Five classes of falsification:

Article 171
FALSIFICATION OF DOCUMENTS BY PUBLIC OFFICER, EMPLOYEE, OR NOTARY OR
(1) Falsification of legislative documents;
ECCLESTASTICAL MINISTER
(2) Falsification of a document by a public officer, employee or notary public;
 ELEMENTS:
a. That the offender is a public officer, employee, or notary public.
(3) Falsification of a public or official, or commercial documents by a private individual;
b. That he takes advantage of his official position.
(4) Falsification of a private document by any person;
c. That he falsifies a document by committing any of the following acts:
(5) Falsification of wireless, telegraph and telephone messages.
1. Counterfeiting or imitating any handwriting, signature or rubric.
The crime of falsification must involve a writing that is a document in the legal sense. The
writing must be complete in itself and capable of extinguishing an obligation or creating rights or
Requisites:
capable of becoming evidence of the facts stated therein. Until and unless the writing has
i. That there be an intent to imitate, or an attempt to imitate
attained this quality, it will not be considered as document in the legal sense and, therefore, the
crime of falsification cannot be committed in respect thereto.
ii. That the two signatures or handwritings, the genuine and the
forged, bear some resemblance, to each other
Distinction between falsification and forgery:
 (lack of similitude/imitation of a genuine signature will not be a ground
Falsification is the commission of any of the eight acts mentioned in Article 171 on legislative
for conviction under par. 1 but such is not an impediment to conviction
(only the act of making alteration), public or official, commercial, or private documents, or
under par. 2)
wireless, or telegraph messages.
2. Causing it to appear that persons have participated in any act or proceeding when they
The term forgery as used in Article 169 refers to the falsification and counterfeiting of treasury or
did not in fact so participate.
bank notes or any instruments payable to bearer or to order.
3. Attributing to persons who have participated in an act or proceeding statements other
Note that forging and falsification are crimes under Forgeries.
than those in fact made by them.

Requisites:
Article 170
i. That the offender caused it to appear in a document that a
FALSIFICATION OF LEGISLATIVE DOCUMENTS
person/s participated in an act or a proceeding; and
 ELEMENTS :
ii. That such person/s did not in fact so participate in the act or
a. That these be a bill, resolution or ordinance enacted or approved or pending approval by the
proceeding
national assembly or any provincial board or municipal council.
4. Making untruthful statements in a narration of facts;
b. That the offender (any person) alters the same.
Requisites:
c. That he has no proper authority therefor.
i. That the offender makes in a document statements in a narration
of facts
d. That the alteration has changed the meaning of the document.
ii. That he has a legal obligation to disclose the truth of the facts narrated
The words "municipal council" should include the city council or municipal board – Reyes.
by him; (required by law to be done) and
 Accused must not be a public official entrusted with the custody or possession of such iii. That the facts narrated by the offender are absolutely false; and
document otherwise Art 171 applies .
iv. That the perversion or truth in the narration of facts was made with the
The falsification must be committed on a genuine, true and authentic legislative document. If wrongful intent of injuring a third person
committed on a simulated, spurious or fabricated legislative document, the crime is not
punished under this article but under Article 171 or 172.  There must be a narration of facts, not a conclusion of law. Must be on a
material matter

For one to be held criminally liable for falsification under paragraph 4, the untruthful statement
must be such as to effect the integrity of the document or to change the effects which it would
otherwise produce.
  Legal obligation means that there is a law requiring the disclosure of the
truth of the facts narrated. Ex. Residence certificates
 The person making the narration of facts must be aware of the falsity of the
facts narrated by him. This kind of falsification may be committed by
omission
5. Altering true dates.
– date must be essential
For falsification to take place under this paragraph, the date of the document must be material
to the right created or to the obligation that is extinguished.
6. Making any alteration or intercalation in a genuine document which changes its
meaning.
Requisites:
i. That there be an alteration (change) or intercalation (insertion) on
a document
ii. That it was made on a genuine document
iii. That the alteration/intercalation has changed the meaning of the
document
iv. That the change made the document speak something false.
7. Issuing in an authenticated form a document purporting to be a copy of an original
document when no such original exists, or including in such copy a statement contrary
to, or different from, that of the genuine original; (if no knowledge, falsification
through negligence) or
The acts of falsification mentioned in this paragraph are committed by a public officer or by a
notary public who takes advantage of his official position as custodian of the document. It can
also refer to a public officer or notary who prepared and retained a copy of the document. The
falsification can be done in two ways . It can be a certification purporting to show that the
document issued is a copy of the original on record when no such original exists. It can also be
in the form of a certification to the effect that the document on file contains statements or
including in the copy issued, entries which are not found on contrary to, or different from the
original genuine document on file.
8. Intercalating any instrument or note relative to the issuance thereof in a protocol,
registry, or official book. (genuine document)
d. In case the offender is an ecclesiastical minister, the act of falsification is
committed with respect to any record or document of such character that its
falsification may affect the civil status of persons.
 There is no crime of attempted or frustrated falsification of public document
Alteration or changes to make the document speak the truth do not constitute falsification. (US
vs. Mateo, 25 Phil. 324)
 Persons liable – public officer, employee or notary public or ecclesiastical minister
Either he has duty to intervene in the preparation of the document or it may be a situation
wherein the public officer has official custody of the document.
 So even if the offender is a public officer, if her causes the falsification of a document
which is not in his official custody or if the falsification committed by him is not related
whatsoever to the performance of his duties, he will still be liable for falsification but
definitely not under this Article but under Article 172. (falsification of documents by a
private person)
Document: Any written instrument which establishes a right or by which an obligation is
extinguished. A deed or agreement executed by a person setting forth any disposition or
condition wherein rights and obligations may arise.
Writing may be on anything as long as it is a product of the handwriting, it is
considered a document.
 Not necessary that what is falsified is a genuine or real document, enough that it gives an
appearance of a genuine article
As long as any of the acts of falsification is committed, whether the document is
genuine or not, the crime of falsification may be committed. Even totally false documents may
be falsified.
 Counterfeiting – imitating any handwriting, signature or rubric
 Feigning – simulating a signature, handwriting, or rubric out of one of which does not in
fact exist
It does not require that the writing be genuine. Even if the writing was through and through
false, if it appears to be genuine, the crime of falsification is nevertheless committed.
There are four kinds of documents:
(1) Public document in the execution of which, a person in authority or notary public has
taken part;
(2) Official document in the execution of which a public official takes part;
(3) Commercial document or any document recognized by the Code of Commerce or any
commercial law; and
(4) Private document in the execution of which only private individuals take part.
Public document is broader than the term official document. Before a document may be
considered official, it must first be a public document. But not all public documents are official
documents. To become an official document, there must be a law which requires a public officer
to issue or to render such document. Example: A cashier is required to issue an official receipt
for the amount he receives. The official receipt is a public document which is an official
document.
Liability of a private individual in falsification by a public officer when there is conspiracy.
Under Republic Act 7975, when a public officer who holds a position classified as Grade 27 or
higher, commits a crime in relation to the performance of his official functions, the case against
him will fall under the jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan. If a private person is included in the
accusation because of the existence of conspiracy in the commission of the crime , the
Sandiganbayan shall maintain jurisdiction over the person of the co-accused, notwithstanding
the fact that said co-accused is a private individual. If the public officer is found guilty, the same
liability and penalty shall be imposed on the private individual . (U.S. vs. Ponce, 20 Phil. 379)
Article 172
FALSIFICATION OF PUBLIC, OFFICIAL, OR COMMERCIAL DOCUMENT BY A PRIVATE
INDIVIDUAL (par 1)
 ELEMENTS
a. That the offender is a private individual or a public officer or employee who did not
take advantage of his official position.
b. That he committed any of the acts of falsification enumerated in ART. 171.
1. Counterfeiting or imitating any handwriting, signature or rubric.
2. Causing it to appear that persons have participated in any act or proceeding when they
did not in fact so participated.
3. Attributing to persons who have participated in an act or proceeding statements other
than those in fact made by them.
4. Making untruthful statements in a narration of facts;
5. Altering true dates.
6. Making any alteration or intercalation in a genuine document which changes its
meaning.
c. That the falsification was committed in any public or official or commercial document.
 Under this paragraph, damage is not essential, it is presumed
If the falsification of public, official or commercial documents, whether they be public official or
by private individuals, it is not necessary that there be present the idea of gain or the intent to
injure a third person. What is punished under the law is the violation of public faith and the
perversion of the truth as solemnly proclaimed by the nature of the document. (Sarep vs.
Sandiganbayan)
 Defense: lack of malice or criminal intent
 The following writings are public:
a. the written acts or records of acts of the sovereign authority of official bodies and
tribunals, and of the public officers, legislative, judicial and executive, whether of the
Philippines or of a foreign country.
b. Public records kept in the Philippines.
 Examples of commercial documents – warehouse receipts, airway bills, bank checks, cash
files, deposit slips and bank statements, journals, books, ledgers, drafts, letters of credit
and other negotiable instruments
There is a complex crime of estafa through falsification of public, official or
commercial document. In the crime of estafa, damage or intent to cause damage is not an
element. It is sufficient that the offender committed or performed the acts of falsification as
defined and punished under Article 171. The two offenses can co-exist as they have distinct
elements peculiar to their nature as a crime. When the falsification is committed because it is
necessary to commit estafa, what we have is a complex crime defined and punished under
Article 48 of the Revised Penal Code.
There is a complex crime of falsification of pubic documents through reckless imprudence.
 Cash disbursement vouchers or receipts evidencing payments are not commercial
documents
 A mere blank form of an official document is not in itself a document
 The possessor of falsified document is presumed to be the author of the falsification
FALSIFICATION UNDER PARAGRAPH 2 OF ART. 172. OF PRIVATE DOCUMENT
 ELEMENTS :
a. That the offender committed any of the acts of falsification, except those in paragraph 7 and
8, enumerated in art. 171.
b. That the falsification was committed in any private document (must affect the truth or
integrity of the document)
c. That the falsification caused damage (essential element; hence, no crime of estafa thru
falsification of private document) to a third party or at least the falsification was committed
with intent to cause such damage.
 Not necessary that the offender profited or hoped to profit from the falsification
Falsification of a private document is consummated when such document is actually falsified
with the intent to prejudice a third person whether such falsified document is or is not thereafter
put to illegal use for which it is intended. (Lopez vs. Paras, 36 Phil. 146)
What is emphasized at this point is the element of falsification of private document. There must
be intent to cause damage or damage is actually caused . The intention is therefore must be
malicious or there is deliberate intent to commit a wrong. Reckless imprudence is incompatible
with malicious intent.
 Falsification is not a continuing offense
There is no falsification through reckless imprudence if the document is a private document.
 Falsification by omission
Mere falsification of a private document is not enough to commit crime under paragraph 2 of
Article 172. Two acts must be done by the offender. 1) He must have performed in the private
document the falsification contemplated under Article 171. 2) He must have performed an
independent act which operates to cause damage or prejudice to a third person. The third
person mentioned herein may include the government. Damage is not limited to money or
pecuniary prejudice. Damage to one’s honor, reputation or good name is included.
 A document falsified as a necessary means to commit another crime must be public, official
or commercial
 There is no complex crime of estafa through falsification of a private document because the
immediate effect of the latter is the same as that of estafa
If a private document is falsified to cause damage to the offended party, the crime committed is
falsification of a private document. Remember that in estafa, damage or intent to cause damage
is an indispensable element of the crime. The same element is necessary to commit the crime of
falsification of private document. Since they have a common element, such element cannot be 3. That he used such documents (not in judicial proceedings).
divided into the two parts and considered as two separate offenses.
4. That the use of the documents caused damage to another or at least was used with
There is no complex crime of estafa with falsification because deceit is a common element of intent to cause such damage.
both. One and the same deceit or damage cannot give rise to more than one crime. It is either
estafa or falsification.  The user of the falsified document is deemed the author of falsification, if:
a. the use is so closely connected in time with the falsification
Criteria to determine whether the crime is estafa only or falsification only :
b. the user had the capacity of falsifying the document
IF the falsification of the private document was essential in the commission of estafa because
the falsification, estafa cannot be committed, the crime is falsification; estafa becomes the Falsification of Private Falsification of Public/Official
consequence of the crime. Documents Documents
Prejudice to third party is an Prejudice to third persons is immaterial,
IF the estafa can be committed even without resorting to falsification, the latter being resorted element of the offense. what is punished is the violation of public
only to facilitate estafa, the main crime is estafa; falsification is merely incidental, since even faith and perversion of truth which the
without falsification, estafa can be committed. document proclaims.

 If the estafa was already consummated at the time of the falsification of a private document
was committed for the purpose of concealing the estafa, the falsification is not punishable,
because as regards the falsification of the private document there was no damage or intent
to cause damage.
A private document which is falsified to obtain money from offended party is a falsification of
private document only.
Rules to observe in the use of a falsified document.
1. It is a crime when knowingly introduced in a judicial proceeding even if there is not intent to
cause damage to another. Knowingly introducing a falsified document in a judicial
proceeding, the use alone is not a crime. The mere introduction of the forged document is
the crime itself. But when the falsified document is knowingly introduced in an
administrative proceeding, the use alone is not a crime. There must be intent to cause
damage or damage is actually inflicted.

 A private document may acquire the character of a public document when it becomes part 2. Falsification of document is a separate and distinct offense from that of the use of falsified
of an official record and is certified by a public officer duly authorized by law documents. So if the falsification of document was done or performed because it was
necessary to the use of the same and in the commission of the crime, then we may have a
 The crime is falsification of public documents even if falsification took place before the complex crime defined and punished under Article 48 of the Revised Penal Code.
private document becomes part of the public records
3. Good faith is a defense in falsification of public document.
Examples:
An employee of a private company who punches the bundy clock on behalf on a co-employee is Article 173
guilty of falsification of a private document. FALSIFICATION OF WIRELESS, CABLE, TELEGRAPH, AND TELEPHONE MESSAGES,
AND USE OF SAID FALSIFIED MESSAGES
One who will take the civil service examination for another and makes it appear that he is the
examinee is guilty of falsification of a public document.  Acts punishable:
1. Uttering fictitious, wireless, telegraph or telephone message
USE OF FALSIFIED DOCUMENT (par. 3, art. 172) Requisites:
a. That the offender is an officer or employee of the government or an officer
 ELEMENTS: or employee of a private corporation, engaged in the service of sending or
receiving wireless, cable or telephone message.
a. Introducing in a judicial proceeding:
1. That the offender knew that a document was falsified by another person. b. That the accused commits any of the following acts:
- uttering fictitious wireless, cable, telegraph, or telephone message, or
2. That the false document is embraced in art. 171 or in any subdivisions nos. 1 and 2 of - falsifying wireless, cable, telegraph, or telephone message
art. 172.
2. Falsifying wireless, telegraph or telephone message
3. That he introduced said document in evidence in any judicial proceeding. (intent to Requisites:
cause damage not necessary) a. That the offender is an officer or employee of the government or an officer
or employee of a private corporation, engaged in the service of sending or
b. Use in any other transaction: receiving wireless, cable or telephone message.
1. That the offender knew that a document was falsified by another person.
b. That the accused commits any of the following acts:
2. That the false document is embraced in art. 171 or in any of subdivisions nos. 1 and 2 - uttering fictitious wireless, cable, telegraph, or telephone message, or
of art. 172. - falsifying wireless, cable, telegraph, or telephone message
3. Using such falsified message
Requisites: OTHER FALSITIES
a. That the accused knew that wireless, cable, telegraph, or telephone
message was falsified by any of the person specified in the first paragraph Article 177
of art. 173. USURPATION OF AUTHORITY OR OFFICIAL FUNCTIONS:

b. That the accused used such falsified dispatch.  2 ways of committing the crime:
a. By knowingly and falsely representing oneself to be an officer, agent or
c. That the use of the falsified dispatch resulted in the prejudice of a third representative of any department or agency of the Philippine gov’t or any
party, or that the use thereof was with intent to cause such prejudice. foreign gov’t.

 The public officer, to be liable must be engaged in the service of sending or receiving b. By performing an act pertaining to any person in authority or public officer
wireless, cable and telegraph or telephone message of the Phil gov’t or foreign gov’t under the pretense of such official
position, and without being lawfully entitled to do so.
Article 174
FALSIFICATION OF MEDICAL CERTIFICATES, CERTIFCATES OF MERIT OR SERVICE  In usurpation of authority: The mere act of knowingly and falsely representing oneself is
AND THE LIKE: sufficient. Not necessary that he performs an act pertaining to a public officer.

 Persons liable: Elements

a. Physician or surgeon who, in connection with the practice of his profession, issued a
false certificate (note: such certificate must refer to the illness or injury of a person) 1. Offender knowingly and falsely represents himself;

b. Public officer who issued a false certificate of merit of service, good conduct or similar 2. As an officer, agent or representative of any department or agency of the
circumstances Philippine government or of any foreign government.

c. Private individual who falsified a certificate under (1) and (2)  In usurpation of official functions: It is essential that the offender should have performed
an act pertaining to a person in authority
Article 175
USING FALSE CERTIFICATES Elements

 ELEMENTS: 1. Offender performs any act;

a. That a physician or surgeon has issued a false medical certificate, or a public officer
has issued a false certificate of merit or service, good conduct, or similar 2. Pertaining to any person in authority or public officer of the Philippine
circumstances, or a private person had falsified any of said certificates. government or any foreign government, or any agency thereof;

b. That the offender knew that the certificate was false. 3. Under pretense of official position;

c. That he used the same. 4. Without being lawfully entitled to do so.

 A public officer may also be an offender

Article 176  The act performed without being lawfully entitled to do so must pertain:
MANUFACTURING AND POSSESSION OF INTRUMENTS OR IMPLEMENTS FOR a. to the gov’t
FALSIFICATION: b. to any person in authority
c. to any public office
 Acts punishable:
a. Making or introducing into the Philippines any stamps, dies or marks or other Foreign government adverted to in this article refers to public officers duly authorized to
instruments or implements for counterfeiting or falsification perform governmental duties in the Philippines. The law cannot refer to other foreign
governments as its application may bring us to legal problems which may infringe on
b. Possessing with intent to use the instruments or implements for counterfeiting or constitutional boundaries.
falsification made in or introduced into the Philippines by another person
If the offender commits the acts of usurpation as contemplated herein, and he does it because
 The implement confiscated need not form a complete set he is a rebel and pursuant to the crime of rebellion or insurrection or sedition, he will not be
liable under this article because what is attributed against him as a crime of usurpation is in fact
 Constructive possession is also punished one of the elements of committing rebellion.

The elements of false pretense is necessary to commit the crime of usurpation of official
function.
Article 178 b. That the insignia, uniform or dress pertains to an office not held by the offender or to
USING FICTITIOUS NAME AND CONCEALING TRUE NAME a class of persons of which he is not a member.

 ELEMENTS (using fictitious name) : c. That said insignia, uniform or dress is used publicly and improperly.
a. That the offender uses a name other than his real name.
The wearing of a uniform, or insignia of a non-existing office or establishment is not a crime. It
b. That he uses that fictitious name publicly. is necessary that the uniform or insignia represents an office which carries authority, respect,
dignity, or influence which the public looks up to.
c. That the purpose of the offender is –
1. To conceal a crime, So also, an exact imitation of a uniform or dress is unnecessary; a colorable resemblance
2. To evade the execution of a judgment, or calculated to deceive the common run of people is sufficient.
3. To cause damage to public interest. (ex. Signing fictitious name for a passport)
The wearing of insignia, badge or emblem of rank of the members of the armed forced of the
The name of a person is what appears in his birth certificate. The name of a person refers to his Philippines or constabulary (now PNP) is punished by Republic Act No. 493.
first name, surname, and maternal name. Any other name which a person publicly applies to
himself without authority of law is a fictitious name. When the uniform or insignia is used to emphasize the pageantry of a play or drama or in
moving picture films, the crime is not committed.

 ELEMENTS (concealing true name): Three forms of false testimony

a. that the offender conceals –
1. False testimony in criminal cases under Article 180 and 181;
1. his true name, and 2. False testimony in civil case under Article 182;
3. False testimony in other cases under Article 183.
2. all other personal circumstances.
False testimony, defined
b. that the purpose is only to conceal his identity. It is the declaration under oath of a witness in a judicial proceeding which is contrary
to what is true, or to deny the same, or to alter essentially the truth.
What the offender does to violate or commit this act is for him to conceal his true name and
other personal circumstances. His only motive in doing so is to conceal his identity. In Nature of the crime of false testimony.
concealment of true name, the deception is done momentarily, just enough to conceal the name 1. It cannot be committed through reckless imprudence because false testimony requires
of the offender. In the use of fictitious name , the offender presents himself before the public criminal intent or intent to violate the law is an essential element of the crime.
with another name.
2. If the false testimony is due to honest mistake or error or there was good faith in making the
A person under investigation by the police who gives a false name and false personal false testimony, no crime is committed.
circumstances, upon being interrogated, is guilty of this crime.
Article 180
Use of Fictitious Name (178) Concealing True Name (178) FALSE TESTIMONY AGAINST A DEFENDANT
Element of publicity must be present Publicity not necessary  ELEMENTS:
a. That there be a criminal proceeding.
Purpose is to conceal a crime, to evade Purpose is to conceal identity
the execution of a judgement, or to
b. That the offender testifies falsely under oath against the defendant therein.
cause damage
c. That the offender who gives false testimony knows that it is false.
Commonwealth Act No. 142 (Regulating the Use of Aliases)
No person shall use any name different from the one with which he was registered at birth in the
d. That the defendant against whom the false testimony is given is either acquitted or
office of the local civil registry, or with which he was registered in the bureau of immigration upon
convicted in a final judgment (prescriptive period starts at this point)
entry; or such substitute name as may have been authorized by a competent court.
 Requires criminal intent, can’t be committed through negligence. Need not impute guilt
upon the accused
Exception: Pseudonym solely for literary, cinema, television, radio, or other entertainment and
in athletic events where the use of pseudonym is a normally accepted practice.
 The defendant must at least be sentenced to a correctional penalty or a fine or must have
Article 179 been acquitted
ILLEGAL USE OF UNIFORM OR INSIGNIA
 The witness who gave false testimony is liable even if the court did not consider his
 ELEMENTS: testimony
a. That the offender makes use of insignia, uniform or dress.
The probative value of the testimonial evidence is subject to the rules of evidence. It may not be
considered at all by the judge. But whether the testimony is credible or not or whether it is
appreciated or not in the context that the false witness wanted it to be, the crime of false PERJURY FALSE TESTIMONY
testimony is still committed, since it is punished not because of the effect it produces, but
1. Non-judicial proceedings. 1. Given in a judicial proceeding.
because of its tendency to favor the accused. (People vs. Reyes)
2. Statement or testimony is required by 2. Testimony need not be required by
 Penalty is dependent upon sentence imposed on the defendant law. law.
3. Amount involved is not material. 3. Amount involved in civil cases is
material.
Article 181 4. immaterial whether statement or 4. It is always material in criminal cases.
FALSE TESTIMONY IN FAVOR OF DEFENDANT in a criminal case: testimony is favorable or not to the
accused.
Elements:
1. A person gives false testimony;
Article183
2. In favor of the defendant; FALSE TESTIMONY IN OTHER CASES AND PERJURY IN SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
3. In a criminal case. ELEMENTS:
a. That an accused made a statement under oath or made an affidavit upon a material
 False testimony by negative statement is in favor of the defendant matter.

 False testimony need not in fact benefit the defendant b. That the statement or affidavit was made before a competent officer, authorized to
receive and administer oath.
 A statement of a mere opinion is not punishable
c. That in that statement or affidavit, the accused made a willful and deliberate assertion
 Conviction or acquittal is not necessary (final judgement is not necessary). The false of a falsehood, and
testimony need not influence the acquittal
d. That the sworn statement or affidavit containing the falsity is required by law.
 A defendant who voluntarily goes up on the witness stand and falsely imputes the offense
to another person the commission of the offense is liable under this article. If he merely  2 ways of committing perjury:
denies the commission of the offense, he is not liable. a. by falsely testifying under oath
b. by making a false statement
 Basis of penalty: gravity of the felony charged against the defendant
 Subornation of perjury: procures another to swear falsely.

Article 182  Solemn affirmation: refers to non-judicial proceedings and affidavits

FALSE TESTIMONY IN CIVIL CASES
 A false affidavit to a criminal complaint may give rise to perjury
 ELEMENTS:
a. That the testimony must be given in a civil case. Two contradictory sworn statements are not sufficient to convict the affiant for the crime of
perjury. There must be evidence to show which is false. The same must be established or
b. That the testimony must relate to the issues presented in said case. proved from sources other than the two contradictory statements. (People vs. Capistrano, 40 Phil.
902)
c. That the testimony must be false.
 A matter is material when it is directed to prove a fact in issue
d. That the false testimony must be given by the defendant knowing the same to be false.
The test of materiality is whether a false statement can influence the court (People vs. Bnazil).
e. That the testimony must be malicious and given with an intent to affect the issues
presented in the said case
 A “competent person authorized to administer an oath” means a person who has a
right to inquire into the questions presented to him upon matters under his jurisdiction
 Not applicable when testimony given in a special proceeding (in this case, the crime is
perjury)
There is no perjury if the accused signed and swore the statement before a person not
 Basis of penalty: amount involved in the civil case authorized to administer oath (People vs. Bella David).

Distinctions between perjury and false testimony:  There is no perjury through negligence or imprudence since the assertion of falsehood
must be willful and deliberate

Because of the nature of perjury, which is the willful and corrupt assertion of a falsehood, there
is no perjury committed through reckless imprudence or simple negligence under Article 365.
Since admittedly perjury can only be committed by means of dolo, then good faith or lack of
malice is a good defense when one is indicted for the crime of perjury.

 Even if there is no law requiring the statement to be made under oath, as long as it is made
for a legal purpose, it is sufficient

If there is no requirement of law to place the statement or testimony under oath, there is no
Perjury considering the phrases “oath in cases in which the law so requires” in Article 183.

The affidavit or sworn statement must be required by law like affidavit of adverse claim to
protect one’s interest on real property; or an affidavit of good moral character to take the bar
examination. So if the affidavit was made but the same is not required by law, even if the
allegations are false, the crime of perjury is not committed. (Diaz vs. People, 191 SCRA 86)

 Perjury is an offense which covers false oaths other than those taken in the course of
judicial proceedings

 False testimony before the justice of the peace during the P.I. may give rise to the crime of
perjury because false testimony in judicial proceedings contemplates an actual trial where a
judgment of conviction or acquittal is rendered

 A person who knowingly and willfully procures another to swear falsely commits
subornation of perjury and the witness suborned does testify under circumstances
rendering him guilty of perjury.

 The false testimony is not in a judicial proceeding

False testimony vs. Perjury

When one testifies falsely before the court, the crime committed is false testimony. If one
testifies falsely in a non-judicial proceeding, the crime committed is perjury. In false testimony,
it is not required that the offender asserts a falsehood on a material matter. It is enough that he
testifies falsely with deliberate intent. In perjury, the witness must testify or assert a fact on a
material matter with a full knowledge that the information given is essentially contrary to the
truth. Material matter means the main fact which is the subject or object of the inquiry.