G.R. No.

17958 – February 27, 1922

The People of the Philippine Islands, plaintiff-appellee

vs

Lol-lo and Saraw, defendants-appellants

Thos. D. Aitken for appellants.

Acting Attorney-General Tuason for appellee.

Facts:

 On or about June 30, 1920, two Dutch boats left Matuta, a Dutch possession, for Peta, another
Dutch possession.
 In one of the boats was one Dutch, and in the other boat were eleven Dutch men, women, and
children.
 After a number of days of navigation, at about 7 o’clock in the evening, the second boat arrived
between the islands of Buang and Bukid in the Dutch East Indies where they were surrounded
by six vintas manned by twenty-four armed Moros.
 The Moros first asked for food, but when they were already on the Dutch boat, they also asked
for all the cargo, attacked some of the men and brutally violated two women by “methods too
horrible to describe.”
 All the Dutch persons, except from the two young women, were again placed on the boat where
holes were made for the idea that it would submerge.
 After 11 days of violating the Dutch people, the Moros arrived at Maruro, a Dutch possession.
 Two Moro marauder were Lol-lo, who also raped one of the women, and Saraw. At the Maruro,
the two young women were able to escape.
 Lol-lo and Saraw returned to their home in South Ubian, Tawi-Tawi, Sulu, Philippine Islands,
where they got arrested and were charged in the Court of First Instance of Sulu with the crime
of piracy.

(Note):

 An objection was made by the counsel de officio for the Moros, based on the grounds that the
offense charged was not within the jurisdiction of the Court of First Instance, nor of any court of
the Philippines, and the facts did not constitute a public offense, under the laws in force in the
Philippines.

Issue:
Whether or not the Court of First Instance, nor any court of the Philippines have jurisdiction over the
crime of piracy.

Held:

YES.

According to Article 2 of the Revised Penal Code, the provision of the said Code shall also be enforced
outside the jurisdiction of the Philippines against those who should commit any of the crimes against
national security and the law of nations, defined in Title One of Book Two of the said Code.

Piracy is a violation against Sec. 3, Art. 122 of Revised Penal Code’s Book Two.

The penalty of reclusion perpetua shall be inflicted upon any person who, on the high seas, or in
Philippine waters shall attack or seize a vessel or, not being a member of its complement nor a
passenger, shall seize the whole or part of the cargo of said vessel, it equipment or personal belongings
of its complement or passengers.

(Note):

 The objection was overruled by the trial judge, had a trial, and a judgement was rendered
finding the two defendants guilty and sentencing each of them to life imprisonment (cadena
perpetua). They must also return to the offended parties, 39 sacks of copras robbed, or
indemnify them in the amount of 924 rupees, and to pay one-half part of the costs.

Final Ruling:

The judgment of the trial court as to the defendant and appellant Saraw is affirmed and is reversed as to
the defendant and appellant Lol-lo, who is sentenced therefore to be hung until dead, at such time and
place as shall be fixed by the judge of first instance of the 26 th Judicial District.

The two appellants shall indemnify the offended parties in the amount of 924 rupees and shall pay a
one-half part of the costs of both instances.

(Note):

In Lol-lo’s (the accused who raped one of the women) case, the judgement was reversed as he is guilty
of the crime qualified piracy.

Under Book Two, Sec. 3, Art. 123 of the Revised Penal Code— the crime of piracy becomes a qualified
piracy when the said crime is accompanied by murder, homicide, physical injuries, or rape. The penalty
of reclusion perpetua to death shall be imposed upon those who commit the said crime.