Professional Documents
Culture Documents
_______________
* EN BANC.
683
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000177a4af68533b2b18ec003600fb002c009e/p/AUB093/?username=Guest Page 1 of 82
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 267 15/2/21, 4:08 PM
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000177a4af68533b2b18ec003600fb002c009e/p/AUB093/?username=Guest Page 2 of 82
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 267 15/2/21, 4:08 PM
684
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000177a4af68533b2b18ec003600fb002c009e/p/AUB093/?username=Guest Page 3 of 82
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 267 15/2/21, 4:08 PM
685
Same; Same; Same; R.A. No. 7659 provides the test and
yardstick for the determination of the legal situation warranting the
imposition of the supreme penalty of death.·In the first place, the
1987 Constitution did not amend or repeal the provisions of the
Revised Penal Code relating to aggravating circumstances.
Secondly, R.A. No, 7659, while it specifies circumstances that
generally qualify a crime provided therein to be punished by the
maximum penalty of death, neither amends nor repeals the
aggravating circumstances under the Revised Penal Code. Thus,
construing R.A. No, 7659 in pari materia with the Revised Penal
Code, death may be imposed when: (1) aggravating circumstances
attend the commission of the crime as to make operative the
provision of the Revised Penal Code regarding the imposition of the
maximum penalty; and (2) other circumstances attend the
commission of the crime which indubitably characterize the same as
heinous in contemplation of R.A. No. 7659 that justify the
imposition of death, albeit the imposable penalty is reclusion
perpetua to death. Without difficulty, we understand the rationale
for the guided discretion granted in the trial court to cognize
circumstances that characterize the commission of the crime as
heinous. Certainly there is an infinity of circumstances that may
attend the commission of a crime to the same extent that there is no
telling the evil that man is capable of. The legislature cannot and
need not foresee and inscribe in law each and every loathsome act
man is capable of. It is sufficient thus that R.A. No. 7659 provides
the test and yardstick for the determination of the legal situation
warranting the imposition of the supreme penalty of death.
Needless to say, we are not unaware of the ever existing danger of
abuse of discretion on the part of the trial court in meting out the
death sentence. Precisely to reduce to nil the possibility of executing
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000177a4af68533b2b18ec003600fb002c009e/p/AUB093/?username=Guest Page 4 of 82
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 267 15/2/21, 4:08 PM
686
SEPARATE OPINION:
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000177a4af68533b2b18ec003600fb002c009e/p/AUB093/?username=Guest Page 5 of 82
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 267 15/2/21, 4:08 PM
SEPARATE OPINION:
687
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000177a4af68533b2b18ec003600fb002c009e/p/AUB093/?username=Guest Page 6 of 82
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 267 15/2/21, 4:08 PM
Same; Same; R.A. No. 7659 did not change the nature or the
elements of the crimes stated in the Penal Code and in the special
laws.·But RA 7659 did not change the nature or the elements of
the crimes stated in the Penal Code and in the special laws. It
merely made the penalty more severe. Neither did its provisions
(other than the preamble, which was cast in general terms) discuss
or justify the reasons for the more severe sanction, either
collectively for all the offenses or individually for each of them.
Generally, it merely reinstated the concept of and the method by
.which the death penalty had been imposed until February 2, 1987,
when the Constitution took effect as follows: (1) a person is
convicted of a capital offense; and (2) the commission of which was
accompanied by aggravating circumstances not outweighed by
mitigating circumstances.
Same; Same; R.A. 7659 merely amended certain laws to
prescribe death as the maximum imposable penalty once the court
appreciates the presence or absence of aggravating circumstances.
·As already alluded to, RA 7659 merely amended certain laws to
prescribe death as the maximum imposable penalty once the court
appreciates the presence or absence of aggravating circumstances.
ThereÊs nothing really new that Congress did which it could not
have otherwise done had such provision not been included in our
fundamental law. In other words, it just reinstated capital
punishment for crimes which were already punishable with death
prior to the effectivity of the 1987 Constitution. With the possible
exception of plunder and qualified bribery, no new crimes were
introduced by RA 7659. The offenses punished by death under said
law were already so punishable by the Revised Penal Code and by
special laws. In short, Sec. 19, Article III of the Constitution did not
have any impact
688
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000177a4af68533b2b18ec003600fb002c009e/p/AUB093/?username=Guest Page 7 of 82
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 267 15/2/21, 4:08 PM
RESOLUTION
PER CURIAM:
689
________________
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000177a4af68533b2b18ec003600fb002c009e/p/AUB093/?username=Guest Page 9 of 82
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 267 15/2/21, 4:08 PM
690
In his Brief before us when the rape case was elevated for
automatic review, the accused-appellant reiterated as
grounds for exculpation:
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000177a4af68533b2b18ec003600fb002c009e/p/AUB093/?username=Guest Page 10 of 82
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 267 15/2/21, 4:08 PM
691
„As pointed out in People v. Lim (190 SCRA 706 [1990], which is
also cited by the accused-appellant, an affidavit of desistance is
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000177a4af68533b2b18ec003600fb002c009e/p/AUB093/?username=Guest Page 11 of 82
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 267 15/2/21, 4:08 PM
________________
2 See Amigo v. Court of Appeals, 253 SCRA 382, 390 [1996]; De Leon v. Court
of Appeals, 245 SCRA 166, 172 [1995].
3 RTC Decision, p. 3; Rollo, p. 19.
4 G.R. No. 108871 promulgated on November 19, 1996.
692
II
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000177a4af68533b2b18ec003600fb002c009e/p/AUB093/?username=Guest Page 12 of 82
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 267 15/2/21, 4:08 PM
________________
693
III
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000177a4af68533b2b18ec003600fb002c009e/p/AUB093/?username=Guest Page 13 of 82
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 267 15/2/21, 4:08 PM
694
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000177a4af68533b2b18ec003600fb002c009e/p/AUB093/?username=Guest Page 14 of 82
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 267 15/2/21, 4:08 PM
________________
695
books, and as long as our criminal law provides for its imposition in
certain cases, it is the duty of judicial officers to respect and apply
14
the law regardless of their private opinions."
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000177a4af68533b2b18ec003600fb002c009e/p/AUB093/?username=Guest Page 15 of 82
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 267 15/2/21, 4:08 PM
_______________
696
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000177a4af68533b2b18ec003600fb002c009e/p/AUB093/?username=Guest Page 16 of 82
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 267 15/2/21, 4:08 PM
________________
697
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000177a4af68533b2b18ec003600fb002c009e/p/AUB093/?username=Guest Page 17 of 82
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 267 15/2/21, 4:08 PM
_______________
17 Id., p. 678.
18 Id., p. 680.
698
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000177a4af68533b2b18ec003600fb002c009e/p/AUB093/?username=Guest Page 18 of 82
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 267 15/2/21, 4:08 PM
________________
699
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000177a4af68533b2b18ec003600fb002c009e/p/AUB093/?username=Guest Page 19 of 82
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 267 15/2/21, 4:08 PM
_______________
20 Id., p. 744
21 155 SCRA 327 [1987].
22 Id., p. 335.
700
23 24 25
Masangkay, People v. Atencio and People v. Intino
divided into three new periods, to wit, the lower half of
reclusion temporal maximum as the minimum; the upper
half of reclusion temporal maximum as the medium; and
reclusion perpetua as the maximum, in keeping with the
three-grade scheme26 under the Revised Penal Code. In
People v. Muñoz, however, we reconsidered these
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000177a4af68533b2b18ec003600fb002c009e/p/AUB093/?username=Guest Page 20 of 82
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 267 15/2/21, 4:08 PM
________________
701
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000177a4af68533b2b18ec003600fb002c009e/p/AUB093/?username=Guest Page 21 of 82
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 267 15/2/21, 4:08 PM
________________
27 Id., p. 121.
702
xxx
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000177a4af68533b2b18ec003600fb002c009e/p/AUB093/?username=Guest Page 22 of 82
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 267 15/2/21, 4:08 PM
The Chair explained that it was agreed upon that the Body
would first decide the question whether or not death penalty should
be reimposed, and thereafter, a seven-man committee would be
formed to draft the compromise bill in accordance with the result of
the voting. If the Body decides in favor of the death penalty, the
Chair said that the committee would specify the crimes on which
death penalty would be imposed. It affirmed that a vote of Yes in
the nominal voting would mean a vote in favor of death penalty on
at least one crime, and that certain refinements on how the penalty
would be imposed would be left to the discretion of the seven-man
committee.
xxx
Senator Roco stated that the Body would vote whether or not
death as a penalty will be reincorporated in the scale of penalties
provided by the Revised Penal Code. However, he pointed out that if
the Body decides in favor of death penalty, the Body would still have
to address two issues: 1) Is the crime for which the death penalty is
supposed to be imposed heinous pursuant to the constitutional
mandate? 2) And, if so, is there a compelling reason to impose the
703
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000177a4af68533b2b18ec003600fb002c009e/p/AUB093/?username=Guest Page 23 of 82
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 267 15/2/21, 4:08 PM
________________
704
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000177a4af68533b2b18ec003600fb002c009e/p/AUB093/?username=Guest Page 24 of 82
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 267 15/2/21, 4:08 PM
________________
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000177a4af68533b2b18ec003600fb002c009e/p/AUB093/?username=Guest Page 25 of 82
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 267 15/2/21, 4:08 PM
705
From March 17, 1993, when the death penalty bill was
presented for discussion until August 16, 1993, the
Members of the Senate debated on its provisions.
The stiffest opposition thereto was bannered by Senator
Lina who kept prodding the sponsors of the bill to state the
compelling reason for each and every crime for which the
supreme penalty of death was sought. Zeroing in on the
statement in the preamble of the death penalty bill that the
same is warranted in the face of „the alarming upsurge of
[heinous] crimes,‰ Senator Lina demanded for solid
statistics showing that in the case of each and every crime
in the death penalty bill, there was a significantly higher
incidence of each crime after the suspension of the death
penalty on February 2, 1987 when the 1987 Constitution
was ratified by the majority
31
of the Filipino people, than
before such ratification. Inasmuch as the re-impositionists
could not satisfy the abolitionists with sufficient statistical
data for the latter to accept the alarming upsurge of
heinous crimes as a compelling reason justifying the re-
imposition of the death penalty, Senator Lina concluded
that there were, in fact, no compelling reasons therefor. In
the alternative, Senator Lina argued that the compelling
reason required by the constitution was that „the State has
done everything in its command so that it can be justified
32
to use an inhuman punishment called death penalty." The
problem, Senator Lina emphasized, was that even the re-
impositionists admit that there were still numerous
reforms in the criminal justice system that may and must
be put in place, and so clearly, the recourse to the
enactment of a death penalty bill was not in the nature of a
last resort, hence, unconstitutional in the absence of
compelling reasons. As an initial reaction to Senator LinaÊs
contentions, Senator Tolen-
_______________
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000177a4af68533b2b18ec003600fb002c009e/p/AUB093/?username=Guest Page 26 of 82
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 267 15/2/21, 4:08 PM
706
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000177a4af68533b2b18ec003600fb002c009e/p/AUB093/?username=Guest Page 27 of 82
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 267 15/2/21, 4:08 PM
________________
707
heinous but also one can see the compelling reasons for the
reimposition of the death penalty therefor?
Senator Tolentino. Mr. President, that matter was actually
considered by the Committee. But the decision of the Committee
was to avoid stating the compelling reason for each and every
offense that is included in the substitute measure. That is why in
the preamble, general statements were made to show these
compelling reasons. And that, we believe, included in the bill, when
converted into law, would be sufficient notice as to what were
considered compelling reasons by the Congress, in providing the
death penalty for these different offenses.
If a matter like this is questioned before the Supreme Court, I
would suppose that with the preamble already in general terms, the
Supreme Court would feel that it was the sense of Congress that
this preamble would be applicable to each and every offense
described or punishable in the measure.
So we felt that it was not necessary to repeat these compelling
reasons for each and every offense.
Senator Tañada. Mr. President, I am thinking about the
constitutional limitations upon the power of Congress to enact
criminal legislation, especially the provisions on the Bill of Rights,
particularly the one which says that no person shall be held to
answer for a criminal offense without due process of law.
Can we not say that under this provision, it is required that the
compelling reasons be so stated in the bill so that the bill, when it
becomes a law, will clearly define the acts and the omissions
punished as crimes?
Senator Tolentino. Mr. President, I believe that in itself, as
substantive law, this is sufficient. The question of whether there is
due process will more or less be a matter of procedure in the
compliance with the requirements of the Constitution with respect
to due process itself which is a separate matter from the
substantive law as to the definition and penalty for crimes.
Senator Tañada. Under the Constitution, Mr. President, it
appears that the reimposition of the death penalty is subject to
three conditions and these are:
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000177a4af68533b2b18ec003600fb002c009e/p/AUB093/?username=Guest Page 28 of 82
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 267 15/2/21, 4:08 PM
708
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000177a4af68533b2b18ec003600fb002c009e/p/AUB093/?username=Guest Page 29 of 82
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 267 15/2/21, 4:08 PM
_______________
709
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000177a4af68533b2b18ec003600fb002c009e/p/AUB093/?username=Guest Page 30 of 82
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 267 15/2/21, 4:08 PM
„The people should have the final say on the subject, because, at some
future time, the people might want to restore death penalty through
initiative and referendum.
710
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000177a4af68533b2b18ec003600fb002c009e/p/AUB093/?username=Guest Page 31 of 82
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 267 15/2/21, 4:08 PM
711
It is for this reason, Mr. Speaker, that I stand here and support
House Bill No. 62.
As duly elected Representatives of our people, collectively, we
ought to listen to our constituents and heed their plea·a plea for
life, liberty and pursuit of their happiness under a regime of justice
and democracy, and without threat that their loved ones will be
kidnapped, raped or butchered.
But if such a misfortune befalls them, there is the law they could
rely on for justice. A law that will exact retribution for the victims.
A law that will deter future animalistic behavior of the criminal
who take their selfish interest over and above that of society. A law
that will deal a deathblow upon all heinous crimes.
Mr. Speaker, my distinguished colleagues, for the preservation of
36
all that we hold dear and sacred, let us restore the death penalty."
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000177a4af68533b2b18ec003600fb002c009e/p/AUB093/?username=Guest Page 32 of 82
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 267 15/2/21, 4:08 PM
________________
712
of what crimes are heinous and that the fact of their very
heinousness involves the compulsion and the imperative to
suppress, if not completely eradicate, their occurrence. Be
it the foregoing general statement of Representative
Sanchez on the following details of the nature of the
heinous crimes enumerated in House Bill No. 62 by
Representative Miguel L. Romero of Negros Oriental, there
was clearly, among the hundred or so re-impositionists in
the Lower House, no doubt as to their cause:
„My friends, this bill provides for the imposition of the death
penalty not only for the importation, manufacture and sale of
dangerous drugs, but also for other heinous crimes such as treason;
parricide; murder; kidnapping; robbery; rape as defined by the
Revised Penal Code with or without additionally defined
circumstances; plunder, as defined in R.A. 7080; piracy, as defined
under Section 2 of PD 532; carnapping, as defined in Section 2 of RA
6539, when the owner, driver or occupant is killed; hijacking, as
defined in x x x RA 6235; and arson resulting in the death of any
occupants.
All these crimes have a common denominator which qualifies
them to the level of heinous crimes. A heinous crime is one which,
by reason of its inherent or manifest wickedness, viciousness,
atrocity or perversity, is repugnant and outrageous to the common
standards of decency and morality in a just and civilized society.
For instance, the crime of treason is defined as a breach of
allegiance to a government, committed by a person who owes
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000177a4af68533b2b18ec003600fb002c009e/p/AUB093/?username=Guest Page 33 of 82
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 267 15/2/21, 4:08 PM
713
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000177a4af68533b2b18ec003600fb002c009e/p/AUB093/?username=Guest Page 34 of 82
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 267 15/2/21, 4:08 PM
38
reading. The results were 123 votes in favor, 26 votes
against, and 2 abstentions.
After the approval on third reading of House Bill No. 62
on February 23, 1993 and of Senate Bill No. 891 on August
16, 1993, the Bicameral Conference Committee convened to
incorporate and consolidate them.
On December 31, 1993, Republic Act (R.A.) No. 7659,
entitled, „An Act to Impose the Death Penalty on Certain
Heinous Crimes, Amending for that Purpose the Revised
Penal Code,
________________
714
________________
39 People v. Simon, 234 SCRA 555 [1994]; People v. Timple, 237 SCRA
52 [1994].
715
„x x x the crimes punishable by death under this Act are heinous for
being grievous, odious and hateful offenses and which, by reason of
their inherent or manifest wickedness, viciousness, atrocity and
perversity are repugnant and outrageous to the common standards
and norms of decency and morality in a just, civilized and ordered
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000177a4af68533b2b18ec003600fb002c009e/p/AUB093/?username=Guest Page 36 of 82
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 267 15/2/21, 4:08 PM
society.‰
_______________
716
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000177a4af68533b2b18ec003600fb002c009e/p/AUB093/?username=Guest Page 37 of 82
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 267 15/2/21, 4:08 PM
717
All the foregoing crimes are not capital crimes per se, the
uniform penalty for all of them being not mandatory death
but the flexible penalty of reclusion perpetua to death. In
other words, it is premature to demand for a specification
of the heinous elements in each of the foregoing crimes
because they are not anyway mandatorily penalized with
death. The elements that call for the imposition of the
supreme penalty of death in these crimes, would only be
relevant when the trial court, given the prerogative to
impose reclusion perpetua, instead actually imposes the
death penalty because it has, in appreciating the evidence
proferred before it, found the at-
718
„If any public officer is entrusted with law enforcement and be refrains
from arresting or prosecuting an offender who has committed a crime
punishable by reclusion perpetua and/or death in consideration of any
offer, promise, gift or present, he shall suffer the penalty for the offense
which was not prosecuted.
If it is the public officer who asks or demands such gift or present, he
shall suffer the penalty of death.‰ (Sec. 4)
719
(4) Rape with the victim becoming insane, rape with homicide and
qualified rape
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000177a4af68533b2b18ec003600fb002c009e/p/AUB093/?username=Guest Page 40 of 82
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 267 15/2/21, 4:08 PM
„When by reason or on the occasion of the rape, the victim has become
insane, the penalty shall be death.
xxx
When by reason or on the occasion of the rape, a homicide is
committed, the penalty shall be death.
The death penalty shall also be imposed if the crime of rape is
committed with any of the following attendant circumstances:
1. when the victim is under eighteen (18) years of age and the
offender is a parent, ascendant, step-parent, guardian, relative by
consanguinity or affinity within the third civil degree, or the
common-law spouse of the parent of the victim.
2. when the victim is under the custody of the police or military
authorities.
3. when the rape is committed in full view of the husband, parent,
any of the children or other relatives within the third degree of
consanguinity.
4. when the victim is a religious or a child below seven (7) years old.
5. when the offender knows that he is afflicted with Acquired
Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS) disease.
6. when committed by any member of the Armed Forces of the
Philippines or the Philippine National Police or any law
enforcement agency.
7. when by reason or on the occasion of the rape, the victim has
suffered permanent physical mutilation.‰ (Sec. 11)
720
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000177a4af68533b2b18ec003600fb002c009e/p/AUB093/?username=Guest Page 41 of 82
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 267 15/2/21, 4:08 PM
„The maximum penalties [of death] provided for in Sections 3, 4(1), 5(1),
6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12 and 13 of Article II and Sections 14, 14-A, 14(1), 15-A(1),
16, and 19 of Article III [of the Dangerous Drugs Act of 1972] shall be
imposed, if those found guilty of any of the same offenses are government
officials,
721
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000177a4af68533b2b18ec003600fb002c009e/p/AUB093/?username=Guest Page 42 of 82
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 267 15/2/21, 4:08 PM
(11) In all the crimes in R.A. No. 7659 in their qualified form
722
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000177a4af68533b2b18ec003600fb002c009e/p/AUB093/?username=Guest Page 43 of 82
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 267 15/2/21, 4:08 PM
723
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000177a4af68533b2b18ec003600fb002c009e/p/AUB093/?username=Guest Page 44 of 82
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 267 15/2/21, 4:08 PM
724
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000177a4af68533b2b18ec003600fb002c009e/p/AUB093/?username=Guest Page 45 of 82
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 267 15/2/21, 4:08 PM
725
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000177a4af68533b2b18ec003600fb002c009e/p/AUB093/?username=Guest Page 46 of 82
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 267 15/2/21, 4:08 PM
726
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000177a4af68533b2b18ec003600fb002c009e/p/AUB093/?username=Guest Page 47 of 82
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 267 15/2/21, 4:08 PM
„We cannot say from facts disclosed in these records that these
defendants were sentenced to death because they were black. Yet
our task is not restricted to an effort to divine what motives
impelled these death penalties. Rather, we deal with a system of
law and of justice that leaves to the uncontrolled discretion of
judges or juries the determination whether defendants committing
these crimes should die x x x.
xxx
In a Nation committed to equal protection of the laws there is no
permissible ÂcasteÊ aspect of law enforcement. Yet we know that the
discretion of judges and juries in imposing the death penalty
enables the penalty to be selectively applied, feeding prejudices
against the accused if he is poor and despised x x x.
xxx
________________
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000177a4af68533b2b18ec003600fb002c009e/p/AUB093/?username=Guest Page 48 of 82
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 267 15/2/21, 4:08 PM
727
________________
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000177a4af68533b2b18ec003600fb002c009e/p/AUB093/?username=Guest Page 49 of 82
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 267 15/2/21, 4:08 PM
728
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000177a4af68533b2b18ec003600fb002c009e/p/AUB093/?username=Guest Page 50 of 82
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 267 15/2/21, 4:08 PM
authorized the death penalty in some rape cases, but only where the
victim was a child and the rapist an adult, the Tennessee statute
has since been invalidated because the death sentence was
mandatory. x x x The upshot is that Georgia is the sole jurisdiction
in the United States at the present time that authorizes a sentence
729
of death when the rape victim is an adult woman, and only two
other jurisdictions provide capital punishment when the victim is a
child.
The current judgment with respect to the death penalty for rape
is not wholly unanimous among state legislatures, but it obviously
weighs very heavily on the side of rejecting capital punishment as a
suitable penalty for raping an adult woman.
x x x [T]he legislative r ejection of capital punishment for rape
strongly confirms our own judgment, which is that death is indeed a
disproportionate penalty for the crime of raping an adult woman.
We do not discount the seriousness of rape as a crime. It is highly
reprehensible, both in a moral sense and in its almost total
contempt for the personal integrity and autonomy of the female
victim and for the latterÊs privilege of choosing those with whom
intimate relationships are to be established. Short of homicide, it is
the Âultimate violation of self.Ê It is also a violent crime because it
normally involves force, or the threat of force. or intimidation, to
overcome the will and the capacity of the victim to resist. Rape is
very often accompanied by physical injury to the female and can
also inflict mental and psychological damage. Because it
undermines the communityÊs sense of security, there is public injury
as well.
Rape is without doubt deserving of serious punishment; but in
terms of moral depravity and of the injury to the person and to the
public, it does not compare with murder, which does involve the
unjustified taking of human life. Although it may be accompanied
by another crime, rape by definition does not include the death of or
even the serious injury to another person. The murderer kills; the
rapist, if no more than that, does not. Life is over for the victim of
the murderer; for the rape victim, life may not be nearly so happy
as it was, but it is not over and normally is not beyond repair. We
have the abiding conviction that the death penalty, which Âis unique
in its severity and irrevocabilityÊ x x x is an excessive penalty for the
rapist who, as such, does not take human life.‰
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000177a4af68533b2b18ec003600fb002c009e/p/AUB093/?username=Guest Page 51 of 82
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 267 15/2/21, 4:08 PM
730
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000177a4af68533b2b18ec003600fb002c009e/p/AUB093/?username=Guest Page 52 of 82
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 267 15/2/21, 4:08 PM
________________
731
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000177a4af68533b2b18ec003600fb002c009e/p/AUB093/?username=Guest Page 53 of 82
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 267 15/2/21, 4:08 PM
MERIT.
________________
732
SO ORDERED.
SEPARATE OPINION
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000177a4af68533b2b18ec003600fb002c009e/p/AUB093/?username=Guest Page 54 of 82
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 267 15/2/21, 4:08 PM
733
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000177a4af68533b2b18ec003600fb002c009e/p/AUB093/?username=Guest Page 55 of 82
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 267 15/2/21, 4:08 PM
734
SEPARATE OPINION
________________
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000177a4af68533b2b18ec003600fb002c009e/p/AUB093/?username=Guest Page 56 of 82
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 267 15/2/21, 4:08 PM
1996.
3 Atty. Julian R. Vitug, Jr.
4 The bulk of jurisprudence precludes raising an issue for the first
time only on appeal. See, for instance, Manila Bay Club Corporation vs.
Court of Appeals, 249 SCRA 303, October 13, 1995; Manila Bay Club
Corporation vs. Court of Appeals, 245 SCRA 715, July 11, 1995; Securities
and Exchange Commission vs. Court of Appeals, 246 SCRA 738, July 21,
1995. However, the Court resolved to tackle the question of
constitutionality of Republic Act No. 7659 in this case, anticipating that
the same question would be raised anyway in many other subsequent
instances. The Court resolved to determine and dispose of the issue once
and for all, at the first opportunity. To let the issue pass unresolved just
because it was raised after the promulgation of the decision affirming
conviction may result in grave injustice.
735
„Sec. 19. (1) Excessive fines shall not be imposed, nor cruel,
degrading or inhuman punishment inflicted. Neither shall death
penalty be imposed, unless for compelling reasons involving heinous
crimes, the Congress hereafter provides for it. Any death penalty
already imposed shall be reduced to reclusion perpetua‰ (Italics
supplied)
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000177a4af68533b2b18ec003600fb002c009e/p/AUB093/?username=Guest Page 57 of 82
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 267 15/2/21, 4:08 PM
________________
5 In People vs. Muñoz, 170 SCRA 107, February 9, 1989; the Court,
prior to the enactment and effectivity of RA 7659, ruled by a vote of 9–6
(J. Cruz, ponente, C.J. Fernan, JJ. Gutierrez, Jr., Feliciano, Gancayco,
Padilla, Bidin, Griño-Aquino and Medialdea, concurring) that the death
penalty was not abolished but only prohibited from being imposed. But
see also the persuasive Dissenting Opinion of Mme. Justice Ameurfina
Melencio-Herrera (joined by JJ. Narvasa, Paras, Sarmiento, Cortes and
Regalado) who contended that the Constitution totally abolished the
death penalty and removed it from the statute books. People vs. Muñoz
reversed the earlier „abolition‰ doctrine uniformly held in People v.
Gavarra, 155 SCRA 327, October 30, 1987, (per C.J. Yap); People vs.
Masangkay, 155 SCRA 113, October 27, 1987, (per J. Melencio-Herrera)
and People vs. Atencio, 156 SCRA 242, December 10, 1987 (per C.J.
Narvasa). It is time that these cases are revisited by this Court.
736
_______________
„Fr. Bernas:
xxx xxx xxx
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000177a4af68533b2b18ec003600fb002c009e/p/AUB093/?username=Guest Page 58 of 82
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 267 15/2/21, 4:08 PM
„My Collection on this is that there was a division in the Committee not on
whether the death penalty should be abolished or not, but rather on whether
the abolition should be done by the Constitution·in which case it cannot be
restored by the legislature·or left to the legislature. The majority voted for the
constitutional abolition of the death penalty. And the reason is that capital
punishment is inhuman for the convict and his family who are traumatized by
the waiting, even if it is never carried out. There is no evidence that the death
penalty deterred deadly criminals, hence, life should not be destroyed just in
the hope that other lives might be saved. Assuming mastery over the life of
another man is just too presumptuous for any man. The fact that the death
penalty as an institution has been there from time immemorial should not
deter us from reviewing it. Human life is more valuable than an institution
intended precisely to serve human life. So basically, this is the summary of the
reasons which were presented in support of the constitutional abolition of the
death penalty. (italics supplied)
737
________________
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000177a4af68533b2b18ec003600fb002c009e/p/AUB093/?username=Guest Page 59 of 82
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 267 15/2/21, 4:08 PM
738
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000177a4af68533b2b18ec003600fb002c009e/p/AUB093/?username=Guest Page 60 of 82
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 267 15/2/21, 4:08 PM
12 13
Code; (2) by incorporating a new14 article therein; and (3)
by amending certain special laws.
But RA 7659 did not change the nature or the elements
of the crimes stated in the Penal Code and in the special
laws. It merely made the penalty more severe. Neither did
its provi-
________________
739
Heinous Crimes
740
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000177a4af68533b2b18ec003600fb002c009e/p/AUB093/?username=Guest Page 62 of 82
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 267 15/2/21, 4:08 PM
________________
741
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000177a4af68533b2b18ec003600fb002c009e/p/AUB093/?username=Guest Page 63 of 82
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 267 15/2/21, 4:08 PM
19
Sen. Ernesto Maceda, wryly said:
„So we did not go that far from the Revised Penal Code, Mr.
President, and from existing special laws which, before abolition of
the death penalty, had already death as the maximum penalty.‰
________________
742
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000177a4af68533b2b18ec003600fb002c009e/p/AUB093/?username=Guest Page 64 of 82
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 267 15/2/21, 4:08 PM
________________
„MR. SUAREZ. The Gentleman advisedly used the words Âheinous crimes,Ê
whatever is the pronunciation. Will the Gentleman give examples of Âheinous
crimesÊ? For example, would the head of an organized syndicate in dope
distribution or dope smuggling fall within the qualification of a heinous
offender such as to preclude the application of the principle of abolition of
death penalty?
MR. MONSOD. Yes, Madam President. That is one of the possible crimes
that would qualify for a heinous crime. Another would be organized murder. In
other words, yesterday there were many arguments for and against, and they
all had merit. But in the contemporary society, we recognize the sacredness of
human life and·I think it was Honorable Laurel who said this yesterday·it is
only God who gives and takes life. However, the voice of the people is also the
voice of God, and we cannot presume to have the wisdom of the ages. Therefore,
it is entirely possible in the future that circumstances may arise which we
should not preclude today. We know that this is a very difficult question. The
fact that the arguments yesterday were quite impassioned and meritorious
merely tell us that this is far from a well-settled issue. At least in my personal
opinion, we would like the death penalty to be abolished. However, in the
future we should allow the National Assembly, in its wisdom and as
representatives of the people, to still impose the death penalty for the common
good, in specific cases.
MR. SUAREZ. Thank you. I would like to pursue some more the
GentlemanÊs defi-nition of Âheinous crimes.Ê Would the brutal murder of a rape
victim be considered as falling within that classification?
MR. MONSOD. Madam President, yes, particularly, if it is a person in
authority. He would, therefore, add as an ag
743
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000177a4af68533b2b18ec003600fb002c009e/p/AUB093/?username=Guest Page 65 of 82
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 267 15/2/21, 4:08 PM
Compelling Reasons
________________
744
is true
22
that paragraphs 3 and 4 of the preamble of RA
7659 made some attempt at meeting this requirement.
But such effort was at best feeble and inconsequential. It
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000177a4af68533b2b18ec003600fb002c009e/p/AUB093/?username=Guest Page 66 of 82
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 267 15/2/21, 4:08 PM
________________
„WHEREAS, due to the alarming upsurge of such crimes which has resulted not only in the
loss of human lives and wanton destruction of property but has also affected the nationÊs efforts
towards sustainable economic development and prosperity while at the same time has
undermined the peopleÊs faith in the Government and the latterÊs ability to maintain peace and
WHEREAS, the Congress, in the interest of justice, public order and the rule of law, and the
need to rationalize and harmonize the penal sanctions for heinous crimes, finds compelling
745
MR. GARCIA (P.). The worsening peace and order condition in the
country, Mr. Speaker. That is one.
MR. LAGMAN. So the compelling reason which the distinguished
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000177a4af68533b2b18ec003600fb002c009e/p/AUB093/?username=Guest Page 67 of 82
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 267 15/2/21, 4:08 PM
746
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000177a4af68533b2b18ec003600fb002c009e/p/AUB093/?username=Guest Page 68 of 82
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 267 15/2/21, 4:08 PM
Philippine National Police show that the crime volume and crime
rate particularly on those legislated capital offenses did not worsen
but in fact declined between 1987, the date when the Constitution
took effect, and 1993, the year when RA 7659 was enacted.
24
Witness the following debate also between Representatives
Garcia and Lagman:
________________
747
MR. LAGMAN. This was the year immediately after the abolition of
the death penalty. Could the Gentleman tell us the volume of
robbery cases in 1988?
MR. GARCIA (P). It was 16,926, Mr. Speaker.
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000177a4af68533b2b18ec003600fb002c009e/p/AUB093/?username=Guest Page 69 of 82
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 267 15/2/21, 4:08 PM
MR. LAGMAN. Obviously, the Gentleman would agree with me. Mr.
Speaker that the volume of robbery cases declined from 22,942 in
1987 or crime rate of 40 percent to 16,926 or a crime rate of 29
percent. Would the Gentleman confirm that, Mr. Speaker?
MR. GARCIA (P.). This is what the statistics say. I understand we
are reading now from the same document.
MR. LAGMAN. Now, going to homicide, the volume in 1987 was
12,870 or a crime rate of 22 percent. The volume in 1988 was
11,132 or a crime rate of 19 percent. Would the Gentleman
confirm that, Mr. Speaker?
MR. GARCIA (P.). As I said, Mr. Speaker, we are reading from the
same document and I would not want to say that the Gentleman
is misreading the document that I have here.
MR. LAGMAN. But would the Gentleman confirm that?
MR. GARCIA (P.). The document speaks for itself.‰
________________
748
But in 1987, when the death penalty was abolished, as far as the
drug-related cases are concerned, the figure continued a downward
trend, and there was no death penalty in this time from, 1988 to
1991."
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000177a4af68533b2b18ec003600fb002c009e/p/AUB093/?username=Guest Page 70 of 82
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 267 15/2/21, 4:08 PM
_______________
749
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000177a4af68533b2b18ec003600fb002c009e/p/AUB093/?username=Guest Page 71 of 82
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 267 15/2/21, 4:08 PM
________________
750
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000177a4af68533b2b18ec003600fb002c009e/p/AUB093/?username=Guest Page 72 of 82
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 267 15/2/21, 4:08 PM
________________
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000177a4af68533b2b18ec003600fb002c009e/p/AUB093/?username=Guest Page 73 of 82
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 267 15/2/21, 4:08 PM
751
________________
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000177a4af68533b2b18ec003600fb002c009e/p/AUB093/?username=Guest Page 74 of 82
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 267 15/2/21, 4:08 PM
issue of December 9, 1996, page 17, however reports that, quoting Sen.
Ernesto Herrera, the total number of death row inmates has gone up to
267, as of November, 1996, of whom more than one half (139) are rape
convicts. Some major dailies (Philippine Daily Inquirer, Philippine Star,
Manila Standard) in their February 3, 1997 issue up the death row
figure to 300, as of the end of January 1997, with 450 as the probable
number at the end of 1997.
752
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000177a4af68533b2b18ec003600fb002c009e/p/AUB093/?username=Guest Page 75 of 82
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 267 15/2/21, 4:08 PM
753
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000177a4af68533b2b18ec003600fb002c009e/p/AUB093/?username=Guest Page 76 of 82
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 267 15/2/21, 4:08 PM
754
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000177a4af68533b2b18ec003600fb002c009e/p/AUB093/?username=Guest Page 77 of 82
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 267 15/2/21, 4:08 PM
Epilogue
755
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000177a4af68533b2b18ec003600fb002c009e/p/AUB093/?username=Guest Page 78 of 82
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 267 15/2/21, 4:08 PM
________________
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000177a4af68533b2b18ec003600fb002c009e/p/AUB093/?username=Guest Page 79 of 82
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 267 15/2/21, 4:08 PM
Publications:
756
_______________
„2266. Preserving the common good of society requires rendering the aggressor
unable to inflict harm. For this reason the traditional teaching of the Church
has acknowledged as well-founded the right and duty of legitimate public
authority to punish malefactors by means of penalties commensurate with the
gravity of the crime, not excluding, in cases of extreme gravity, the death
penalty. For analogous reasons those holding authority have the right to repel
by armed force aggressors against the community in their charge.
„55. This should not cause surprise: to kill a human being, in whom the image
of God is present, is a particularly serious sin. Only God is the master of life!
Yet from the beginning, faced with the many and often tragic cases which occur
in the life of individuals and society, Christian reflection has sought a fuller
and deeper understanding of what GodÊs commandment prohibits and
prescribes. There are, in fact, situations in which values proposed by GodÊs Law
seem to involve a genuine paradox. This happens for example in the case of
legitimate defense, in which the right to protect oneÊs own life and the duty not
to harm someone elseÊs life are difficult to reconcile in practice. Certainly, the
intrinsic value of life and the duty to love oneself no less than others are the
basis of a true right to self-defense. The demanding commandment of love of
neighbor, set forth in the Old Testament and confirmed by Jesus, itself
presupposes love of oneself as the basis of comparison: „You shall love your
neighbor as yourself (Mk 12:31). Consequently, no one can renounce the right to
self-defense out of lack of love for life or for self. This can only be done in virtue
of a heroic love which deepens and transfigures the love of self into a radical
self-offering, according to the spirit of the Gospel Beatitudes (cf. Mt. 5:38–40).
The sublime example of this self-offering is the Lord Jesus himself.
Moreover, legitimate defense can be not only a right but a grave duty for
someone responsible for anotherÊs life, the common good of the family or of the
State.Ê Unfortunately it happens that the need to render the aggressor
incapable of causing harm sometimes involves taking his life. In this case,
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000177a4af68533b2b18ec003600fb002c009e/p/AUB093/?username=Guest Page 80 of 82
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 267 15/2/21, 4:08 PM
757
________________
758
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000177a4af68533b2b18ec003600fb002c009e/p/AUB093/?username=Guest Page 81 of 82
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 267 15/2/21, 4:08 PM
··o0o··
759
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000177a4af68533b2b18ec003600fb002c009e/p/AUB093/?username=Guest Page 82 of 82