Title 4 ; Crimes against

Public Interest
 Article 170; Falsification of legislative documents
Elements:
1. That there be a bill, resolution or ordinance enacted or approved
or pending approval by either House of the Congress/ any
provincial board or municipal council;
2. Offender alters the same;
3. He has no proper authority thereof;
4. Alteration has changed the meaning of the documents

Concepts: Any person, public officer or private individual, can be

offender in this crime
Article 171; Falsification by public officer, employee or notary or
ecclesiastic minister
Elements:

A. Par 1; Counterfiting or imitating any handwriting, signature or rubric

- That the offender is a public officer, employee or notary public;
- He takes advantage of his official position
- He falsifies a document by counterfeiting or imitating any handwriting,
signature or rubric
B. Par 2; Causing to appear that person have participated in any act or proceeding
when they did not in fact so participate
- That offender = public offcer/ ee/ notary public
- Takes advantage of his official position
- Falsifies a docu by causing it to appear that person have participated in any
act or proceeding
- Such person or persons did not in fact so participate in the proceeding
C. Par 3; Attributing to person who have participated in an act/ proceeding statements other
than those in fact made by them
- That a person or persons participated in an act / proceeding
- That the offender, in making a docu, attributed to such person or persons
statements other than those in fact made by such person or persons
- Offender - making docu – attributed to such person or persons statements other
than those in fact made by such person/persons

D. Par 4; Making untruthful statements in narration of facts

- Offender makes in a public docu – untruthful statements in a narration of facts
- Offender has legal obligation to disclose the truth of the facts narrated by him
- Facts narrated by the offender are absolutely false

E. Par 5; Altering True Dates

- Mere alteration of date per se = not constitute falsification but alteration date
must be essential to the document
- if such alteration does not affect either the veracity of docu or effects = such
alteration = not constitute the crime of falsification
C. Par 6; Making any alteration or intercalation in a genuine document which changes its
meaning
- That there be an alteration / tercalation (insertion ) on a docu
- Made on a genuine docu
- alteration / intercalation has changed the meaning of the docu
- changes made the docu speak something false

C. Par 7; Issuing any authenticated form a document purporting to be a copy of an original

document when no such original exists, or including in such copy a statement contrary
to or different form, that of genuine original.
- Offender here is a public officer / notary public – Authentication only be made by
custodian or the one who prepared and retained the copy of the original product
- Only act which cannot be committed by a private individual or a public officer =
does not take advantage of his official position
- Private person who cooperates with the public officer in the falsification = guilty
incurs same liablity as the public officer
Elements of Article 171:

1. That the offender is public officer/ ee or notary public

2. He takes advantage of his position
3. Falsifies a document by committing any of the following acts  2CAMAM2I
4. In case of offender is an ECCLESIASTICAL MINISTER , the act of falsification is
committed to any record/ document of such character that its falsification may affect
the status of persons

Concept of Article 171:

• Necessary that such public officer takes advantage of his position if not it would fall
into 172
• Meaning of the taking advantage  they had the duty to make or prepare or otherwise
intervene in the preparation of document  they had official custody of the falsified
document
• Falsification of document has technical meaning but limited to the 7 ways listed in the
171 except for no. 7
• Document is a writing or instrument by which a fact may be proven and affirmed –
written statement by which a right is established or an obligation extinguished
• It is NOT necessary to specify the kind of falsification on kind of the document
• Falsification of public document – leading other to errors as to its authenticity
• Principally the undermining of the public faith/ destruction of truth as solemnly
proclaimed therein
• Notary public as offender – undermines public trust or reliance on notarized documents
as evidence
• Falsification of last will/ testament – validity of attestation clause – prosecution must
prove that either the testator could not have authorized the instrument or instrumental
witnesses had no capacity to due execution of the will – READ G.R. No. 225696
• Damage is not element – because the principal thing punished is the violation of the
public faith and the destruction of the truth therein solemnly proclaimed
• Court interpreter who falsified a court order – not considered have abuse public
function; it is not her duty to prepare such order  liable for Article 172 of RPC
 Article 172; Falsification by private individual and use of falsified
documents
Acts punished:
1. Falsification of public, commercial, or official documents by PRIVATE
individual
2. Falsification of private documents by any person
3. Use of falsified document

Kinds of Document:

a. Public Document – any instrument authorized by a notary public or competent public

official w/ solemnities required by law. Issued/ published by a political body or otherwise
connected w/ public business
 Under Rules of Court;
• written official acts, or records of the official acts of sovereign authority, official
bodies & tribunals, public officers, whether PH or foreign
• Docu – acknowledge before a notary public excepts last will and testament
• Records – kept in PH – private docu required by law to be entered therein
 Ex: Burial permit, Official Receipt issued upon the receipt of money for public
purposes
 Secretary’s certificate – public docu
 Board Resolution – not – w/in Section 19 Rule 132 of the Revised Rules of
Evidence
 Disbursement Vouchers. Reports of Waste Material, Requisition for Supplies
on/or Equipment & Certificates of Emergency Purchase ---- by DPWH – PD
 Pd - acknowledge by notary – self authenticating and requires no further
authentication in order to be presented as evidence in court
 The purpose of notarization ; is to authorize such documents to be given in
evidence without further proof of their execution and delivery
• Official Document – one issued by public official in the exercise of his office
• Commercial Documents – instrument/ used by merchants or businessmen to promote
or facilitate trade or credit transactions
 Promissory notes, receipts, order slips, invoice or sales invoice
• Private Documents – deed or instrument executed by private person w/o the
intervention of a notary public / other person legally authorized
 Disbursement Voucher
• Docu – acknowledge before a notary public excepts last will and testament
• Records – kept in PH – private docu required by law to be entered therein
 Ex: Burial permit, Official Receipt issued upon the receipt of money for public
purposes
 Secretary’s certificate – public docu
 Board Resolution – not – w/in Section 19 Rule 132 of the Revised Rules of
Evidence
 Disbursement Vouchers. Reports of Waste Material, Requisition for Supplies
on/or Equipment & Certificates of Emergency Purchase ---- by DPWH – PD
 Pd - acknowledge by notary – self authenticating and requires no further
authentication in order to be presented as evidence in court
 The purpose of notarization ; is to authorize such documents to be given in
evidence without further proof of their execution and delivery
• Official Document – one issued by public official in the exercise of his office
• Commercial Documents – instrument/ used by merchants or businessmen to promote
or facilitate trade or credit transactions
 Promissory notes, receipts, order slips, invoice or sales invoice
• Private Documents – deed or instrument executed by private person w/o the
intervention of a notary public / other person legally authorized
 Disbursement Voucher
PAR. 1 Falsification of public, commercial or official by a private individual

Elements;
1. That the offender – private indi / public officer / ee – did not take
advantage of his official position
2. He committed any of the acts of falsification enumerated in Art. 171
3. Falsification – committed in public or official or commercial document

Concepts:
• Not take advantage of his position
• Violation public faith/ destruction of truth as therein solemnly proclaimed
• Intent must be established  mens rea must be shown to the committed felonies intent –
mental state – shown by overt acts – falsification – the criminal intent to pervert the truth
is lacking in cases showing that – accused did not benefit from the falsification and no
damages and no damage to either gov’t or to 3rd person
• That change in the public document must be such as to affect the integrity of the same or
to change – otherwise produce
• Essential element of the intention of the crime
• Damage is not element – does not requiree of damage or intent to damage
• It may be committed by Culpa or negligence – as it is not a simple modality of a willful
but a distinct crime in itself – Quasi Offense
• Information exclusively charging the commission of a willful offense upon the theory that
the greater includes the lesser offense
• Samson V CA - negligence – proper and adequate means to assure himself of the
identity of the real claimants
• Sevilla V. People – marking “no’ – pending case – he was not the one prepared the said
pds – everyone to execute his own acts with due diligence
• The onle that is penalized is that the mental attitude or condition behind the acts of
dangerous recklessness and lack of care or foresight – consequences
• Complex Crime with other crimes
• In defrauding other- already consummated - damage or intent to cause damage – not
being elemtent
• Complex Crime of Estafa through falsification of public document  commits any in 171
as necessary means to commit Estafa
• In Estafa through Falsification of commercial document – damage element –
consummated – falsification
• Estafa and Falsification CANNOT be determined and considered independently of the
falsification
• Forgery: prove – clear, positive, convincing evidence or the same is never presumed
• Rule 132 Sec 22 : the geniuneness of the manner – 1st; any witness who believes the
handwriting such person because he has SEEN the person write – 2nd comparison of the
handwritten
• Validity and regularity prevails over allegations of forgery and fraud
• Lamsen V People; Genuinenes and due execution of a document CANNOT BE established
merely by a machine copy – photocopies are considered secondary evidence

• FALSIFICATION OF PRIVATE DOCUMENT BY ANY PERSON:

Elements:
1. Offender committed any of the acts of falsification except number 7
2. Falsification was committed in any Private document
3. Falsification caused damage to a 3rd party or at least was committed w/ intent to
cause such damage

Offender: Private individual / Notary Public / Public Officer – they not take advantage
of their position

2nd Elements requires additional independent evidence of damage or intention to cause

the same to a 3rd person.
• Forgery: prove – clear, positive, convincing evidence or the same is never presumed
• Rule 132 Sec 22 : the geniuneness of the manner – 1st; any witness who believes the
handwriting such person because he has SEEN the person write – 2nd comparison of the
handwritten
• Validity and regularity prevails over allegations of forgery and fraud
• Lamsen V People; Genuinenes and due execution of a document CANNOT BE established
merely by a machine copy – photocopies are considered secondary evidence

• FALSIFICATION OF PRIVATE DOCUMENT BY ANY PERSON:

o Elements:
1. Offender committed any of the acts of falsification except number 7
2. Falsification was committed in any Private document
3. Falsification caused damage to a 3rd party or at least was committed w/ intent to
cause such damage
o Offender: Private individual / Notary Public / Public Officer – they not take
advantage of their position
o 2nd Elements requires additional independent evidence of damage or intention to
cause the same to a 3rd person.
o Damage is not material – includes the damage to one’s honor – mere intent
o No complex crime of estafa through falsification of private document
o Proper crime to be charged ; FALSIFICATION OF PRIVATE DOCUMENT OR
ESTAFA
• IF THE FALSIFICATION OF A PRIVATE DOCUMENT ; committted as
means to commit estafa  FALSIFICATION
• IF THE ESTAFA COMMITITED WITHOUT NECESSITY OF
FALSIFYING DOCUMENT  ESTAFA

o Variance doctrine not applicable – if a person was already charged of falsification of

commercial docu he cannot be convicted to falsification of private document
o People V. Andaya: It would be simply unfair and underhanded to convict petitioner
on this ground not alleged while he was concentrating his defense against the ground
alleged
o Malabanan V Sandiganbayan: Erroneous – falsification in commercial v private
documents – beyond the elements under 171
o Distinction between falsification by Private persons of Public Documents and of
Private Documents ;
> Private person of Public Documents; mere performance of any of acts of
falsification enumberated in Article 171
> Private Document; likewise be shown that such act of falsification was committed
to a damage of 3rd party or with intent to cause such damage
 o It is unnecessary that there be present the idea of gain or the intent to injure a 3 rd
person  contradiction to private documents , principal things – violates of public
faith and destruction of the truth as therein solemnly proclaimed

• USE OF FALSIFIED DOCUMENT :

o Acts Punished :
Ø Introducing in a judicial proceeding
Ø Use in any other transactions

o Elements:
1. Offender knew that a document was falsified by another person
2. False document is embraced in Art. 171 or any subdivision No. 1 or 2 of
Article 172
3. Introduced said document in evidence in any judicial proceeding

• Concept:
- Judicial Proceeding – legal proceeding – judicial content to determine and enforce
legal rights
- Not limited to Private Individuals
- Damage / intent to cause damage is NOT an element
• USE OF FALSIFIED DOCUMENT IN ANY OTHER PROCEEDING :
o Elements:
1. Offender knew that a document was falsified by another person
2. False documents is embraced in Art . 171 any subdivision no. 1 or 2 of Article 172
3. He used such document
4. Use of false document cause damage to another at least it was used with intent
to cause such damage
o Concepts:
Ø Use of falsified docu is NOT necessary include in crime of falsification of public
Document
Ø Element of damage os intent to cause damage MUST be established
Ø Presumption that a holder of a forged document is himself the forger – forged
instrument – is strong evidence tending to established that the used himself
Ø Presumption to apply the use of forged document --- connected in time with the
forgery or user may be proved to have capacity to undertake forgery or such
close connection w/ the forgers to create a reasonable link
Ø Presumption of authorship of the falsification applies in the absence of contrary
convincing proof by the accused
 Article 177; Usurpation of Authority or official functions

Two crimes:
a. Usurpation of authority
b. Usurpation of functions
Ways of commititing:
• knowingly and false representing oneself to be an officer agent or
representative of any dept or agency of the PH Gov’t or any foreign gov’t

• Performing any act pertaining to any person in authority or public officer of

the PH gov’t or foreign gov’t or any agency – UNDER pretense official
position, and WITHOUT being lawfully entitled to do so
Concepts:
• Offender should have performed – pertaining to a person in authority / public officer
• Express/ Explicit representation on the part of the offender before he can be convicted
• Represented to be an officer + usurpation of authority / official functions of any officer
 Article 178; Using Fictitious name and concealing true name

Two crimes:
a. Using fictitious name
b. Concealing true name
Elements of using fictitious name:
a. offender uses a name other that this real name
b. uses the fictitious name publicly
c. Purpose  conceal a crime
 evade the execution of a judgement
 cause damage to public interest
Elements of using fictitious name:
a. Offender conceals his true name / other circrumstances
b. purpose is ONLY to conceal his identity
Concepts: - Damage must be public interest, if private  ESTAFA
- Correlate with Article 142
- USED TO EVADE A SENTENCE –NOT evasion of sentence but THIS ARTICLE
 Article 179; Illegal use of uniforms or insignia

Elements:
a. Offender makes use of insignia, uniform or dress
b. insignia, uniform or dress pertains to an office not held by the offender
or to class of person which he is NOT a member
c. insignia, uniform or dress - used publicly and improperly
Concepts:
- Office or uniform does not exist – no crime
- Wearing imaginary uniform – no crime
- Naval, military or police uniform of a foreign state  RA 75
- Wearing insignia, badge or emblem of members of the AFP  RA 493
- Illegal manufacture of PNP uniform or insignias  EO 297
Elements: a) b) c) d)
Article ny against a defendant
180;
There be a CRIMINAL proceeding
False Offender testifies falsely under oath against the
defendant Offender who gives false testimony knows
that it is false
testimo Defendant whom false testimony is either acquitted or convicted –
final sentence
Concepts:
• 180, 181 and 182 – distinct to each
other • 180 and 181 – criminal case
• 180 is a WITNESS TESTIFYING AGAINST THE ACCUSED  Offender is a
witness for the prosecution
• 181 – offender is a WITNESS FOR THE DEFENDANT – witness for the defense
• There must be CONVICTION or ACQUITTAL FIRST!!!! – this article covers ;
reclusion temporal, reclusion perpetua, any other afflictive penalties , correctional
 penalty , fine or acquittal  fails to cover = violator of 180 = light penalty = Art. 25
• Violator may exist even if the accused convicted or acquitted
• Period of prescription ; shall commence to run from the day on which the crimes
is discovered by the offended party, authorities or agents (Art. 91)
Concepts for 180:
• This article made depend UPON THE CONVICTION OR ACQUITTAL of the defendant
in the principal case
• Act of testifying falsely does NOT constitute an actionable offense UNTIL the principal
case is FINALLY DECIDED
• Basis of such penalty  in conviction or acquittal of the defendant
• Offender is liable even the testimony is not considered by the court – mere giving false
testimony
• Case must BE TERMINATED FIRST whether defendant is acquitted or convicted – final

Article 181; False testimony favorable to the defendant

Elements:
1. There be a criminal proceeding
2. Offender testifies falsely under oath in favour of the defendant therein
3. Offender gives false testimony knows that it is false
Concepts:
• Intent to favour the accused is ESSENTIAL in this kind of false testimony
• Must first be convicted / acquitted
• WITNESS IS FOR DEFENSE
 Article 182; False Testimony in Civil cases
Elements:
1. Testimony be given in a civil case
2. testimony must relate to the issues presented in said case
3. Testimony must be false
4. False testimony must be given by the defendant knowing the same to be false
5. Testimony  malicious and given with an intent to affect the issues presented in
said case

Concepts:
- no need that case where the false testimony is introduct be terminated first before a
complaint under this article be filed
- Defines / penalizes the false testimony – civil - which makes the proceedings or the penalty
imposed in such cases in any WISE dependent on the outcome – civil case – false testimony
is given – no reason why crim should be suspended pending trial o
 Article 183; False Testimony in other case and Perjury in Solemn
Affirmation
Acts Punished :
a.) falsely testifying under oath
b.) Making false affidavit
Elements:
1. Accused made a statement under oath / executed an affidavit upon a material matter
2. Statement / Affidavit – made before competent officer, authorized to receive and
administer oath
3. Statement / Affidavit – accused – made a wilful & deliberate assertion of falsehood
4. Sworn statement or affidavit containing falsity – require by law or made for a legal
purpose
Concept:
• Perjury is the wilful and corrupt assertion of a falsehood under oath or affirmation
administered by authority of law on a material matter
• Oath is an attestation by which signifies that he is bound in conscience to perform an act
faithfully and truthfully
• Lis mota of the crime is DELIBERATE / INTENTIONAL GIVING OF FALSE EVIDENCE
in the court where such evidence is material
Concept for 183:
• Material Matter – main fact which was the subject of the inquiry or any circumstance which
tends to corroborate or strengten the testimony relative to the subject of the inquiry or which
legitimately affects the credit of any witness who testifies
• Among the very facts in issue or the main facts
• Materiality  directed to prove a fact in issue , Relevant  tends in any reasonable degree to
establish the probability or improbability of a fact in issue , Pertinence  concerns collateral
matters which make more or less probable the proposition at issue
• Materialy cannot be interfered or left to presumption
• "Sec. 41. Officers Authorized to Administer Oath. - The following officers have general
authority to administer oaths: President; Vice-President; Members and Secretaries of both
Houses of the Congress; Members of the Judiciary; Secretaries of Departments; provincial
governors and lieutenant-governors; city mayors; municipal mayors; bureau directors;
regional directors; clerks of courts; registrars of deeds; other civilian officers in the public
service of the government of the Philippines whose appointments are vested in the President
and are subject to confirmation by the Commission on Appointments; all other constitutional
officers; and notaries public.“
• Clerks of courts authorized to administer oaths on matters related to official functions 
BUT ONLY IF WHEN THE MATTER IS RELATED TO THE EXERCISE OF THEIE
OFFICIAL FUNCTIONS  NOT in ex-officio capacity
Concept for 183 :
• Competent person authorized to administer oath  right to inquire into the questions present
to him upon matters under jurisdiction
• ASSERTION MUST BE WILLFULL AND DELIBERATE – mere assertions of false
objective = not sufficient
• Perjury being a felony by dolo, malice on the part of the accused, willfully and intentionally
• Deliberately implies meditated as distinguished from in adverted acts , NO PERJURY
through NEGLIGENCE / IMPRUDENCE
• GOOD FAITH IS A DEFENSE - no evidence that same was done deliberately and willfully
= no perjury – valid defense = GF / lack of malice – Perjury cannot be willful where the oath
is according to belief / conviction of its true – Bona fide belief in the truth of a statement is an
adequate defense
• Elements to proof of Perjury; 1. statements made by the defendants must be proven false
2. must be proven – defendant – did not believe those
statements to be true
• Which the law requires – permissive and not mandatory
• Statement to be made under oath – sufficient as long as it made for a legal purpose
• Verification of complaint or pleading not required by law – since the complainst filed bythe
fourt element of perjury ; sworn statement containing falsity require by the law is absent
Concept for 183 :
• False certification of Forum shopping constitutes Perjury – the statement / affidavit in
question is the verification and certification against forum shopping
v Perjury necessary element of FS
v The test to determine the existence of forum shopping is whether the elements of
litis pendentia are present, or whether a final judgment in one case amounts to res
judicata in the other. elements are present, namely:
v (a) identity of parties, or at least such parties as represent the same
interests in both actions;
v (b) identity of rights asserted and reliefs prayed for, the relief being
founded on the same facts; and
v (c) the identity of the two preceding particulars, such that any judgment
rendered in the other action will, regardless of which party is successful,
amounts to res judicata in the action under consideration.
v 2 contradictory statements are NOT enough = Perjury – for it would leave simply one oath of
defendant as against another – will simply neutralize each other – corroboration + furnished
by evidence aliunde tending to show perjury independently of the declaration of the
testimony
Concept for 183:
• False affidavits submitted during preliminary investigation are perjurious – as it partakes an
actual trial where a judgement of convictions or acquittal is rendered – REASON:
PERJURY strikes at very administration of the laws
False Testimony Perjury
give in the course of judicial proceeding + actual trial is any willful & corrupt assertion of falsehood on a
MATERIAL matter under oath and not given in judicial
Not falsity under oath proceeding + may be committed preliminary investigation
/ false affidavit
Falsity under oath
• Perjury is committed in the place where affiant swears his affidavit
• Falsities in SALN constitute PERJURY
• Dismissal of administrative case does not necessarily bar the filing of criminal case
• There is a civil liability in Perjury – Fundamental postulate of our law that every person
criminally liable is also civilly liable
• False affidavit presented in the court  perjury by means of affidavit
• Subornation of Perjury; one willfully and knowingly procures another to swear falsely –
punishable – Art 17 subsection 2 – principal by inducement
• Witness duly sword – testimony – material false
 Article 184; Offering false testimony in evidence
Elements:
1. Offender OFFERED a false witness or testimony
2. Knew the witness / testimony – FALSE
3. Offer was made in judicial or official proceeding
Concepts:
• No inducement but offer
• Mere offer is enough
• False witness – does not testify on material matter and desist from testifying =NOT
LIABLE because desistance during attempted stage – absolutory but liable for
ATTEMPTED OFFERING FALSE TESTIMONY – must be offered – offer made when
the witness is called to the witness stand