "guilty beyond Facts: An information for libel was filed before the RTC,
reasonable doubt of two (2) crimes of libel Branch 20, Naga City, against the petitioner and Ramos
Issue: Whether or not the report is libelous who were then the managing editor and
correspondent, respectively, of the Bicol Forum, a local
Held: No weekly newspaper circulated in the Bicol Region. The article
provides:
Ratio: For an imputation then to be libelous, the
following requisites must concur: "VILLAFUERTES DENIAL CONVINCES NO ONE
(a) it must be defamatory; NAGA CITY-Gov. Luis Villafuertes denial that he did not spend
(b) it must be malicious; government money for his trips to Japan and Israel two weeks
(c) it must be given publicity; and (d) the victim must be ago has failed to convince people in Camarines Sur, reliable
sources said.
identifiable
What the people know, the sources said, is that the two trips
of the governor who is also the minister of the
Any of the imputations covered by Article 353 is defamatory Government Reorganization Commission was purely
and, under the general rule laid down in Article 354, every junket.
defamatory imputation is presumed to be malicious, This was confirmed when capitol sources disclosed that about
even if it be true; if no good intention and justifiable P700,000.00 collected by way of cash advances by ranking
motive for making it is shown. However, malice is not provincial officials were allegedly used for the two trips."
presumed and must, therefore, be proved, under the
following exceptions provided for in Article 354, viz.:
1. A private communication made by any person to another in Issue: Whether or not questioned news item is libelous
the performance of any legal, moral or social duty; and
2. A fair and true report, made in good faith, without any Held: No
comments or remarks; of any judicial legislative or other
Ratio: Clearly, when confronted with libel cases involving
official proceedings which are not of confidential nature, or of
publications which deal with public officials and the discharge
any statement, report or speech delivered in said proceedings,
of their official functions, this Court is not confined within
or of any other act performed by public officers in the exercise
the wordings of the libel statute; rather, the case
of their functions.
should likewise be examined under the constitutional
The privileged character of these communications is not
precept of freedom of the press.
absolute, but merely qualified since they could still be shown
to be malicious by proof of actual malice or malice in fact. Of course, this does not mean that a public official is
The burden of proof in this regard is on the plaintiff or barred from recovering damages in cases involving
the prosecution. If the statement is sent straight to a
defamations. His entitlement, however, is limited to
person whom it is written there is no publication of instances when the defamatory statement was made
it. 10 The reason for this is that [a] communication of with actual malice that is, with knowledge that it was
the defamatory matter to the person defamed cannot
false or with reckless disregard of whether it was false
injure his reputation though it may wound his self-
or not.
esteem. It is undisputed that thepetitioner, as Field
Operations Officer for Region XI of the PMCC, is a public officer Applied to the case at bar, we hold that the prosecution
and that she submitted the questioned report after she had failed to meet the criterion of reckless disregard. As the
conducted the inspection of the two clinics of Dr. Velasco records reveal, the issue of cash advances against the coffers
pursuant to and by virtue of the directive of the Executive of the provincial government of Camarines Sur was a major
Officer, Atty. Rossi Castro, which was duly approved by the political topic in said locality at that time. Further, it bears
Chairman of the PMCC, emphasis that in this case, the petitioner and Ramos had in
Her authority to conduct the inspection and to submit the their possession information relating to the cash advances and
corresponding report were not questioned by the private the private respondents travels abroad. The information was
respondents. provided by one who worked in the provincial treasurers office
There can then be no doubt that the petitioner made and had access to the pertinent financial records of the
her report in the exercise of her official duty or provincial government.
function. She rendered it in due course to her superior who
had a duty to perform with respect to its subject matter and Santos v. Court of Appeals
which the latter faithfully did by filing the appropriate
complaint against Dr. Velasco after an evaluation of the report. Facts: Petitioner Nanerico D. Santos as a columnist of the
We thus fully agree with the Court of Appeals that the report then Manila Daily Bulletin wrote and published in his
falls within the first paragraph of Article 354 of the weekly column an article entitled "Charges Against
Revised Penal Code (PRIVILEGED). CMS Stock Brokerage, Inc." which article was
quoted verbatim from an unverified complaint filed with the
Flor v. People Securities and Exchange Commission by Rosario Sison
AUFSOL-CRIMREV-230
Sandejas and her daughters charging CMS Stock Brokerage 1. This Administrative Circular does not remove
Inc., particularly its board chairman and controlling stockholder imprisonment as an alternative penalty for
Carlos Moran Sison and its president-general manager Luis F. the crime libel under Article 355 of the
Sison, of engaging in fraudulent practices in the stock market. Revised Penal Code;
2. The Judges concerned may, in the exercise
The lower court dismissed the case against all the of sound discretion, and taking into
accused, with the exception of petitioner Nanerico D. consideration the peculiar circumstances of
Santos. each case, determine whether the imposition
of a fine alone would best serve the interests
Issue: WON the publication of a complaint filed with the of justice or whether forbearing to impose
imprisonment would depreciate the
Securities and Exchange Commission before any judicial action
seriousness of the offense, work violence on
is taken thereon is privileged as a report of a judicial the social order, or otherwise be contrary to
proceeding. the imperative of justice;
3. Should only a fine be imposed and the
Held: Yes accused be unable to pay the fine, there is
no legal obstacle to the application of the
Ratio: Cuenco Case Revised Penal Code provision on subsidiary
imprisonment.
We are firmly convinced that the correct rule on the matter
should be that a fair and true report of a complaint Republic Act No. 10175 (2012)
filed in court without remarks nor comments even
before an answer is filed or a decision promulgated
Section 4(c)(4) provides:
should be covered by the privilege.

The publication of a complaint, being a true and fair Libel. — The unlawful or prohibited acts of libel as defined in
Article 355 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended, committed
report of a judicial proceeding, made in good faith and
through a computer system or any other similar means which
without comments or remarks, is privileged and comes
may be devised in the future.
under Item 2 of Article 354.

It is no longer correct to state that Article 354 is not applicable Disini v. Secretary of Justice
because the published complaint as filed would not by itself
constitute a judicial proceeding, as the issues have not as yet Facts
been joined.
Petitioners lament that libel provisions of the penal code and,
That doctrine established in the Barretto and Choa Tek in effect, the libel provisions of the cybercrime law carry with
Hee cases is no longer controlling and has been them the requirement of ―presumed malice‖ even when the
superseded by the Cuenco case. latest jurisprudence already replaces it with the higher
standard of ―actual malice‖ as a basis for
conviction. Petitioners argue that inferring ―presumed malice‖
from the accused‘s defamatory statement by virtue of Article
Administrative Circular No. 08-2008 354 of the penal code infringes on his constitutionally
guaranteed freedom of expression.
Article 355 of the Revised Penal Code penalizes libel,
committed by means of writing, printing, lithography, Issue
engraving, radio, phonograph, painting, theatrical exhibition,
cinematographic exhibition, or any similar means, with prision Whether or not Section 4(c)(4) of the Cybercrime Prevention
correctional in its minimum and medium periods or fine Act on cyberlibel affected the requirement of ―actual malice‖ as
opposed to ―presumed malice‖ as basis for conviction of libel.
ranging from 200 to 6,000 pesos, or both, in addition to the
civil action which may be brought by the offended party.
Ratio:
This circular provides cases which indicate an emergent rule of
preference for the imposition of fine only rather than The prosecution bears the burden of proving the presence of
imprisonment in libel cases under the circumstances therein actual malice in instances where such element is required to
establish guilt. The defense of absence of actual malice, even
specified.
when the statement turns out to be false, is available where
the offended party is a public official or a public figure, as in
All courts and judges concerned should henceforth take note the cases of Vasquez (a barangay official) and Borjal (the
of the foregoing rule of preference set by the Supreme Court Executive Director, First National Conference on Land
on the matter of the imposition of penalties for the crime of Transportation). Since the penal code and implicitly, the
libel bearing in mind the following principles: cybercrime law, mainly target libel against private persons, the

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-231
Court recognizes that these laws imply a stricter standard of 1. That the offender is a Reporter, editor or manager of
―malice‖ to convict the author of a defamatory statement a newspaper, daily or magazine;
where the offended party is a public figure. Society‘s interest
and the maintenance of good government demand a full 2. He publishes facts connected with the private life of
discussion of public affairs. another; and

But, where the offended party is a private individual, the 3. Such facts are offensive to the honor, virtue, and
prosecution need not prove the presence of malice. The law reputation of said person.
explicitly presumes its existence (malice in law) from the
defamatory character of the assailed statement. For his Note: Also known as "Gag Law" while a report of an
defense, the accused must show that he has a justifiable
official proceeding is allowed, it gags those who would
reason for the defamatory statement even if it was in fact true.
publish therein facts which this article prohibits. This
law prohibits publication of cases relating to adultery,
The Court agrees with the Solicitor General that libel is not a
constitutionally protected speech and that the government has divorce, legitimacy of children.
an obligation to protect private individuals from defamation.
Indeed, cyberlibel is actually not a new crime since Article 353, Art. 358. Slander. — Oral defamation shall be punished
in relation to Article 355 of the penal code, already punishes it. by arresto mayor in its maximum period to prision
In effect, Section 4(c)(4) above merely affirms that online correccional in its minimum period if it is of a serious
defamation constitutes "similar means" for committing libel. and insulting nature; otherwise the penalty shall be
arresto menor or a fine not exceeding 200 pesos
Art. 356. Threatening to publish and offer to present
such publication for a compensation. — The penalty of Kinds:
arresto mayor or a fine from 200 to 2,000 pesos, or
both, shall be imposed upon any person who threatens 1. Simple slander
another to publish a libel concerning him or the
2.Grave slander, when it is of a serious and insulting
parents, spouse, child, or other members of the family
nature
of the latter or upon anyone who shall offer to prevent
the publication of such libel for a compensation or
Factors in determining gravity of the oral defamation
money consideration.
1. Expression used;
Note: Also known as blackmail. Light threats in Art.
282 is also a form of blackmail 2. Personal relations of the accused and the offended
party;
Punishable Acts:
3. Circumstances surrounding the case; and
1. Threatening another to publish a libel concerning
him, or his parents, spouse, child or other members of 4. Social standing and position of the offended party.
the family; and
Note: Slander need not be heard by the offended party.
2. Offering to prevent the publication of such libel for
compensation or money consideration Gossiping is considered as oral defamation if a
defamatory fact is imputed or intriguing against honor
Art. 357. Prohibited publication of acts referred to in if there is no imputation.
the course of official proceedings. — The penalty of
arresto mayor or a fine of from 20 to 2,000 pesos, or Self defense in slander may only be invoked if this reply
both, shall be imposed upon any reporter, editor or is made in good faith and without malice, not
manager or a newspaper, daily or magazine, who shall necessarily defamatory.
publish facts connected with the private life of another
and offensive to the honor, virtue and reputation of Art. 359. Slander by deed. — The penalty of arresto
said person, even though said publication be made in mayor in its maximum period to prision correccional in
connection with or under the pretext that it is its minimum period or a fine ranging from 200 to 1,000
necessary in the narration of any judicial or pesos shall be imposed upon any person who shall
administrative proceedings wherein such facts have perform any act not included and punished in this title,
been mentioned. which shall cast dishonor, discredit or contempt upon
another person. If said act is not of a serious nature,
Elements: the penalty shall be arresto menor or a fine not
exceeding 200 pesos.

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-232
Slander by deed is a crime committed by performing but also upon the special circumstances of the case,
any act which casts dishonor, discredit or contempt antecedents or relationship between the offended party
upon another person. and the offender, which might tend to prove the intention
of the offender at the time
Elements: In the instant case, appellant-petitioner admitted having
uttered the defamatory words against Atty. Vivencio Ruiz.
1. That the offender performs any act not included in
Among others he called Atty. Ruiz, "estapador", which
any other crime against honor;
attributes to the latter the crime of estafa, a serious and
insulting imputation.
2. That such act is performed in the presence of
 In the instant case, appellant-petitioner imputed the
another persons; and
crime of estafa against a prominent lawyer one-time
3. That such act cast dishonor, discredit or contempt Justice of the Peace and member of the Provincial
Board of Nueva Ecija, a professor of law and for
upon the offended party.
sometime a president of the Nueva Ecija Bar
Note: If no intent to dishonor the offended party, the Association.
As the scurrilous imputation strikes deep into the
crime is maltreatment by deed.
character of the victim, no special circumstance need
Kinds: be shown for the defamatory words uttered to be
considered grave oral defamation
1. Simple slander by deed
Section 2 - General Provisions
2. Grave slander by deed, which of a serious nature.
Article 360
Note: Common denominator of unjust vexation and
slander by deed is irritation or annoyance. Without any Person Liable:
other concurring factor it is only unjust vexation.
1. The person who publishes, exhibits or causes the
Slapping in the face of another is slander by deed if the publication or exhibition of any defamatory in writing
intention of the accused is to cause shame and or similar means;
humiliation (People v. Delfin, GR No. 15230, July 31,
1961) 2. The author or editor of a book or pamphlet;

Victorio v. Court of Appeals 3. The editor or business manager of a daily newspaper

magazine or serial publication; and
Short Facts: Petitioners were overheard by Emiliano Manuzon,
a policeman of Cabanatuan City and one of the witnesses for 4. The owner of the printing plant which publishes a
the prosecution, to have uttered the following defamatory libelous article with his consent and all other persons
words: Daniel: "Kayabang ng putang-inang abogadong Ruiz na who in any way participate in or have connection with
iyan, tunaw naman ang utak, suwapang at estapador." its publication.
Exequiel: "Lastog ta ukinnanata abogado Ruiz, suwapang,
estapador, paltogak ta ukinana ta abogado Ruiz, suwapang Venue:
ken estapador." (Translated in Tagalog as, Mayabang yang
putang-inang abogado Ruiz na iyan, babarilin ko ang putang The criminal and civil action for damages in cases of
inang iyan, suwapang at estapador.") written defamations as provided for in this chapter,
shall be filed simultaneously or separately with the
Issue: WON the words uttered by the petitioners in a court of first instance of the province or city where the
conversation with each other and while in the heat of anger libelous article is printed and first published or where
constitute grave oral defamation instead of merely light oral any of the offended parties actually resides at the time
defamation of the commission of the offense: Provided, however,
That where one of the offended parties is a public
Ratio: To determine whether the offense committed is
officer whose office is in the City of Manila at the time
serious or slight oral defamation, the Court adopted the
of the commission of the offense, the action shall be
following guidelines:
filed in the Court of First Instance of the City of Manila,
. . . We are to be guided by a doctrine of ancient or of the city or province where the libelous article is
respectability that defamatory words will fall under one or printed and first published, and in case such public
the other, depending upon, as Viada puts it, '...upon their officer does not hold office in the City of Manila, the
sense and grammatical meaning judging them separately, action shall be filed in the Court of First Instance of the

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-233
province or city where he held office at the time of the he actually resided at the time of the
commission of the offense or where the libelous article commission of the offense.
is printed and first published and in case one of the 3. If the offended party is a public officer
offended parties is a private individual, the action shall whose office is in Manila at the time of the
be filed in the Court of First Instance of the province or commission of the offense, the action may
city where he actually resides at the time of the be filed in the Court of First Instance of
Manila.
commission of the offense or where the libelous matter
is printed and first published: Provided, further, That If the offended party is a public officer holding office outside of
the civil action shall be filed in the same court where Manila, the action may be filed in the Court of First Instance of
the criminal action is filed and vice versa: Provided, the province or city where he held office at the time of the
furthermore, That the court where the criminal action commission of the offense
or civil action for damages is first filed, shall acquire
jurisdiction to the exclusion of other courts: And, In this case, the Informations did not allege that the
provided, finally, That this amendment shall not apply offended party was actually residing in Baguio City at
to cases of written defamations, the civil and/or the time of the commission of the offenses, or that the
criminal actions which have been filed in court at the alleged libelous articles were printed and first
time of the effectivity of this law. published in Baguio City.

Agustin v. Pamintuan It cannot even be inferred from the allegation the

offended party was the Acting General Manager of the
Facts: Baguio Country Club and of good standing and
reputation in the community that the private
The Office of the City Prosecutor of Baguio City, filed four
respondent (complainant) was actually residing in
separate Informations[2] charging the petitioner, a
Baguio City.
Philippine Daily Inquirer columnist, with libel.
Gonzales v. Arcilla
Agustin then filed a Motion to Quash the Informations,
on the sole ground that the court had no jurisdiction Facts:
over the offenses charged. He pointed out that the said
Informations did not contain any allegation that the offended  An information for slander against accused Marcela N.
party, Anthony de Leon, was actually residing in Baguio City, Gonzales (hereinafter referred to as the appellee) was
or that the alleged libelous articles were printed and first filed before the City Court of Davao by Assistant City
published in a newspaper of general circulation in Baguio City. Fiscal Alfredo Celi.
 The appellee moved to quash the information
Issue: WON the RTC of Baguio City has jurisdiction over the asserting that the City Court has no jurisdiction over
offenses charged in the four Information for libel on the the offense charged and that the Officer who filed the
premise that the Informations are defective information had no authority to do so.

She claims therein that the alleged defamation imputes

Held: No
the crime of adultery and thus cannot be prosecuted de
Ratio: Venue in criminal cases is an essential element of oficio. The other remarks, however, do not charge a crime,
jurisdiction.[10] The jurisdiction of a court over the criminal case The complaint must, therefore, be brought at the instance of
is determined by the allegations in the complaint or the offended party, which was not done in this case.
Information, and the offense must have been committed or
Issue: WON the information should be quashed on the ground
any one of its essential ingredients took place within the
that only one defamatory remark imputing a private offense
territorial jurisdiction of the court.
which cannot be prosecuted de oficio was alleged.
 Thus, the rules on venue in Article 360 of the Revised
Held: No
Penal Code are as follows:
1. Whether the offended party is a public
Ratio: The issues in this case revolve on the correct
official or a private person, the criminal
appreciation of the statements uttered by appellee and alleged
action may be filed in the Court of First
Instance of the province or city where the in the information to be slanderous. They read as follows:
libelous article is printed and first published.
Mang-aagaw ng asawa ng may asawa! Tibihon! Putang Ina
2. If the offended party is a private individual,
the criminal action may also be filed in the Mo! Walang Hiya! Patay Gutom!
Court of First Instance of the province where

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-234
We agree with appellants that "mang-aagaw ng asawa ng may persons accusation
asawa," even if translated as "one who grabs another's
husband," does not necessarily mean an adulteress. At most, it Limited to the act of planting Giving false statement under
may imply that the person whom it is addressed is a "flirt, a evidence and the like in order oath or making false affidavit,
temptress, or one who is in enticing other husbands;" hence, it to incriminate an innocent imputing the person the
is more of an imputation of a vice, condition or act not person commission of a crime
constituting a crime.
It is committed by performing It is committed when the
Art. 361. Proof of the truth. — In every criminal an act imputation was falsely made
prosecution for libel, the truth may be given in before an officer
evidence to the court and if it appears that the matter
charged as libelous is true, and, moreover, that it was
published with good motives and for justifiable ends,
People v. Alagao
the defendants shall be acquitted.
Facts: City Fiscal of Manila filed an information against
Proof of the truth of an imputation of an act or the defendants-appellees charging them of having
omission not constituting a crime shall not be committed the complex crime of incriminatory
admitted, unless the imputation shall have been made machinations through unlawful arrest
against Government employees with respect to facts
related to the discharge of their official duties.
the defendants, through counsel, moved to quash the
information against them on the grounds that (1) the facts
In such cases if the defendant proves the truth of the
charged in the information do not constitute an offense; and
imputation made by him, he shall be acquitted.
(2) the court trying the case has no jurisdiction over the
offense charged. Later on, the defendants filed a supplemental
When proof of truth is admissible in a charge for libel
motion to quash, alleging that the information charges more
than one offense.
1. When the act or omission imputed constitutes a crime
regardless of whether the offended party is a private individual
The Court of First Instance of Manila issued an order
or a public officer;
sustaining the motion to quash
2. When the offended party is a Gov't employee, even if the
Issue: WON the information filed in the court below alleges
imputation does not constitute a crime, provided it is related to
the discharge of his official duties. the complex crime of "incriminatory machinations through
unlawful arrest."
Art. 362. Libelous remarks. — Libelous remarks or
Held: Yes
comments connected with the matter privileged under
the provisions of Article 354, if made with malice, shall
not exempt the author thereof nor the editor or Ratio: We find that the information in the present case
managing editor of a newspaper from criminal liability. specifically alleges that the accused did "willfully,
unlawfully and feloniously incriminate and impute to
Chapter Two: Incriminatory Machinations one Marcial Apolonio y Santos the commission of the
crime of bribery through unlawful arrest ... ."We agree
Art. 363. Incriminating innocent person. — Any person who, by with the Solicitor General in his contention that the accused
any act not constituting perjury, shall directly incriminate or first had to resort to unlawful arrest in order to be able to plant
impute to an innocent person the commission of a crime, shall the P1.00 bill among the money taken from the offended party
be punished by arresto menor. Under the circumstances of the case, the accused had to arrest
Marcial because it was the only way that they could with
Elements: facility detain him and, more importantly, search his person or
effects and, in the process, commingle therewith the marked
1. That the offender performs an act;
peso bill. It should be observed that without detaining,
2. That by such acts he directly incriminates or imputes to an investigating and searching Marcial it would have been
impossible, if not difficult, for the accused to plant the marked
innocent person the commission of a crime; and
one peso bill, because then they could not have simply held
3. That such act does not constitute perjury. Marcial and placed the marked one peso bill in his pocket,
without the latter vigoriously protesting the act.
Incriminating innocent Perjury by making false

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-235
For a criminal complaint or information to charge the principal purpose to blemish the honor and reputation of a
commission of a complex crime, the allegations contained person.
therein do not necessarily have to charge a complex crime as
defined by law. It is sufficient that the information contains This felony undoubtedly falls under the coverage of crimes
allegations which show that one offense was a necessary involving moral turpitude, the latter term having been
means to commit the other. defined as "an act of baseness, vileness, depravity in the
private and social duties which a man owes his fellow man, or
to society in general, contrary to the accepted and customary
rule of right and duty between man and man, or conduct
Art. 364. Intriguing against honor. — The penalty of contrary to justice, honesty, modesty and good morals" (Tak
arresto menor or fine not exceeding 200 pesos shall be Ng vs. Republic of the Philippines, 106 Phil. 727 [1959]).
imposed for any intrigue which has for its principal
purpose to blemish the honor or reputation of a person. Respondent, having been found guilty of willfully and
maliciously causing intrigue against a person for the
It is committed by any person who shall make any purpose of tainting his honor and reputation, is
intrigue which has for its principal purpose to blemish consequently guilty of a crime involving moral
the honor or reputation of another. turpitude. On this score alone, her dismissal from the
service is warranted.
Note: This refers to such intrigues against a person's
honor or reputation which are not otherwise punished TITLE XIX- QUASI-OFFENSES
under other articles in the RPC. It differs from XIX, XII, X,
defamation in that it consists of tricky or secret plots
and may be committed using written or spoken words
which are defamatory (People v. Fontanilla)

Betguen v. Masangcay

Facts:

 In this complaint for dishonesty, grave misconduct,

conviction of an offense and unauthorized absences,
respondent is charged, primarily, with
concealing the records of C.A.-G.R. 10643 entitled
"People of the Philippines vs. Dominga P. Masangcay"
for grave oral defamation wherein respondent
Dominga P. Masangcay, Clerk IV of the Office of the
Clerk of Court, RTC Cabarroguis, Quirino, is the
accused/appellant.
 G. Cabanag and Luz Ancheta filed separate criminal
complaints for grave oral defamation against
respondent with the Municipal Trial Court of
Cabarroguis, Quirino, docketed as Criminal Case Nos.
901 and 902, respectively.

After joint trial, respondent was found guilty of intriguing

against honor under Article 364 of the Revised Penal Code and
was imposed a fine of P200.00 and ordered to indemnify
complainants in the amount of P5,000.00 each. On appeal to
the Regional Trial Court, the conviction was affirmed in toto.
The Court of Appeals likewise affirmed respondent's conviction.

Issue: Whether or not should be dismissed for having

previously convicted of intriguing against honor

Held: Yes

Ratio: Article 364 of the Revised Penal Code defines

"intriguing against honor" as any intrigue which has for its

AUFSOL-CRIMREV-236