Case No.

15
G.R. No. L-12495 July 26, 1960
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs.
DIONISIO LIDRES, defendant-appellant.

Facts:
Josita Diotay and defendant Dionisio Lidres filed their respective applications as substitute
teachers to fill up the vacancy created by the maternity leave of one Magdalena P. Echavez.
Diotay was recommended by the supervising teacher to fill up the position. However, Echavez
requested Diotay to sign an agreement wherein both Diotay and defendant agreed that the
period of the maternity leave would be equally divided between them. Thereafter, Diotay
began teaching on January 4, 1954. On February 12, 1954 apparently on the sttength of the
agreement, defendant appeared at the school, armed with a prepared letter of resignation for
the signature of Diotay. Diotay refused to resign. So on February 22, 1954, defendant went to
the classroom where Diotay was conducting her classes, and against the latter's will took over
the class. On May 31, 1954, the defendant was prosecuted and convicted of usurpation of
official functions as defined and penalized in Republic Act No. 10.

Issue:
Whether or not the defendant is liable under RA no. 10.

Provision:
Article 10: Usurpation of authority

Ruling:
The court ruled an examination of the of House Bill No. 126, which became Republic Act 10,
discloses indisputably that said Act was really intended as an emergency measure, to cope with
seditious organizations at the time of its passage in September 1946. Hence, the elimination of
the element of pretense of position required under Art. 171 of the Revised Penal Code. Since it
is neither alleged in the information nor proved the trial that the defendant is a member of a
seditious organization engaged in subversive activities, he cannot be held liable.