UNIVERSITY OF THE CORDILLERAS

College of Arts and Sciences

PolSci 117 Criminal law Book 1

Course: LAW 2
Course Title: Criminal law 1
Course Credits: 3 Units
Contact Hours/Week: 4 Hours
Prerequisite: None

Course Description:
A detailed examination into the characteristics of criminal law, the nature of felonies, stages of
execution, circumstances affecting criminal liability, persons criminally liable; the extent and extinction of
criminal liability of the offender.

Course Outcomes:
At the end of the trimester, the students are expected to:
 Acquire and apply adequate knowledge on the fundamental principles of criminal law, particularly
on the characteristics of criminal law, criminal liability and circumstances determining criminal
liability.
 Determine the elements of the actions of persons who are criminally liable and their respective
criminal participation.
 Understand and justify the corresponding penalties of each crime when violated.

Topic 1:
Definition,characteristics and general concepts of Criminal law

Objectives:
At the end of the lesson, students are expected to be able to:
 Define criminal law and provide its characteristics.
 Define and distinguish the theories in criminal law

Instructional Materials:
Review materials issued to students

Teaching-Learning Activity/Lesson Proper:

Criminal law is that branch of public substantive law which defines crimes, treats of their
nature, and

Provides for their punishment.

Limitations upon Congress to enact penal laws:

1. Congress cannot enact ex post facto laws;
2. Congress cannot enact a bill of attainder;
3. Congress cannot provide for cruel and inhumane punishment.

Characteristics of criminal law: (GTP)

1. Generality

General Rule:

Art. 14, NCC. The penal law of the country is binding on all persons who live or sojourn in
Philippine territory, subject to the principles of public international law and to treaty
stipulations.

Limitations:

Art. 2, RPC. ―Except as provided in the treaties or laws of preferential application xxx ‖

A. Treaty Stipulations

Examples:
 Bases Agreement entered into by the Philippines and the US on Mar. 14, 1947 and expired
on Sept. 16, 1991.

 Visiting Forces Agreement (VFA)

B. Laws of Preferential Application

Examples:

 1. Members of Congress are not liable for libel or slander for any speech in Congress or in
any committee thereof. (Sec. 11, Art. VI, 1987

Constitution)

 2. Any ambassador or public minister of any foreign State,authorized and received as such
by the President, or any domestic or domestic

servant of any such ambassador or minister are exempt from arrest and imprisonment and
whose properties are exempt from distraint, seizure and attachment.

3.(R.A. No. 75)

Warship Rule – A warship of another country, even though docked in the Philippines, is
considered an extension of the territory of its

Respective country. This also applies to embassies.

C. Principles of Public International Law

Art. 14, NCC. ―xxx subject to the principles of public international law and to treaty
stipulations.‖ The following persons are exempt from the

provisions of the RPC:

(1) Sovereigns and other heads of state

(2) Ambassadors, ministers, plenipotentiary, minister resident and charges d‘ affaires.

(Article 31, Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations)

Note: Consuls and consular officers are NOT exempt from local prosecution. (See Article 41,
Vienna Convention on Consular Relations)

Public vessels of a friendly foreign power are not subject to local jurisdiction.

2. Territoriality

GENERAL RULE: Penal laws of the country have force and effect only within its territory. It
cannot penalize crimes committed outside its

territory. The territory of the country is not limited to the land where its sovereignty resides but
includes also its maritime and interior water s as well as its atmosphere. (Art. 2, RPC)

(1) Terrestrial jurisdiction is the jurisdiction

exercised over land.

(2) Fluvial jurisdiction is the jurisdiction exercised

over maritime and interior waters.

(3) Aerial jurisdiction is the jurisdiction exercised

over the atmosphere.

EXCEPTIONS

(1) Extraterritorial crimes, which are punishable even if committed outside the Philippine
territory (Art. 2, RPC)

Art. 2 embraces two scopes of applications:

General rule - Intraterritorial refers to the application of the RPC within the Philippine territory
(land, air and water).

Exception - Extraterritorial refers to the application of the Revised Penal Code outside the
Philippine territory.

(a) Par. 1: Crimes committed aboard

Philippine ship or airship:

The RPC is applied to Philippine vessels if the crime is committed while the ship is treading:

i. Philippine waters (intraterritorial), or

ii. The high seas i.e. waters NOT under the jurisdiction of any State (extraterritorial)

Two rules as to jurisdiction over crimes

committed aboard merchant vessels while in the

territorial waters of another country (i.e. a

foreign vessel treading Philippine waters OR

Philippine vessels treading foreign waters):

i. FRENCH RULE: It is the flag or nationality of the vessel which determines jurisdiction
UNLESS the crime violates the peace and order of the host country.

ii. ENGLISH RULE: the location or situs of the crime determines jurisdiction

UNLESS the crime merely relates to internal management of the vessel.

The Philippines adheres to the ENGLISH RULE. However, these rules are NOT applicable if
the vessel is on the high seas when the crime was

committed. In these cases, the laws of the nationality of the ship will always apply. When the
crime is committed in a war vessel of a foreign country, the nationality of the vessel will always
determine jurisdiction because war vessels are part of the sovereignty of the

country to whose naval force they belong.

(b) Par. 2: Forging/Counterfeiting and Coins or Currency Notes in the Philippines

i. Forgery is committed abroad, and

ii. It refers only to Philippine coin, currency note, obligations and securities.

(c) Par. 3: Should introduce into the country the above-mentioned obligations and securities.

i. The reason for this provision is that the introduction of forged or counterfeited obligations
and securities into the Philippines is as dangerous as the forging or counterfeiting of the same,
to the
economical interest of the country.

(d) Par. 4: When public officers or employees commit an offense in the exercise of their
functions.

Crime committed pertains to the exercise of the public official’s functions. Please refer to your
notes.

(e) Par. 5: Commit any of the crimes against national security and the law of nations, (Title
One, Book 2, RPC) Please refer to your notes.

3. Prospectivity

GENERAL RULE: Acts or omissions will only be subject to a penal law if they are committed
AFTER a penal law has taken effect. Conversely, acts or omissions which have been
committed before the effectivity of a penal law could not be penalized by such penal law.

EXCEPTION:

Art. 22 RPC. Penal laws shall have a retroactive effect, insofar as they favor the person guilty
of a felony who is not a habitual criminal, as this term is defined in Rule 5 of Article 62 of this
Code, although at the time of the publication of such laws a final sentence has been
pronounced and the convict is serving the same.

Art. 62(5) RPC. xxx For the purpose of this article, a person shall be deemed to be a habitual
delinquent, if within a period of 10 years from the date of his release or last conviction of the
crimes of serious or less serious physical injuries, robo(robbery), hurto(theft), estafa, or
falsification, he is found guilty of any crimes a third time or oftener.

EXCEPTION TO THE EXCEPTION:

(1) The new law is expressly made inapplicable to pending actions or existing cause of
actions; or

(2) The offender is a habitual criminal.

Effects of repeal of penal law

(1) If the repeal makes the penalty lighter in the

new law,

(a) The new law shall be applied,

(b) EXCEPT when the offender is a habitual delinquent or when the new law is made not
applicable to pending action or existing

causes of action.

(2) If the new law imposes a heavier penalty

(a) Law in force at the time of the commission of the offense shall be applied.

(3) If the new law totally repeals the existing law so that the act which was penalized under the
old law is no longer punishable,

(a) The crime is obliterated.

(b) Pending cases are dismissed.

(c) Unserved penalties imposed are remitted.

(4) Rule of prospectivity also applies to judicial decisions,administrative rulings and circulars.

Co vs. CA, (1993): In this case, Circular No. 4 of the Ministry of Justice, dated December, 15,
1981, provided that ―where the check is issued as part of an arrangement to guarantee or
secure the payment of an obligation, whether preexisting or not, the drawer is not criminally
liable for either estafa or violation of B.P. 22.‖ Subsequently, the administrative interpretation
was reversed in Circular No. 12, issued on August 8, 1984, such that the claim that the check
was issued as a guarantee or part of an arrangement to secure an obligation or to facilitate
collection, is no longer a valid defense for the prosecution under B.P. 22. Hence, it was ruled
that under the new circular, a

check issued merely to guarantee the performance of an obligation is covered by B.P. 22 [ Que
vs. People].

However, consistent with the principle of prospectivity, the new doctrine

should not apply to parties who had relied on the old Circular and acted on the
faith thereof. No retrospective effect.

Rationale for the prospectivity rule: the punishability of an act must be reasonably known for
the guidance of society [citing Peo v. Jabinal] .

Other characteristics but some authors do not include or is not generally accepted as part of
the general characteristics of criminal law.

4. Legality (nullum crimen nulla poena sine lege)

Art. 21. No felony shall be punishable by any penalty

not prescribed by law prior to its commission. There is no crime when there is no law
punishing the same.

Limitation:

Not every law punishing an act or omission may be

valid as a criminal law. If the law punishing an act is

ambiguous, it is null and void.

5. Strict Construction of Penal Laws Against State: The ―Doctrine of

Pro Reo

Pro reo doctrine: Whenever a penal law is to be construed or applied and the law admits of
two interpretations - one lenient to the offender and one strict to the offender, that
interpretation which is lenient or favorable to the offender will be adopted.

Basis: The fundamental rule that all doubts shall be construed in favor of the accused and
presumption of innocence of the accused.

Art. III, Sec. 14(2), 1987 Const. In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall be presumed
innocent until the contrary is proved.

Note: This is peculiar only to criminal law.

EQUIPOISE RULE:

When the evidence of the prosecution and the defense are equally balanced, the scale should
be tilted in favor of the accused in obedience to the constitutional presumption of innocence.

C. Constitutional limitations on the power of Congress to enact

penal laws in the Bill of Rights

(i) Equal protection

(ii) Due process

(iii)Non-imposition of cruel and unusual

punishment or excessive fines

(iv) Bill of attainder

(v) Ex post facto law

1. Equal protection

Article III, Section 1, 1987 Const. No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property
without due process of law, nor shall any person be denied the equal protection of the laws.

2. Due process

Art. III, Sec. 14 (1), 1987 Const. No person shall be held to answer for a criminal offense
without due process of law.

 Must be general in application.

3. Non-imposition of cruel and unusual punishment or excessive

fines

Art III, Sec. 19, 1987 Const. 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.

a. Act Prohibiting the Imposition of Death Penalty in the Philippines (R.A.

9346) Republic Act 9346

An Act Prohibiting the Imposition of the Death Penalty.

Repealed the law imposing lethal injection (R.A. 8177) and the law imposing the death penalty
(R.A. 7659) (Sec. 1). This Act also imposes the punishment of reclusion perpetua for offenses
under any act using the nomenclature of the RPC (Sec. 2 (a)) and the punishment of life
imprisonment for offenses under any act which does not use the nomenclature of the RPC
(Sec. 2(b))

4. Bill of attainder

Art III, Sec. 22, 1987 Const. No ex post facto law or bill of attainder shall be enacted. Bill of
attainder - a legislative act that inflicts

punishment without trial, its essence being the substitution of legislative fiat for a judicial
determination of guilt.

5. Ex post facto law

Art III, Sec. 22, 1987 Const. No ex post facto law or bill of attainder shall be enacted.

Ex post facto law is one which:

(1)Makes criminal an act done before the passage of the law and which was innocent when
done, and punishes such an act.

(2) Aggravates a crime, or makes it greater than it was, when committed;

(3)Changes the punishment and inflicts a greater punishment than the law annexed to the
crime when committed;

(4)Alters the legal rules of evidence, and authorizes conviction upon less or different testimony
than the law required at the time of the commission of the offense;

(5)Assumes to regulate civil rights and remedies only, in effect imposes penalty or deprivation
of a right for something which when done was

lawful; and

(6)Deprives a person accused of a crime some lawful protection to which he has become
entitled, such as the protection of a former

conviction or acquittal, or a proclamation of amnesty. (Reyes, The Revised Penal Code citing
In re: Kay Villegas Kami, Inc.)

Other constitutional limitations

 Must not provide imprisonment for non-payment

of debts or poll tax. [1987 Const. Art. III, Sec. 19

(1)]

 Must not restrict other constitutional freedoms,

e.g. due process, religion, free speech, and

assembly.

Basic Maxims in Criminal Law

a. Actus Non Facit Reum, Nisi Mens Sit Rea

―The act cannot be criminal where the mind is not criminal.‖

U.S. vs. Catolico (18 Phil. 504, 508)

Facts: Accused was a justice of the peace who rendered decisions for damages based on
breach of contract. The defendants failed to pay the bonds required on time, so upon petition
of the plaintiffs, the accused dismissed the appeals and ordered the sums attached and
delivered to plaintiffs in satisfaction of the judgment. Accused

was prosecuted for malversation.

Held: The general rule is that, if it is proved that the accused committed the criminal act
charged, it will be presumed that the act was done with criminal intention. However, it must be
borne in mind that the act from which such presumption springs must be a criminal act. In this
case, the act of the accused was not unlawful. Everything he did was done in good faith under
the belief that he was acting judiciously and correctly. The act of a person does not make him
a criminal,

unless his mind be criminal.

b. Actus Me Invito Factus Non Est Meus Actus ―An act done by me against my will is not my
act
c. El Que Es Causa De La Causa Es Causa Del Mal

Causado ―He who is the cause of the cause is the cause of the

evil caused.‖

 This is the rationale in par. 1 of Art. 4 which He who commits an intentional felony is
responsible for all the consequences which may naturally and logically result therefrom,
whether foreseen or

intended or not.

Mala in se and Mala Prohibita. Kindly refer to the notes given to you.

Enhancement Activity/Outcome:
A. Read the following cases and discuss the decision of the Supreme court integrating the concepts
learned as cited hereinabove.
1. Basis of criminal law:
Pp vs. Marivic Genosa GR no. 135981 September 29, 2000 and January 15, 2004
2. Application of the provisions of the RPC, Article 2
Ppvs. Liang GR 125865 January 28, 2000
Ppvs. Evangelista vs. Pp GR 163267 May 5, 2010(concept of possession)
3. Equipoise rule
Ppvs. Monalyn Cervantes GR181494 March 17, 2009
Ppvs. Aricheta GR 172500 Sept, 21 2007
4. Ex post facto
Fajardo vs. CA GR 128508 February 1, 1999
Sable vs. Pp GR 177961 April 7, 2009
5. Prospectivity/Retroactivity
Valeroso vs Pp GR 164815 February 22, 2008
Pp vs. Jacinto GR 182239 mARCH 16, 2011
6. Mala in se/Malum prohibitum
Monge vs.Pp GR 170308 March 7, 2008
Fajardo vs. People GR 190889 January 10, 2011

B. For your reading pleasure, please read the cases digests relative to the topics provided for in
this module. https://www.scribd.com/doc/191717091/Criminal-Law-1-Case-Digests

References:
1. https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/reviewers/criminal-law/
2. https://www.slideshare.net/gmicor/criminal-law-reviewer
3. https://lawphil.net/judjuris/judjuris.html
4. chanrobles.com