3.1 People vs. Hernandez, et al. 99 Phil., 515, July 18, 1956, Nos.

L-6025-26

FACTS:

It was the height of the Government action against communists and the Hukbalahap guerillas. President
Elpidio Quirino, through his Defense Secretary (and later, President) Ramon Magsaysay intensified the
campaign against them, and the crackdown was on against communist organizations. Due to such
government action, several communist leaders like Luis Taruc and the Lava brothers were soon in
government custody.

On January 20, 1951, the Congress of Labor Organizations (CLO) headquarters was raided. Writer (and
future National Artist for Literature) Amado V. Hernandez, himself a labor leader, was arrested on
January 26 for various rebellious activities with the CLO. Upon his arrest, he was charged in the criminal
information of “Rebellion with Murder, Arson and Robbery”. Five years after his arrest, Hernandez asked
for bail with the court where his case was pending, but was denied on the basis of the nature of the
offense (if the crime was complexed, the penalty for the most serious crime shall be imposed). Thus, he
filed a petition to the Supreme Court.

ISSUES AND RULINGS:

Whether or not the crime of rebellion can be complexed? No.

1. CMMINAL LAW; REBELLION; ELEMENTS OF; PENALTY.-

According to Article 135 of the Revised Penal Code, one of the means by which rebellion may be
committed is by "engaging in war against the forces of the government" and "committing serious
violence" in the prosecution of said war". These expressions imply everything that war connotes,
namely: resort to arms, requisition of property and services, collection of taxes and contributions,
restraint of liberty, damages to property, physical injuries and loss of life, and the hunger, illness and
unhappiness that war leaves in its wake. Being within the purview of "engaging in war" and "committing
serious violence", said act of resorting _to arms, with the resulting impairment or destruction of life and
property—when, as alleged in the information, performed "as a necessary means to commit rebellion,
in connection therewith and in futherance thereof" and "so as to facilitate the accomplishment of the
* * * purpose" of the rebellion—constitutes neither two or more offenses, nor a complex crime, but
one crime—that of rebellion. plain and simple, punishable with one single penalty, namely, that
prescribed in said Article 135.

3. CMMINAL LAW; REBELLION; COMPLEX CRIMES; ARTICLE 48 APPLIES ONLY WHEN Two CRIMES ARE

COMMITTED.-

The language of Article 48 of the Revised Penal Code presupposes the commission of two or more
crimes, and hence, does not apply when the culprit is guilty of only one crime.

4. CMMINAL LAW; REBELLION; COMPLEX CRIMES; "PRO REO" PRINCIPLE; LESS CRIMINAL PERVERSITY

IN COMPLEX CRIMES.-

If one act constitutes two or more offenses,there can be no reason to inflict a punishment graver than
that prescribed for each one of said offenses put together. In directing that the penalty for the graver
offense be, in such case, imposed in its maximum period, Article 48 of the Revised Penal Code could
have had no other purpose than to prescribe a. penalty lower than the aggregate of the penalties for
each offense, if imposed separately. The reason for this benevolent spirit of Article 48 is readily
3.1 People vs. Hernandez, et al. 99 Phil., 515, July 18, 1956, Nos. L-6025-26

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 through separate and distinct acts. Instead of sentencing
him for each crime independently from the other, he must suffer the maximuin of the penalty f or the
more serious one, on the assumption that it is less grave than the sum total of the separate penalties for
each offense.

Q: Whether or not the accused can be entitled to bail? Yes.

5. CMMINAL LAW; REBELLION; CBIMINAL PROCEDURE; BAIL; WHEN ACCUSED ENTITLED TO BAIL.-

Individual freedom is too basic, too transcendental and vital in a republican state, to be denied mere
general principles and abstract considerations of public policy. Considering that the information filed
against defendant is simply rebellion, the penalty for which cannot exceed twelve years of prision
mayor and a fine of P20,000; that defendant was sentenced by the lower court, not to the extreme
penalty, but to life imprisonment; and that the decision appealed from and the opposition to the
petition for bail do not reveal satisfactorily any concrete, positive act of the defendant showing,
sufficiently, that his provisional release, during the pendency of the appeal, would jeopardize the
security of the State, said defendant may be allowed bail.

DECISION:

Wherefore, the aforementioned motion for bail of defendant-appellant Amado V. Hernandez is hereby
granted and, upon the filing of a bond, with sufficient sureties, in the sum of P30,000, and its approval
by the court, let said defendant-appellant be provisionally released. Is is so ordered.