Criminal Law Review Discussion
September 20, 2020
Last Topic:
Art 125
Delay in delivery of detained persons
- Remember, should not be taken literally. It does
not refer to actual delivery of the arrested person
to the judge. This refers to the filing of the
proper criminal case with the court against the
arrested person..
- Offended party here was subjected to a valid
warrantless arrest. However, arresting officer
failed to comply the requirements under this
article which is to file appropriate charge within
12, 18, and 36 hours.
- In order to comply, the arrested person, although
he committed a crime which should be subject to
preliminary investigation, he is not given PI, but
his case is subjected to inquest proceedings.
o He is not required to submit answer.
o During inquest proceedings, inquest
prosecutor will just look at the affidavits
of the arresting officers and other
evidences to determine if the arrest was
valid. Inquest prosec would not require
the offended person to submit answer to
the charge.
o If the inquest prosec finds that the arrest
was valid, meaning a crime was
committed, inquest prosec now files
appropriate charge/information in court.
o However, if arrested person would
really want to file answer or counter
affidavit to the charge, he needs to sign
a waiver, waiving his rights for the
filing of appropriate charges against
arresting officer under A125, and should
be assisted by counsel in waiving his
rights.
 Once he would waive his rights,
the case filed against him would
be subject to preliminary
investigation. But, PI here must
terminated only for 15 days.
Period is shorter than in those
cases subjected to regular PI.
Because if subjected to regular
PI, PI would usually last 30
days.
 Here, PI is only 15 days from
the signing of the waiver.
o IBP vs DOJ
 SC: The waiver signed by the
arrested person does not give
the prosecutor’s office indefinite
period to detain the arrested
person. They should follow the
period given by the CrimPro to
terminate PI within 15 days.
 If for whatever reason, PI is not
terminated (example, case is
dismissed, subjected for
automatic review by DOJ
secretary)
 In drug cases, if
idissmiss sa prosec,
automatic review sa
DOJ sec.
 When there is automatic
review and 15 days
have passed, the person
arrested should be
released pursuant to the
constitutional right of
said arrested person to
liberty, unless detained
for some other lawful
grounds
 The release should be
without prejudice to the
outcome of the case.
 If after release,
information is
eventually filed in
court, court issues
Warrant of arrest, and
accused who was
released because PI was
not finished on time,
has to be rearrested.
Does not apply when arrest is by virtue of a warrant of
arrest.
- If arrested by virtue of a warrant arrest, arresting
officer has no more due to file appropriate case
in court under 125. His duty is to deliver
accused to the nearest police station or jail, and t
 make a report to the court regarding the service
of the warrant of arrest against the accused.
Suppose appropriate case was not filed in court within
the period of 12, 18, and 36 hours, but eventually,
information was filed in court. Would the eventual filing
of info in court erase the criminal liability of arresting
officer?
- No. Liability of arresting officer is not negated
by the filing of an information in court because
the felony or violation under Art 125 has already
been committed.
Suppose an arresting officer failed to file the appropriate
case in court?
- Remember: ang makaprevent sa pagfile under
125 is not the filing of the case before the
prosec’s office but of the filing of the case
before the court.
o Mere filing of the case before the
procutor’s office would not excuse or
relieve the arresting officer from
committing a violation under Art 125.
- Remember, it is the filing of the case in court.
- Filing before the prosec’s office would not
relieve the officer from liability under 125.
o If, police nifile ug kaso, ang prosec’s
office nagdugay2. Ang filing ug case
under 125 is not the prosec, but the
police officer.
Suppose arresting officer failed to file appropriate case
in court.
- For example, arrest nahitabo Friday 4pm. Slight
physical injuries. Case has to be filed within a
period of 12 hrs. Kay sabado, domigo, labi nag
lunes holiday?
o SC: Soria vs Dissierto
o Holidays should be excluded in the
counting of reglementary period.
However, the case shall be filed on the
first working hour of the next working
day.
Suppose, the prosec cannot file the case before the
prosecutor’s office because all the prosecutos are not
around. For example, they are having a seminar. Unsay
buhaton sa police nga nagdakop niya?
- Options:
o If all prosecutors are absent, the
arresting officer or station chief may file
the appropriate criminal case in court
through criminal complaint (Sec 7
R112)
- Or, he may release arrested person, and rearrest
him once the appropriate case is filed in court.
If during inquest proceedings, the prosec finds that the
arrest was invalid.
- Possible ba na nga a crime was committed but
the arrest is illegal? Yes.
- Example, accused committed murder. Sa dihang
nakapatay, nagtago2 within 2 months. After 2
months, nibalik. Pwede ba siya dakpon without
warrant?
o No. Warrantless arrest would not fall in
any of those circumstances mentioned in
Sec5 R113.
 GR: person cannot be arrested
without warrant of arrest
 EXC: R113Sec5
- If gidakop jud siya kadtong nakacommit ug
murder 2 months ago. Most inquest prosecutors
will order his release and subject the case to
regular preliminary investigation. After the case
is filed in court and a warrant of arrest is issued,
he could be rearrested.
ARTICLE 126.
Delaying Release.
- Suppose, a person who has committed murder 2
months ago is arrested without warrant. When
subjected to inquest proceedings, inquest prosec
ordered his release because the warrantless
arrest was invalid. He ordered that the arrested
person be released. Suppose arresting officer
refused to comply with prosec’s order, does the
arresting officer have any criminal liability?
o Yes, a126, delaying release.
o Penalty? Same as that in 124.
The penalties provided for in article 124 shall be
imposed upon any public officer or employee who
delays for the period of time specified therein the
performance of any judicial or executive order for the
release of a prisoner or detention prisoner, or unduly
delays the service of the notice of such order to said
prisoner or the proceedings upon any petition for the
liberation of such person.
- TN: Pwede sad makarelease ang prosecutor,
especially to a case subjected to inquest
proceedings. If inquest prosec finds that the case
is not proper for inquest proceedings, arrest
being invalid, inquest prosecutor can release the
arrested person, without prejudice to the conduct
of proper prelim investigation.
- If arresting officer will disobey the order of the
inquest prosec, the arrest custodian could be
criminally liable under A126, delaying release
Could also be committed by the jail warden who would
refuse to comply with the order of the court
- Court issues release of the accused.
o Example, case dismissed. Court orders
release of accused. Suppose jail warden
would not immediately release the
accuse, the jail warden could be held
liable under A126.
Suppose not the custodian of the detained person who
will refuse release but it is the employee who is in
charged with the service of the order. If siyay
nagdugay2, he should also be held liable under Art 126.
- Delaying service of notice would in turn delay
the release of the detained person.
What is the remedy of the offended party under Art 124
(dakpon bisag wala nakacommit ug crime), Art 125
failure to file appropriate case within reglementary, or
Art 126 delaying release, if jail warden refuses order?
Aside from criminal case, unsay dinalian?
- Petition for habeas corpus.
- The detention now is illegal.
ARTICLE 127. Expulsion.
The penalty of prisión correccional shall be imposed
upon any public officer or employee who, not being
thereunto authorized by law, shall expel any person from
the Philippine Islands or shall compel such person to
change his residence.
- Committed by any public officer or employee,
who without any authority of law, shall expel
any person from the ph islands.
o Ideport, and deportation is without
authority of law
- Or shall compel a person to change his
residence.
Acts penalized:
1. Expelling a person from Ph
2. Compelling a person to change residence
If there are informal settlers. Gikihag ejectment. Napildi.
Giissuehan sa court ug writ of demolition. Is the sheriff
who came in the place and supervised the demolition
liable, including owner of the place?
- No. The demolition or compulsion of those
persons to change place of residence is being
authorized by law, being authorized by court.
- Or if person is prohibited in a certain place
because sentenced to destierro. 127 inapplicable.
Case of mayor who compelled prostitutes to board a ship
and transfer their residence to Davao? (Villa Vesencio vs
Lucban)
- This is an example of compeling a person to
change residence without authority by law.
As regards aliens, the president or commissioner of BID
may order deportation of undesirable or overstaying
SECTION TWO
Violation of Domicile
ARTICLE 128. Violation of Domicile.
The penalty of prisión correccional in its minimum
period shall be imposed upon any public officer or
employee who, not being authorized by judicial order,
shall enter any dwelling against the will of the owner
thereof, search papers or other effects found therein
without the previous consent of such owner, or, having
surreptitiously entered said dwelling, and being required
to leave the premises, shall refuse to do so.
If the offense be committed in the night-time, or if any
papers or effects not constituting evidence of a crime be
not returned immediately after the search made by the
offender, the penalty shall be prisión correccional in its
medium and maximum periods.
- Committed by a public officer not authorized by
any judicial order
- Enter dwelling of a person

Acts penalized:
1. Entering dwelling against will of owner
- There must be an express or implied prohibition
against the entry of a public officer.
o Example, a policeman is prohibited
from entering, and despite prohibition,
enters the dwelling
2. Entering a dwelling surreptitiously and
refuses to leave after being required to do so
- “surreptitiously,” wala nagsaba.
- If nisulod walay pananghid, not yet a crime.
- It will be a crime if after entering surreptitiously
refuses to leave after being required to leave.
3. By searching documents or papers, or other
effects, without prior consent of owner
- Musulod, unya manguhag evidence.
Usually committed when officers will search a
contraband without a court order, or without search
warrant or warrant of arrest.
Suppose, the one who entered the dwelling is a private
person, crime committed is trespass to dwelling. If
public officer, violation of domicile.
Suppose search is conducted on a vehicle. Is violation to
this article violated?
- If sakyanan nga gipark ang gisearch. Would that
constitute a crime under Art 128?
o No. Ang vehicle dili balay. 128 is not
violated.
o Remedy on a warrantless search
convicted to a vehicle?
 SC: merely civil under Art32CC
in relation to Ar219CC
o Case: Galvante vs Casimero
- If ang gisearch kay balay kay nangitag shabu,
violation of domicile.
- With or without violence.
ARTICLE 129.
Search Warrants Maliciously Obtained and Abuse in
the Service of Those Legally Obtained.
In addition to the liability attaching to the offender for
the commission of any other offense, the penalty of
arresto mayor in its maximum period to prisión
correccional in its minimum period and a fine not
exceeding 1,000 pesos shall be imposed upon any public
officer or employee who shall procure a search warrant
without just cause, or, having legally procured the same,
shall exceed his authority or use unnecessary severity in
executing the same.
- Refers to a search with search warrant.
Acts:
1. Maliciously obtaining search warrant without
just cause
- Searching officers would commit a crime if they
would procure search warrant without just cause
o Why is that searching officers would
commit a crime? They would commit a
crime if they would procure a search
warrant without just cause, meaning
without factual basis.
 Example, they applied for
search warrant and a search
warrant was eventually issued
based on perjured affidavit or
perjured testimony.
 Law enforcers would be
liable for Crime of
perjury for signing false
affidavit and Crime
under 129 for securing
search warrant
maliciously, without
prejudice to their
criminal liability for
perjury.
2. Crimes committed: Exceeding authority or using
unnecessary force in the execution of the search
warrant legally obtained.
- Here, the search warrant was legally obtained
but they exceeded their authority.
o Example: search wearrant directed them
to search for shabu. When they executed
the search warrant, hasta ang pieces of
jewelry owners giapil ug dala,
Exceeding authority.
- or executing unnecessary force.
o Example: No need to break doors of
cabinet but broke them. Use of
unnecessary force.
Liability of the public officers shall be without prejudice
to their other liabilities.
- Example, committed perjury for securing search
warrant.
o They could be held liable under 129, at
the same time they could be held liable
for perjury.
o This is an example of Two-Tiered
Penalty
ARTICLE 130.
Searching Domicile Without Witnesses.
The penalty of arresto mayor in its medium and
maximum periods shall be imposed upon a public officer
or employee who, in cases where a search is proper,
shall search the domicile, papers or other belongings of
any person, in the absence of the latter, any member of
his family, or in their default, without the presence of
two witnesses residing in the same locality.\
Under this article, the law officers have secured valid
search warrant. But upon conduct of search, there was no
witness.
- It is not enough that a valid search warrant is
secured. It is also necessary that during the
enforcement of the search warrant, there should
be a w itness.
Who can be witness?
1. Subject of search warrant
- Owner of the search.
2. In the presence of the family of the subject in
the absence of the subject of the search
- If X is owner. If wala si Mr. X? Can search be
conducted? Yes, in the presence of the family of
the person subject to the search.
3. Absent subject and his famil members, two
witnesses residing in the same locality
- If, wala ang subject sa search. Wala pud ang
pamilya. Pwede ba makapadayon ug search?
Yes. In the presence of two witnesses residing in
the same locality
o Same barangay.
o Who? Brgy tanod or barangay officials
(at least 2)
- This is another instance of the two-witness rule.
What will happen if search is conducted without
witness? Would commit a crime under 130.
- ROC basis: Rule 126 Sec 8
o No search of a house, room or any other
premises, shall be made except in the
presence of the lawful occupant, or any
member of his family, or in the absence
of those persons, of two witnesses of
sufficient age and discretion residing in
the same locality
Remember:
- Those under Articles 124-130 are crimes related
to the provisions of the Consti
ARTICLE 131.
Prohibition, Interruption, and Dissolution of
Peaceful Meetings.
The penalty of prisión correccional in its minimum
period shall be imposed upon any public officer or
employee who, without legal ground, shall prohibit or
interrupt the holding of a peaceful meeting, or shall
dissolve the same.
The same penalty shall be imposed upon a public officer
or employee who shall hinder any person from joining
any lawful association or from attending any of its
meetings.
The same penalty shall be imposed upon any public
officer or employee who shall prohibit or hinder any
person from addressing, either alone or together with
others, any petition to the authorities for the correction
of abuses or redress of grievances.
- Committed by public officer or employees
Acts punished:
1. Prohibition or interrupting of peaceful
meeting, or shall dissolve the same
“Peaceful” “Without legal ground”
- Law enforcers may disperse meetings, rallies if
there is legal ground, or if the same would turn
out to be chaotic.
- If meeting is peaceful and is allowed by law, law
enforcers who would interrupt or prohibit such
meeting or assembly could be held criminally
liable.
If, for example, naay magrally. Nya muviolate sa covid
protocols nga kinahanglan naay 1m distance and should
wear face mask
- Pwede
2. Hindering a person from joining a lawful
association or from attending its meetings.
- Or prohibits another from addressing petition to
the authorities for the correction of abuses or
redress of grievances.
In order to be held liable, the public officer who is an
offender should be a stranger.
- Crime should not be committed if the one who
disturbs, prohibits is a participant.
o If participant, crime committed could be
unjust vexation or public disorder.
Right to peaceful meeting, right to assembly is not
absolute.
- It is subject to regulations promulgated by
appropriate government offices to promote order
and public safety.
- Organizers of a rally are required to secure a
permit first before they can use the streets to
conduct a rally.
CRIMES AGAINST RELIGIOUS WORSHIP
UNDER ART132 AND ART133?
- Violation of freedom of religion or religious
worship.
ARTICLE 132.
Interruption of Religious Worship.
The penalty of prisión correccional in its minimum
period shall be imposed upon any public officer or
employee who shall prevent or disturb the ceremonies or
manifestations of any religion.
If the crime shall have been committed with violence or
threats, the penalty shall be prisión correccional in its
medium and maximum periods.
- What is the crime committed a policeman who
would prevent ceremony or manifestation of any
religion without valid reason? Art 132
o Example, naay misa. Iyang paundangon
ang misa without valid reason.
Could be religious ceremony or manifestation
- Ceremony is mass or service
- Manifestation? Prayer meeting.
Preventing or disturbing the ceremonies or
manifestations of any religion without valid reason shall
be liable for interruption of religious worship.
- Ceremony or manifestation need not be
conducted in church. It could be inside the
house.
o Example. Prayer meeting. If dissolved
or prevented by a public officer such as
a law enforcement officer, crime is
interruption of religious ceremony or
worship.
Penalty would be higher if the crime is committed with
violence (par.2)
ARTICLE 133.
Offending the Religious Feelings.
The penalty of arresto mayor in its maximum period to
prisión correccional in its minimum period shall be
imposed upon anyone who, in a place devoted to
religious worship or during the celebration of any
religious ceremony shall perform acts notoriously
offensive to the feelings of the faithful.
If the one who disrupts religious ceremony or
manifestation is a private person?
- Example. Seldran (?) In the middle of a religious
ceremony, nisulod ang accused ug nagdala ug
placards, which states “Damaso, Bishops, stop
involving yourselves in politics”
o Crime committed, if any?
 Crime committed is offending
the religious feelings under Art
133.
 PP vs Seldran (march 21 2018)
Accused here performed acts which are seriously
offensive to the feelings of the faithful
- Could be done either while a celebration is
going on, or it could be done in a place devoted
to religious worship even if there is no religious
ceremony going on.
What is the crime committed if a person who does not
believe in saints, kitag simbahan nga naay santos, walay
misa. He is convinced that ang mga santos kay kahoy
nga gihimong “diyos-diyos.” If iyang gipanglambos ang
statues, did he commit any crime?
- That is an act which are seriously/notoriously
offensive to the feelings of the faithful in a place
of religious worship
Also acts which are seriously offensive to the feelings of
the faithful during celebration of any religious ceremony
- Could be done outside the church or temple
- If naay magprosesyon. Naa sa gawas sa
simbahan. Crime committed if iyang pambatoon
ang nangapil? Aside from the crime of physical
injuries who may be injured sa pambato, the
crime of notoriously offending religious feelings
during the celebration of any religious ceremony
is also committed.
Offending the Religious Feelings, how committed?
Performing or commission of an act which is notoriously
offensive to the feelings of the faithful, and the act can
be committed in a place dedicated to religious worship
even if there is no religious ceremony going on, or
during the celebration of any religious ceremony
In another case, according to SC, when can you say that
an act is notoriously offensive to the feelings of the
faithful?
- W/N offensive from the catholics should be
viewed from the latter’s point of view, and not
of the offender. (PP vs Baez)
o W/N or not a certain act is offensive to
the feelings of the faithful, it is not to be
judged by the offender but of the
offended party.
TITLE THREE
Crimes Against Public Order
CHAPTER ONE
Rebellion, Sedition, and Disloyalty
ARTICLE 134.
Rebellion or Insurrection. — How Committed.
The crime of rebellion or insurrection is committed by
rising publicly and taking arms against the Government
for the purpose of removing from the allegiance to said
Government or its laws, the territory of the Philippine
Islands or any part thereof of any body of land, naval or
other armed forces, or of depriving the Chief Executive
or the Legislature, wholly or partially, of any of their
powers or prerogatives.
How is rebellion committed? Elements:
1. There should be a public apprising and taking
arms against the government and the purpose
of public uprising is either to remove allegiance
to said govt or its laws, the territory of the Ph or
any part thereof, or any body of water
- The crime cannot be committed just by one
person. This is a crime of the masses; a vast
movement of men seeking to establish a new
order
- Naa juy pusil
- Igo lang gani ka mag singgit2 sa dalan, not
rebellion
- No mention unsay kadako, basta any part of the
Ph territory. It could be a city or province.
2. To deprive chief executive or congress, wholly
or partially, of any of their powers or
prerogatives.
This is the crime committed by the New People’s Army.
- Because they want to overthrow the govt and
make their own govt
Also the crime committed against the group of Muslim
rebels who wants to separate certain provinces in
Mindanao, which are predominantly Muslim provinces
and wants to separate from the Republic
What is the crime committed if thousands of armed men
would attack provincial capitol of bohol and would
declare independence of the republic of bohol?
- The crime committed is rebellion.
- Because, they want to remove the allegiance to
the government, a part of the Ph territory.
What is the crime committed if thousands of armed men,
for example would call themselves as “Red Army of
God” lead by General Pacman? They would attack
congress to prevent congress from passing the law which
would allow divorce. Crime committed?
 - Could be Rebellion
- To deprive congress of any of their power.
If, would attack Malacañang and deprive the president
of his powers? Rebellion.
If would attack SC to prevent SC to rule on the
constitutionality of the Human Security act? Is rebellion
committed?
- No. Under 134, SC is not included. It is only the
executive or the legislation.
- Crime committed could be sedition
Rebellion is the same with treason that would only be
legal if endeavor would fail.
- Treason would only be considered a crime if the
treasonous act failed, if traitors failed in their
endeavor.
- In rebellion, the rebels would only be punished
if they would fail in their endeavor.
- Example. EDSA people power. If wala
nasuccessful, ang mga nangulo sa EDSA people
power would be in jail for the crime of rebellion.
Rebellion vs Treason
T – fights against govt to deliver country to the foreign
enemy
R – fight against the govt to establish their own govt
R – there is always taking of arms against govt. Mere
giving aid or comfort is not enough.
T – could be committed without taking of arms. It could
be committed by giving aid or comfort.
- Mere membership of the communist party of Ph
does not make one liable for rebellion because
rebellion requires taking of arms against the
govt.
Common crimes are absorbed in rebellion.
- Murder, homicide, robbery
- If a rebel kills another person, the crime
committed is not murder or homicide but
rebellion.
- No such crime as rebellion complexed with
murder, or with homicide, or with robbery.
Common crimes are absorbed in rebellion.
(Enrile vs Salazar)
Rebellion is considered as a continuing crime.
- A person who is a rebel since 1969 until now,
daghan nakag napatay, usa ra kacrime ang
mafile batok nimo. And that is rebellion.
Suppose prosec’s office would charge a rebel with
murder. What will happen? Would that be dismissed
because the accused is charged with the wrong crime or
the charge is improper?
- Case: Ocampo vs Obando
- Under the Political Offense Doctrine, common
crimes committed, such as murder, are absorbed
by the crime of murder when committed as a
necessary means or in furtherance of rebellion.
However, prosecs may choose to charge the
respondents with common crimes, since filing of
criminal charges is addressed to the sound
discretion of the public prosecutor.
o Kay ang prosec man ang mufile sa kaso,
kung gusto jud niya mufile ug murder
instead of rebellion, he may do so.
o But, if the accuse would assert that the
proper charge should be rebellion, the
court should not automatically dismiss
the case.
 When POD is asserted as a
defense, it is crucial for the
court to determine if the act of
killing is done/committed in
furtherance of rebellion through
a hearing. If after hearing, court
finds that the killing is
committed in furtherance of
rebellion, court will order filing
of appropriate case case, and
would this time dismiss the
charge of murder before iya
ipadismiss ang charge sa
murder.
 No automatic dismissal of the
murder charge.
- If, the killing was not in furtherance of rebellion.
If iya gipatay kay personal nga kontra. That
would not prevent filing of homicide or murder
because the killing is not in furtherance of
rebellion.
Not necessary that they will succeed.
-
 - It is enough that they fight against the
government for the purpose of removing
allegiance from the govt, or deprive the chief
executive or congress from exercising their
powers.
Art 134-A
Coup d’etat
The crime of coup d'etat is a swift attack, accompanied
by violence, intimidation, threat, strategy or stealth,
directed against duly constituted authorities of the
Republic of the Philippines, or any military camp or
installation, communications networks, public utilities or
facilities needed for the exercise and continued
possession of power, singly or simultaneously 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 participation, for the purpose of
seizing or diminishing state power.
Keyword?
1. Swift attack committed by any person or
persons belonging to the military or police,
or holding any public office or employment.
o Can’t be committed by private persons
or persons alone.
o Pwede dili police, di military, pero
nagtrabaho sa govt.
o Example, cabinet secretary unya nisukol
sa presidente
2. Accompanied by intimidation, violence,
stealth, committed by any person or persons
belonging to the military or police, or
holding any public office or employment.
To whom shall attack be committed?
- Against duly constituted authorities of the
republic of the Ph or any military camp or
installation, communication networks, public
utilities or facilities needed for the exercise and
continued possession of power singly or
simultaneously carried out anywhere in the
Philippines
Crime committed by disgusted soldiers who would
attack gma network for the purpose of seizing or
diminishing state power? Crime committed is coup
d’etat
- OR: What’s the crime committed when a grp of
disgusted soldiers would attack a military camp
for the purpose of seizing or diminishing state
power? Coup d’etat
Purpose?
- seizing or diminishing state power.
Rebellion vs Coup d’etat
R – requires public uprising
C – does not require public uprising. Relies on swift
attack or stealth necessary for acquisition of power
R – movement of the multitude
C – conducted by a compact or select group of persons
belonging to the military, or police, or persons holding
public office or employment, with or without civilian
support
R – usually committed by persons outside the govt
C – can be committed by persons who are working in
the govt.
ARTICLE 135.
Penalty for Rebellion or Insurrection.
Any person who promotes, maintains or heads a
rebellion or insurrection shall suffer the penalty
of reclusion perpetua.
Any person merely participating or executing the
commands of others in a rebellion or insurrection shall
suffer the penalty of reclusion temporal.
Any person who leads or in any manner directs or
commands others to undertake a coup d'etat shall suffer
the penalty of reclusion perpetua.
Any person in the government service who participates,
or executes directions or commands of others in
undertaking a coup d'etat shall suffer the penalty
of reclusion temporal in its maximum period.
Any person not in the government service who
participates, or in any manner supports, finances abets or
aids in undertaking a coup d'etat shall suffer the penalty
of prision mayor in its maximum period.
When the rebellion, insurrection, or coup d'etat shall be
under the command of unknown leaders, any person
who is in fact directed the others, spoke for them, signed
receipt and other documents issued in their name, or
performed similar acts, on behalf of the rebels shall be
deemed a leader of such rebellion, insurrection, or coup
d'etat.
- Merely provides penalty
Rebellion, penalties:
For the leaders
- penalty is RP
- Non-bailable.
For mere participants
- RT (one degree lower)
For coup d’etat:
For the leaders
- RP
For those working in the govt who participates in the
govt
- RT max
Civilian?
- PM
- Those civilians who supported the soldiers or
police who committed the coup d’etat
Suppose, leader is unknown for rebellion, coup d’etat?
- any person who is in fact directed the others,
spoke for them, signed receipt and other
documents issued in their name, or performed
similar acts, on behalf of the rebels shall be
deemed a leader of such rebellion, insurrection,
or coup d'etat.
ART. 136.
Conspiracy and proposal to commit coup d'etat,
rebellion or insurrection.
The conspiracy and proposal to commit coup d'etat shall
be punished by prision mayor in its minimum period and
a fine shall not exceed eight thousand pesos (P8,000.00).
The conspiracy and proposal to commit rebellion or
insurrection shall be punished, respectively, by prision
correccional in its maximum period and a fine shall not
exceed five thousand pesos (P5,000.00), and by prision
correccional in its medium period and a fine not
exceeding two thousand pesos (P2,000.00).
Remember: conspiracy or proposal to commit a crime is
not punishable. They are merely preparatory acts. But if
there are specific provisions of law penalizing mere
conspiracy or proposal, they are considered as crimes.
ARTICLE 137.
Disloyalty of Public Officers or Employees.
The penalty of prisión correccional in its minimum
period shall be imposed upon public officers or
employees who have failed to resist a rebellion by all the
means in their power, or shall continue to discharge the
duties of their offices under the control of the rebels or
shall accept appointment to office under them.
- This crime is committed by public officers or
employees
Three acts of disloyalty:
1. Failure to resist rebellion by all the means in
their power
- For example, Mayor who would fail to resist the
acts of rebels in attacking the capitol, he could
be held liable under this article
2. Continuing to discharge the duties of their
offices under the control of the rebels
- If for example, the rebels have successfully
taken over the capitol, they continue to
discharge their duties.
3. Accept appointment to office under them
To be liable under this article, there must be
rebellion.
- The crime of rebellion must have been
committed.
- If there is no rebellion
o Example, there are rebels in their place
and ila ang gipasagdan, they will not be
liable for disloyalty
- If there is rebellion and they failed to resist the
crime or continue to discharge duties of office or
accept appointment under them, then the crime
is disloyalty
-
 ARTICLE 138.
Inciting to Rebellion or Insurrection.
The penalty of prisión mayor in its minimum period
shall be imposed upon any person who, without taking
arms or being in open hostility against the Government,
shall incite others to the execution of any of the acts
specified in article 134 of this Code, by means of
speeches, proclamations, writings, emblems, banners or
other representations tending to the same end.
- any person who, without taking arms or being in
open hostility against the Government
- Incite or induce others to commit acts mentioned
in art 134 through speeches, proclamations,
writings, emblems, banners or other
representations which tend to induce other
persons to rebel against the government
Not necessary that persons incited has committed
rebellion. What’s necessary is that the accused induced
them to commit rebellion
- If persons induced has actually committed
rebellion, persons who induced them to commit
rebellion would not be charged under 138 but as
principal of the crime of rebellion.
ARTICLE 139.
Sedition — How Committed.
The crime of sedition is committed by persons who rise
publicly and tumultuously in order to attain by force any
of the following objects:
1. To prevent the promulgation or execution of any
law or the holding of any popular election;
2. To prevent the Insular Government, or any
provincial or municipal government or any
public officer thereof from freely exercising its
or his functions, or prevent the execution of any
administrative order;
3. To inflict any act of hate or revenge upon the
person or property of any public officer or
employee;
4. To commit, for any political or social end, any
act of hate or revenge against private persons or
any social class; and
5. To despoil, for any political or social end, any
person, municipality or province, or the Insular
Government or the Government of the United
States, of all its property or any part thereof.
TN: Rebellion and sedition differ in their purpose.
How is sedition committed?
- ―By person who rise publicly and
tumultuously‖
o Public uprising
 There is violent opposition.
 There is civil disobedience.
 Offenders will not anymore
follow the law.
o Tumultuous
 There is a state of unrest or
violent disorder
 If you connect with Art153,
there must be at least 4.
Not committed by a single person.
- The law says, committed “by persons”
- The law does not specify how many persons in
order that there would be sedition, but it says
tumultuously.
o If you connect this to Art 153, there
must be at least 4 persons
Here, they won’t anymore follow the law. Purpose
being, to attain by force, intimidation or means out of
legal methods
- Instead of availing legal means such as going to
courts for redress of grievances, they resorted to
force, violence, or intimidation, in order to
achieve their purpose.
Sedition then is:
- public uprising plus existence of purposes
Purpose in Sedition:
1. To prevent the promulgation or execution of
any law or the holding of any popular
election;
- Prevent promulgation of laws
o Example: Jeepney modernization act. If
jeepney operators and drivers of old
jeepneys would unite themselves and
would stage public uprising in order to
prevent the govt from phasing out the
 old jeepneys; resort to violence in order
to prevent phasing out
- Prevent holding of popular elections:
o Example. Local elections. Offenders
does not want the same. Resorts to
violence.
- person, municipality or province, or the
2. To prevent the Insular Government, or any
provincial or municipal government or any
public officer thereof from freely exercising
its or his functions, or prevent the execution
of any administrative order;
- Example, a leader of a certain group. When
policemen tried to arrest subject of warrant of
arrest, person subject to the warrant and his
people resisted to prevent arrest of the person
subject to the warrant.
- Example: Mayor of LGU wanted to remove
informal settlers residing along the river banks.
If these people will perform public uprising to
prevent the removal, what crime is committed?
o That could be sedition
3. To inflict any act of hate or revenge upon the
person or property of any public officer or
employee;
- If a city councilor would enact an ordinance. For
example, tanan nga owners sa mga iro nga
nagsuroy2 shall be penalized for not taking care
of their pet dogs. If the owners would unite and
inflict hate or revenge on the public officer nga
nagpasar sa balaod. What crime is committed?
o Could be sedition.
- If councilor X is the author. Ila giadto, pero wala
didto. Naa ang sakyanan. Maoy gipusposan.
Crime committed?
o Not only malicious mischief. Also liable
for sedition.
4. To commit, for any political or social end, any
act of hate or revenge against private persons
or any social class; and
- Example: if a group of persons, numbering to 50
people would rise publicly and tumultuously,
would inflict hate and revenge. Pamatyon nilang
mga turko nga nagpautang nga ilang makit’an.
- Sedition is not only against the government.
Offended parties could also be private persons or
any social class.
5. To despoil, for any political or social end, any
Insular Government or the Government of
the United States, of all its property or any
part thereof.
- “Despoil” means to take away or strip position
- If example, the jeepney drivers would unite
themselves, would rise publicly and
tumultuously, atakehon nila ug panguhaon nila
ang bugas nga gipangpundo sa warehouse sa
LGUs, or ila kuhaon ang bugas. Crime
committed? Sedition
REMEMBER:
For sedition to be committed, there should be public
uprising plus any of the purposes.
- As long as there is public uprising, plus any of
the purposes mentioned in Art 139.
Rebellion vs Sedition
R – purpose is always political. To remove from the
allegiance to the government.
S – purpose could be political or social, other than
removing from the allegiance
R – there is public uprising and taking arms against govt
S – public uprising and tumultuously is sufficient.
Taking of arms not necessary (there could be, but not
necessary)
Remember: Purposes of each crime. Purposes would
distinguish one from the other.
No public uprising, no sedition.
- There is a crime committed, but if no public
uprising, it could be another crime.
o If there is no public uprising, but
offended party is a public officer
considered as a person in authority
 Crime could be direct assault.
 o If he is not a person in authority, the
crime could be homicide or attempted or
frustrated homicide, as the case may be.
If there is public uprising but none of the purposes is
present mentioned in 139, no sedition.
Common crimes are absorbed in rebellion. But in
sedition, common crimes not absorbed
- Offenders may be liable for sedition and of the
common crimes they committed
ARTICLE 140.
Penalty for Sedition.
The leader of a sedition shall suffer the penalty of
prisión mayor in its minimum period and a fine not
exceeding 10,000 pesos.
Other persons participating therein shall suffer the
penalty of prisión correccional in its maximum period
and a fine not exceeding 5,000 pesos.
ARTICLE 141.
Conspiracy to Commit Sedition
Persons conspiring to commit the crime of sedition shall
be punished by prision correccional in its medium period
and a fine not exceeding 2,000 pesos.
- Proposal to commit sedition not penalized.
ARTICLE 142.
Inciting to Sedition.
The penalty of prision correccional in its maximum
period and a fine not exceeding 2,000 pesos shall be
imposed upon any person who, without taking any direct
part in the crime of sedition, should incite 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 to the same end, or upon any person or persons
who shall utter seditious words or speeches, write,
publish, or circulate scurrilous libels against the
(Government of the United States or the Government of
the Commonwealth of the Philippines) or any of the duly
constituted authorities thereof, or which tend to disturb
or obstruct any lawful officer in executing the functions
of his office, or which tend to instigate others to cabal
and meet together for unlawful purposes, or which
suggest or incite rebellious conspiracies or riots, or
which 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, or
who shall knowingly conceal such evil practices.
(Reinstated by E.O. No. 187).
Acts punishable under this article relates to freedom of
speech or of the press.
Rules relative to seditious words:
1. Clear and Present Danger Rule
- The words must be of such nature, that uttering
them, there is a danger of public uprising, and
that such danger should be clear and imminent
o Absent clear and present danger that the
public would stage public uprsing, then
the alleged seditious words should not
be punished if there is no clear and
present danger.
2. Dangerous Tendency Rule
- Words used tend to create danger of public
uprising, such words would tend to create
danger, those words could be proper subject to
prosecution for sedition.
Our government follows “Clear and Present Danger”
- If imong gipangsulti and gipangsuwat, as long as
there is no clear and present danger that the
public would;
- As long as there is no danger of public uprising,
person who tend to use words that tend to incite
people to commit sedition would not be
penalized
o Kanang magsuot ug Tshirt or placards,
imong gibutngan “Oust Duterte Now.”
Inciting sedition?
 David vs Arroyo
 Wearing shirts, having “Oust
Gloria now” does not constitute
inciting to sedition.
Case: PP vs Espuelas
- Accused was convicted of inciting to sedition.
Nagpapicture siya as if he committed suicide.
Then, iya gibutangan sa iyang suicide note, “He
committed suicide because he was not pleased
with the administration of pres. Roxas and the
govt is infested with many hitlers and mussolinis
for reason he cannot hold high brows to the
world with this dirty government.” He instructed
 his children to burn pictures of Roxas if and
when they come across one
- SC: Liable for inciting to sedition.
In another case, PP vs Nabong. During a necrological
service, in the course of his speech, he said
“overthrow the government.. let us make a
government for the poor..”
- Accused liable for inciting to sedition.
Chapter Two
CRIMES AGAINST POPULAR
REPRESENTATION
Section One. - Crimes against legislative bodies and
similar bodies
Article 143.
Act tending to prevent the meeting of the Assembly and
similar bodies.
The penalty of prision correccional or a fine ranging
from 200 to 2,000 pesos, or both, shall be imposed upon
any person who, by force or fraud, prevents the meeting
of the National Assembly (Congress of the Philippines)
or of any of its committees or subcommittees,
constitutional commissions or committees or divisions
thereof, or of any provincial board or city or municipal
council or board. (Reinstated by E.O. No. 187).
- Purpose here is similar to rebellion. Accused
here prevents meeting of Congress or local
legislative bodies, but no public uprising.
Considering no public uprising, no sedition or
rebellion.
Here, no session yet.
Article 144. Disturbance of proceedings. - The penalty
of arresto mayor or a fine from 200 to 1,000 pesos shall
be imposed upon any person who disturbs the meetings
of the National Assembly (Congress of the Philippines)
or of any of its committees or subcommittees,
constitutional commissions or committees or divisions
thereof, or of any provincial board or city or municipal
council or board, or in the presence of any such bodies
should behave in such manner as to interrupt its
proceedings or to impair the respect due it. (Reinstated
by E.O. No. 187).
- There is a session of legislative bodies and the
same is interrupted.
- This is without prejudice to the contemptuous
power of legislative, particularly of congress.
Example: Mayor conducted a meeting, and meeting was
disrupted because one of the participants had a heated
argument with the mayor. Liable for Art 144 for the
disruption of meeting?
- No.
- 144 is applicable only when a meeting of
legislative bodies is being disrupted. This does
not apply to a meeting conducted by the
executive branch.
o Could be held liable for other crime
(example unjust vexation), but not art
144
Section Two. - Violation of parliamentary immunity
Article 145.
Violation of parliamentary immunity.
The penalty of prision mayor shall be imposed upon any
person who shall use force, intimidation, threats, or
fraud to prevent any member of the National Assembly
(Congress of the Philippines) from attending the
meetings of the Assembly (Congress) or of any of its
committees or subcommittees, constitutional
commissions or committees or divisions thereof, from
expressing his opinions or casting his vote; and the
penalty of prision correccional shall be imposed upon
any public officer or employee who shall, while the
Assembly (Congress) is in regular or special session,
arrest or search any member thereof, except in case such
member has committed a crime punishable under this
Code by a penalty higher than prision mayor.
What is the crime committed by a policeman who would
arrest a congressman who committed a crime which is
punishable by prision correccional or less while the
congress is in session?
- Violation of parliamentary immunity.
Who shall be liable?
- any person who shall use force, intimidation,
threats, or fraud to prevent
- any member of the National Assembly
(Congress of the Philippines) from attending the
 meetings of the Assembly (Congress) or of any
of its committees or subcommittees,
constitutional commissions or committees or
divisions thereof,
- from expressing his opinions or casting his vote
- or shall arrest or search any member of congress
while in regular or special session for
committing a crime by prision correccional or
less.
“higher than Prision mayor”
- should be prision mayor or higher
- if the crime he committed is punishable only by
PC or less, he cannot be arrested or detained.
Why is it de Lima is detained even if Congress is in
session?
- Crime charged is punishable by life
imprisonment which is higher than prision
mayor.
- Pwede siya maarrest if crime charged is prision
mayor or higher.
Chapter Three
ILLEGAL ASSEMBLIES AND ASSOCIATIONS
Article 146.
Illegal assemblies.
The penalty of prision correccional in its maximum
period to prision mayor in its medium period shall be
imposed upon the organizers or leaders of any meeting
attended by armed persons for the purpose of
committing any of the crimes punishable under this
Code, or of any meeting in which the audience is incited
to the commission of the crime of treason, rebellion or
insurrection, sedition or assault upon a person in
authority or his agents. Persons merely present at such
meeting shall suffer the penalty of arresto mayor, unless
they are armed, in which case the penalty shall be prision
correccional.
If any person present at the meeting carries an
unlicensed firearm, it shall be presumed that the purpose
of said meeting, insofar as he is concerned, is to commit
acts punishable under this Code, and he shall be
considered a leader or organizer of the meeting within
the purview of the preceding paragraph.
As used in this article, the word "meeting" shall be
understood to include a gathering or group, whether in a
fixed place or moving. (Reinstated by E.O. No. 187).
Kinds:
1. A meeting attended by armed persons for the
purpose of committing any of the crimes
punishable under the RPC
- Dili kinahanglan nga tanan nila armed. Pwede
duha.
- Not necessary that all of them attending the
meeting are armed.
2. A meeting in which the audience is incited to
commit a crime of treason, rebellion or
insurrection, sedition or assault upon a
person in authority or his agents.
- Not necessary that persons are armed
o Persons could be with or without
weapons
- They are incited to commit the crimes provided.
- What crime is committed by the persons who
induced them to commit rebellion, sedition or
treason?
o Inciting to rebellion or sedition
Article 147.
Illegal associations.
The penalty of prision correccional in its minimum and
medium periods and a fine not exceeding 1,000 pesos
shall be imposed upon the founders, directors, and
presidents of associations totally or partially organized
for the purpose of committing any of the crimes
punishable under this Code or for some purpose contrary
to public morals. Mere members of said associations
shall suffer the penalty of arresto mayor. (Reinstated by
E.O. No. 187).
- Mere membership is punishable.
146 vs 147
146 – illegal meeting. There should be an actual meeting
or assembly
147 – illegal association. Meeting not required. Mere
forming of association purpose of which is to commit
crimes under RPC, crime is committed.
Being member of the communist party of the Ph?
- Not anymore committing a crime.
- Before, there is RA1700 anti subversion act. But
repealed by RA 7636,
- Membership is no longer illegal.

Before going to Ch. 4 – Assault upon, and Resistance
and Disobedience to persons and authority and their
agents, let’s jump first to article 152
Article 152.
Persons in authority and agents of persons in
authority; Who shall be deemed as such.
―Agents of persons in authority‖
In applying the provisions of the preceding and other
articles of this Code, any person directly vested with
jurisdiction, whether as an individual or as a member of
some court or governmental corporation, board, or
commission, shall be deemed a person in authority. A
barrio captain and a barangay chairman shall also be
deemed a person in authority.
―Persons deemed persons in authority‖
A person who, by direct provision of law or by election
or by appointment by competent authority, is charged
with the maintenance of public order and the protection
and security of life and property, such as a barrio
councilman, barrio policeman and barangay leader and
any person who comes to the aid of persons in authority,
shall be deemed an agent of a person in authority.
In applying the provisions of Articles 148 and 151 of
this Code, teachers, professors and persons charged with
the supervision of public or duly recognized private
schools, colleges and universities, and lawyers in the
actual performance of their professional duties or on the
occasion of such performance, shall be deemed persons
in authority. (As amended by PD No. 299, Sept. 19,
1973 and Batas Pambansa Blg. 873, June 12, 1985).
Are all public officers considered persons in
authority?
- No.
―Persons deemed agents of persons in authority‖
―Person in authority‖
- any person directly vested with jurisdiction,
whether as an individual or as a member of some
court or governmental corporation, board, or
commission
―Vested with jd‖
- Has the power to govern and execute laws.
Who?
- Governors, Mayors
- Under Sec 288 LGC:
o Brgy captains, chairman, councilors, and
member of the Lupong Tagapamayapa
are considered persons in authority.
o TN: bgry captain and brgy chairman are
the same
- Judges are also considered persons in authority
- Persons who are tasked to maintain public order
and the protection and security of life and
property.
- Charged with the maintenance of peace and
order.
- Who? Policemen, brgy tanods
- They could not be employees of the govt but are
also “deemed persons in authority”
- “teachers, professors and persons charged with
the supervision of public or duly recognized
private schools, colleges and universities, and
lawyers in the actual performance of their
professional duties or on the occasion of such
performance”
- All teachers in public or private schools are
deemed persons in authority, including
professors and persons charged with the
supervision of public or duly recognized private
schools, colleges and universities
- Lawyers all also deemed to be persons in
authority
o Lawyers may be in the private or public
practice
o If lawyer ka nya nagtudlo kas college of
law, doble.
- Persons who any person who comes to the aid of
persons in authority who is under attack
- Who? barrio councilman, barrio policeman and
barangay leader and any person who comes to
the aid of persons in authority
- Kung ang teacher sumbagon ug studyante, nya
naay other student nga nilaban sa prof (prof is a
person in authority). Ang person nga nilaban is
deemed to be an agent of the person in authority

Article 148.
Direct assaults.
Any person or persons who, without a public uprising,
shall employ force or intimidation for the attainment of
any of the purpose enumerated in defining the crimes of
rebellion and sedition, or shall attack, employ force, or
seriously intimidate or resist any person in authority or
any of his agents, while engaged in the performance of
official duties, or on occasion of such performance, shall
suffer the penalty of prision correccional in its medium
and maximum periods and a fine not exceeding P1,000
pesos, when the assault is committed with a weapon or
when the offender is a public officer or employee, or
when the offender lays hands upon a person in authority.
If none of these circumstances be present, the penalty of
prision correccional in its minimum period and a fine not
exceeding P500 pesos shall be imposed.
2 kinds/forms of direct assault
1. Direct assault without any public uprising, and
the purpose of the employment of force or
intimidation is for the attainment of any of the
purposes for the crime of rebellion or sedition
2. No public uprising but the offender shall attack,
employ force, or seriously intimidate or, resists
a person in authority or any of his agents, while
engaged in the performance of official duties, or
on occasion of such performance
Common form - #2
―assault‖
- Meaning, attack.
Elements of 1st Form:
1. Offender employs of force or intimidation
2. Purpose is to attain any of the purpose of the
crime of rebellion or sedition
3. No public uprising
- First form is not common.
- Only very few cases are decided by the SC
Elements of 2nd form:
1. Offender shall attack, employ force, or seriously
intimidate or, resists
2. Person attacked is a person in authority or any of
his agents
3. At the time of assault, person in authority or his
agent is in the act of performing of his duty, or
by reason of past performance of his duty
4. Offender knows that the one he is assaulting or
attacking is a person in authority or his agent
5. No public uprising.
“actual performance of duty”
- Nagbuhat sa iyang katungdanan
There’s this public officer who consulted with a lawyer.
Unsay kaso if ang usa kapulis, pusposan ug civilian?
Ingon ang lawyer. ang kaso is direct assault. Pwede ba
ang wife filean ug direct assault sa pulis?
- Yes.
- If nagperform ug duty, nya giduol nya gipuspos.
- The law says “any person”
TN: When a person in authority is being attacked
while performing his duties, the reason why he is
being attacked is immaterial.
- As long as he is attacked while in the actual
performance of duties.
Example: Teacher. Nagsuwat sa board. Nisulod ang
turko. Gilaparo ang maestro. Crime of turko?
- Crime is direct assault.
- Reason is not because of her teaching job but of
failure to pay loan. Still direct assault bec DA is
committed when attacked while in the actual
performance of duties. Motive is immaterial.
- Kung ang maestro, naglakaw na padung sa ilaha.
Ang iyang student nga iyang giingnag bogo sa
classroom nasuko niya. Pagpadulong niyag uli,
giatangan siya, nya gisumbag. Crime
committed?
o Still direct assault.
o Why? She is being attacked by reason of
the past performance of her duties.
o ―On occasion‖ means past
performance
o No time limit. Bisag last year nahitabo
ang performance, pero karon gisumbag.
Direct Assault.
- If padung siya uli, gisugat sa turko. Gisagpa ky
wala kabayad. DA?
 o No. Attack is not by reason of the past
performance of her duties.
As regards employment of force, there is a distinction as
to the amount of force or violence to be used against
person in authority or agent
- If considered person in authority, any amount of
force.
o Not necessary nga serious. Not
necessary nga musuffer ug injury to
constitute direct assault.
- If mere agent of person in authority, force used
must be of serious character.
o Kanang igo jud makasustain ug injury
ang agent.
In one case, ang pulis gisumba sa chest sa offender.
Would that constitute direct assault?
- Police is considered a mere agent of a person in
authority.
o SC: Doe not constitute DA.
o If the victim or offended party of the
direct assault, and the offender used
force, the force must be of serious
character to constitute DA.
 or offended party of the
o So crime macommit? Iabswelto? No.
Serious disobedience or simple
disobedience may be commited. (151)
 So wala ra gani sumbaga, or if
gisumbag man, wala naigo, that
could be simple disobedience.
 If gisumbag, naigo, serious
disobedience.
o If imong gidunggab or gipusil, wala
naigo? It is serious. It would now be
considered DA.
o If imong gipusil, naigo, patay. That
would result now to complex crime.
 Direct assault with homicide, or
if wala namatay DA with
frustrated homicide (or
attempted)
DA may complex under A48 with other crimes.
Naay case nga ang pulis, giorderan niya nga
papahawaon. Ilang gibabagan ang entrance. There was
an order nga papahawaon sila. Giorder sa pulis nga
papahawaon. Wa man sila nihawa, giguyod sa pulis.
- Would that constitute DA? Wala silay gibuhat.
Nagpaguyod.
o SC: Resistance must be active, not
passive. If igo rakang nagpaguyod, wa
kay gibuhat.
o Ang pulis ang naay gibuhat. Giguyod
ka.
Serious resistance that will constitute direct assault?
- Gidunggab, wala naigo.
Direct assault by serious resistance is normally
committed during arrest (warrantless or with
warrant)
- Niserve ug warrant, nisukol ang subject.
If naay public uprising, daghan kayo sila, nya they don’t
want the subject to be arrested kay leader sa ilang group,
there could be sedition.
- If wala ray public uprising, DA.
It is necessary that the subject of the use of force (ang
giattack) is a person in authority or agent.
Suppose, wala kahibalo ang accused nga mayor, or
police?
- Ignorance of facts.
- That would excuse him from committing direct
assault.
- He would be liable for physical injuries, but it
would excuse him of liability for direct assault.
If ang offender is also a person in authority. Can he also
be liable for direct assault?
- Yes. The law says “any person”
- In fact, if offender is a public officer or
employer, penalty would be higher. (Qualified
DA)
o If used weapon, it would also be
Qualified DA
Allegations that accused used force, intimidation, and
against persons in authority, it must be stated, must be
alleged, in the information.
If gihagit ug sumbagay ang maestro. Nisukol ang
maestro. Can there be direct assault?
 - Yes.
- Justo vs CA: When the agent of the person in
authority who is challenged to a fight, and
accepts the challenge, there is still DA.
Suppose, the policemen, in the performance of duties,
exceeded their power, there is no DA, because they
could be the aggressors.
Motive in direct assault is only important when the
victim is no longer in the performance of his duties
- When the attack happened when victim is in the
actual performance of duties, motive is
irrelevant.
Qualified DA?
1. When assault is committed with a weapon
2. When offender is a public officer or employee
3. When offender lays hand upon a person in
authority
There could be complex crime.
- Suppose, the crime produced is only slight
physical injuries. Is there a crime of DA with
slight physical injuries?
o See: Art 48
 Light felonies are absorbed, or
are prosecuted separately.
- In DA, it is absorbed. No DA with spi.
Remember elements of DA, especially the second form.
Article 149.
Indirect assaults.
The penalty of prision correccional in its minimum and
medium periods and a fine not exceeding P500 pesos
shall be imposed upon any person who shall make use of
force or intimidation upon any person coming to the aid
of the authorities or their agents on occasion of the
commission of any of the crimes defined in the next
preceding article.
When committed?
- Committed whenever there is DA committed,
and the victim of the DA is a person in authority.
Remember those “deemed persons in authority” and
“deemed as agents”
- Persons who would come to the rescue to a
person in authority who is being attacked.
- For example, P is a professor. He is attacked by
his student S because P failed S in his subject.
Gidunggab niya si P. Si Y, other student of P,
helped P. Nilaban ni P. Sa paglaban ni Y ngadto
ni P.
o Si P, sa dihang gidunggab ni S, what
crime? Direct assault.
 Prof is considered person in
authority.
 When S attacked P, S
committed the crime of DA.
o Y, who came to the rescue for P, what is
the classification of Y now?
 Y, even if not a police, is
deemed to be an agent of a
person in authority.
 If, S now attacked Y. Iya pud
gidunggab si Y nga nisuway ug
pacify niya. Crime committed?
 Remember that Y is an
agent of a person in
authority for helping a
person in authority.
 So crime committed?
Direct assault
 Private persons coming
to the aid of persons in
authority would
automatically become
agents of persons in
authority.
- If, P is not a professor but a police. Si Patrolman
P nakadakop ug suspected drug pusher S.
Nakagawas si S. Wala kalimot sa gibuhat ni P.
Sa dihang nagkita sila, gidunggab ni S si P.
Maygani kay diha si Y, and Y nilaban ni P.
o Ang kalagot ni S, napunta napud ni Y.
Gidunggab si Y. What crime was
committed?
 Here, the police is only an agent
to a person in authority.
 Crime committed against P is
DA.
 Against Y? Crime committed is
Indirect Assault.
“any person coming to the aid of the authorities or their
agents on occasion of the commission of any of the
crimes”
- Kwaa nanang authorities.
o So, if ang atakehon kay person in
authority, and ang nitabang niya
atakehon pud, the case would be direct
assault.
o When will indirect assault come in? If
person attacked is mere agent of the
person in authority, and the person who
comes to the aid of the agent of the
person in authority who is in turn being
attacked, the attack against such person
helping is considered indirect assault.
Going back to the professor example:
- Ang nitabang kay dritso agent. He becomes
automatic agent. Because he becomes agent, the
rules as to the use of force also applies..
o If person in authority, it is direct assault
regardless of the force used.
o If mere agent, force use must be of
serious character to constitute direct
assault. If not serious, the crime could
be disobedience.
o Same rules apply to those “deemed
agent”
 So if serious force, would also
constitute direct assault. If dili
kayo serious ang force, crime
would only be serious or simple
disobedience.
Article 151. Resistance and disobedience to a person in
authority or the agents of such person. - The penalty
of arresto mayor and a fine not exceeding 500 pesos
shall be imposed upon any person who not being
included in the provisions of the preceding articles (148)
shall resist or seriously disobey any person in authority,
or the agents of such person, while engaged in the
performance of official duties.
When the disobedience to an agent of a person in
authority is not of a serious nature, the penalty of arresto
menor or a fine ranging from 10 to P100 pesos shall be
imposed upon the offender.
Par 1 – Serious Disobedience
- There must be an order, and that order is given
either by a person in authority or agent, and that
order is being disobeyed.
o Example, niserve ug warrant of arrest,
nya niresist. Crime to be charged will be
disobedience, either simple or serious
disobedience.
Par 2 – Simple Disobedience
Elements of Disobedience
1. Person in authority or his agent is engaged in the
performance of his duty or gives lawful order,
2. Accused disobeys the order.
3. Disobedience is either serious or simple
- Usual case that the police will file against those
who will resist kung dakpon.
- If ang mama/papa ang mubabag para ang anak
di madakop ang anak?
o Crime to be charged is obstruction of
justice.
Case: PP vs Breis
- About disobedience
What crime can you commit if nakaagi kag
checkpoint, unya di ka muhunong.
- Kasohan ka sa Art 151.
- There is an order for you to stop. Because you
disobeyed the order, 151.
o If serious, imong gisumbag ang pulis,
serious disobedience
o If wala lang ka nihunong, simple
disobedience
Case: PP vs Sydeco
Article 150.
Disobedience to summons issued by the National
Assembly, its committees or subcommittees, by the
Constitutional Commissions, its committees,
subcommittees or divisions.
The penalty of arresto mayor or a fine ranging from two
hundred to one thousand pesos, or both such fine and
imprisonment shall be imposed upon any person who,
having been duly summoned to attend as a witness
before the National Assembly, (Congress), its special or
standing committees and subcommittees, the
Constitutional Commissions and its committees,
subcommittees, or divisions, or before any commission
or committee chairman or member authorized to
summon witnesses, refuses, without legal excuse, to
obey such summons, or being present before any such
legislative or constitutional body or official, refuses to
be sworn or placed under affirmation or to answer any
legal inquiry or to produce any books, papers,
documents, or records in his possession, when required
by them to do so in the exercise of their functions. The
same penalty shall be imposed upon any person who
shall restrain another from attending as a witness, or who
shall induce disobedience to a summon or refusal to be
sworn by any such body or official.
- Disobedience to summons issued by the
Congress to attend as a witness, for example.
- Suppose imong gidisobey, aside from
contemptuous power of Congress or Senate, the
person who refuse to follow summons or
subpoena issued by the congress could also be
liable criminally (will be liable for 150)
If dili ikaw ang gisubpoenahan. Pero ikay niinduce nga
di lang tungahon. Your liability?
- Still 150.
Acts punished?
1. Refusing to obey summons without legal excuse
2. Refusing to be sworn to or testify
(Nitunga ka, pero wa ka nitestify.)
3. Refusal to answer or produce any books or
documents
4. By restraining another from attending as a
witness
(Di ikay gisubpoenahan, pero ikay naghulhog
nga ayawg tungaha.)
5. You induce the witness to disobey the summons
TN: Art 152 does not define a crime but tells us the
definition of the person in authority, their agents, and
those deemed as such.
Chapter Five
PUBLIC DISORDERS
Article 153. Tumults and other disturbance of public
orders; Tumultuous disturbance or interruption liable to
cause disturbance. - The penalty of arresto mayor in its
medium period to prision correccional in its minimum
period and a fine not exceeding 1,000 pesos shall be
imposed upon any person who shall cause any serious
disturbance in a public place, office, or establishment, or
shall interrupt or disturb public performances, functions
or gatherings, or peaceful meetings, if the act is not
included in the provisions of Articles 131 and 132.
The penalty next higher in degree shall be imposed upon
persons causing any disturbance or interruption of a
tumultuous character.
The disturbance or interruption shall be deemed to be
tumultuous if caused by more than three persons who are
armed or provided with means of violence.
The penalty of arresto mayor shall be imposed upon any
person who in any meeting, association, or public place,
shall make any outcry tending to incite rebellion or
sedition or in such place shall display placards or
emblems which provoke a disturbance of the public
order.
The penalty of arresto menor and a fine not to
exceed P200 pesos shall be imposed upon these persons
who in violation of the provisions contained in the last
clause of Article 85, shall bury with pomp the body of a
person who has been legally executed.
Unsay crime macommit if naa kas SM, unya mukalit kag
pabuto ug firecracker. Or mukalit lang kag singgit ug
sunog pero walay sunog.
- Crime? Public disorder.
Or if naay linog nya musinggit kag tsunami.
- Crime could be public disorder.
How committed?
- Any person who shall cause any serious public
disturbance.
- If the act would not constitute 131 (peaceful
meetings) or 132 (religious ceremony)
Penalty would be higher if the disturbance or
interruption is of tumultuous character.
- When can you say that the interruption is of
tumultuous character? If it is caused by more
than 3 persons who are armed or provided by
means of violence.
 - If the public disturbance is committed by at least
4 persons, that would be tumultuous in
character, penalty is higher.

If the accused would shout or make outcry tending to

incite rebellion or sedition or shall display placards or
emblems which provoke disturbance of public order?
- Kanang magsinggit2 which would incite
rebellion or sedition in a public place? Crime
would be public disorder under Art 153

Also committed when accused will also bury with pomp

the body of a person who has been legally executed.
- Bury with pomp the body of a person legally
executed.
- If magsinggit2 sila and the body of the person
was a victim of extrajudicial killing, would not
fall under Art 153.

ANNOUNCEMENTS:
Next Sunday: Pre-Lim
- Coverage would be until Art 153.
- Essay
o Prepare writing pad, and take pictures
o Will give time for taking pics and
scanning
- Time of exam: Excludes time for uploading
No class this week to give time to study other
subjects.
Friday – REM quiz