G.R. No.

L-18463             October 4, 1922

THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINE ISLANDS, plaintiff-appellee,

vs.
GREGORIO PERFECTOR, defendant-appellant.

August 20, 1920, the Secretary of the Philippine Senate, Fernando M. Guerrero,
discovered that certain documents which constituted the records of testimony given by
witnesses in the investigation of oil companies, had disappeared from his office.

Sept 7, 1920, the newspaper La Nacion, edited by Mr. Gregorio Perfecto, published an
articleregarding the difficulty in findingthe perpetrators was due to an official concealment
by the Senate since the missing documentsconstituted the records of testimony given by
witnesses in the investigation of oil companies.

…the scandalous robbery of records which were kept and preserved in the iron safe of the
Senate, yet up to this time there is not the slightest indication that the author or authors of the
crime will ever be discovered.

…The perpetration of the robbery was but the natural effect of the environment of the place in
which it was committed.

…Senators are without remorse in their conscience and with serenity of mind, that they do not
owe their victory to electoral robbery. And that the author or authors of the robbery of the records
followed the example of certain Senators who secured their election through fraud and robbery.

As a result, an information was filed in the municipal court by an assistant city fiscal
alleging that the article constituted a violation of article 256 of the Penal Code.

MTC: Guilty

CFI/RTC: Guilty

ISSUE:

Whether article 256 of the Spanish Penal Code, punishing "Any person who, by . . .
writing, shall defame, abuse, or insult any Minister of the Crown or other person in
authority . . .," is still in force.

HELD: Acquitted.

It is a general principle of the public law that the previous political relations of the ceded
region are totally abrogated. All laws, ordinances, and regulations in conflict with the
political character, institutions, and constitution of the new government are at once
displaced. Article 256 was enacted to protect Spanish officials which were
representatives of the King. Such intent is contradictory to the ideology of the new
government where “In the eye of our (American) Constitution and laws, every man is a
sovereign, a ruler and a freeman, and has equal rights with every other man”. As such,
Article 256 is deemed abrogated and the case is consequently dismissed and judgment
reversed.

Court’s Opinion:

1.  Effect of the Philippine Libel Law, Act No. 277, on article 256 of the Spanish Penal
Code.

> enacted by the Philippine Commission shortly after organization of this legislative body.

> libel is a "malicious defamation, expressed either in writing, printing, or by signs or

pictures, or the like, or public theatrical exhibitions, tending to blacken the memory of one
who is dead or to impeach the honesty, virtue, or reputation, or publish the alleged or
natural deffects of one who is alive, and thereby expose him to public hatred, contempt or
ridicule."

> Section 13 provides that "All laws and parts of laws now in force, so far as the same
may be in conflict herewith, are hereby repealed. . . ."

> Libel Law abrogated certain portion of the Spanish Penal Code. Provision
covering the subjects of calumny and insults, must have been particularly affected
by the Libel Law.

Rule of statutory construction is, that where the later statute clearly covers the old
subject-matter of antecedent acts, and it plainly appears to have been the purpose
of the legislature to give expression in it to the whole law on the subject, previous
laws are held to be repealed by necessary implication.

2.  Effect of the change from Spanish to Amercian sevoreignty over the Philippine son
article 256 of the Spanish Penal Code. —

Article 256 of the Spanish Penal Code is not now in force because abrogated by the
change from Spanish to American sovereignty over the Philippines and because
inconsistent with democratic principles of government.

I. Whether Article 256 of the Spanish Penal Code is in the nature of a municipal law
or political law. (political in nature)

II. Whether it is consistent with the Constitution and laws of the United States and
the characteristics and institutions of the American Government.

"Political" is here used to denominate the laws regulating the relations sustained by the
inhabitants to the sovereign.

It is a general principle of the public law that on acquisition of territory the previous
political relations of the ceded region are totally abrogated. All laws, ordinances and
regulations in conflict with the political character, institutions and Constitution of the new
government are at once displaced. Thus, upon a cession of political jurisdiction and
legislative power, the laws of the country in support of an established religion
or abridging the freedom of the press, or authorizing cruel and unusual punishments
would at once cease to be of obligatory force without any declaration to that effect."
The municipal laws of the conquered territory affecting private rights of person and
property and providing for the punishment of crime were nominally continued in force
in so far as they were compatible with the new order of things.

In all the forms of government and administrative provisions which they are authorized to
prescribe, the government which they are establishing is designed not for our satisfaction
or for the expression of our theoretical views, but for the happiness, peace, and
prosperity of the people of the Philippine Islands, and the measures adopted should be
made to conform to their customs, their habits, and even their prejudices, to the fullest
extent consistent with the accomplishment of the indispensable requisites of just and
effective government.

According to our view, article 256 of the Spanish Penal Code was enacted by the
Government of Spain to protect Spanish officials who were the representatives of the
King. With the change of sovereignty, a new government, and a new theory of
government, as set up in the Philippines. It was in no sense a continuation of the old,
although merely for convenience certain of the existing institutions and laws were
continued.

Article 256 of the Penal Code is contrary to the genius and fundamental principles
of the American character and system of government. Penalties out of all proportion
to the gravity of the offense, grounded in a distorted monarchical conception of the nature
of political authority, as opposed to the American conception of the protection of the
interests of the public, have been obliterated by the present system of government in
the Islands. 1awph!l.net

The crime of lese majeste disappeared in the Philippines with the ratification of the
Treaty of Paris. Ministers of the Crown have no place under the American flag.

SEPARATE Opinions:

ARAULLO, C.J., concurring:

Facts alleged in the information do not constitute a violation of article 256 of the Penal
Code; for although that article is in force with respect to calumny, injuria, or insult, by
deed or word, against an authority in the performance of his duties or by reason thereof,
outside of his presence, it is repealed by the Libel Law in so far as it refers to calumny,
injuria, or insult committed against an authority by writing or printing.

ROMUALDEZ (concur):

Article 256 of the Penal Code is still in force, except as it refers to "Ministers of the
Crown," whom we do not have in our Government, and to calumny, injuria, or insult, by
writing or printing, committed against an authority in the performance of his duties or by
reason thereof, which portion was repealed by the Libel Law.

NOTE 1:

The rule of stare decisis is binding upon this court until otherwise determined by proper
authority. However, Helbig Case is not applicable becuse:
Difference of Helbig case vs. Perfecto case:

1. Oral defamation; Written defamation

2. Urged upon the court

3. The appellate court is not restrained by strict adherence to a former decision.