Special laws – laws that define and penalizes crime not included in. the RPC.

Mala in se offenses are wrong by their very nature, while mala

prohibita offenses are crimes that are prohibited by law but are not
necessarily wrong in themselves. Violations of the Revised Penal
Code are referred to as malum in se, which literally means, that
the act is inherently evil or bad or per se wrongful. On the other
hand, violations of Special Laws are ‘generally’ referred to as
malum prohibitum.

The better approach to distinguish between mala in se and mala

prohibita crimes is the determination of the inherent immorality or
vileness of the penalized act. If the punishable act or omission is
immoral in itself, then it is a crime mala in se, -on the contrary, if it
is not immoral in itself, but there is a statute prohibiting its
commission b)”. reasons of public policy, then it is mala prohibita.

A crime involving moral turpitude (CIMT) is a criminal or offensive act that can be
defined as vile and/or insulting to one’s moral compass. A crime of moral
turpitude is a crime that disrespects and antagonizes societal norms. Examples
· Murder · Voluntary manslaughter · Involuntary manslaughter (in some cases) · Domestic violence ·
Spousal abuse · Child abuse · Kidnapping

the Revised Penal Code serves as the foundation for the principles of criminal law in the
Philippines and is generally applicable to offenses under Special Penal Laws. However, Special
Penal Laws may contain their own specific provisions, penalties, and elements that take
precedence over the RPC when dealing with the offenses they cover. It is essential for legal
practitioners, judges, and law enforcement agencies to consider both the RPC and relevant
Special Penal Laws when addressing criminal cases.
 The prescription of criminal offenses, including those governed by Special Penal Laws in
the Philippines, refers to the time limit within which criminal proceedings may be
initiated or continued against an accused person. Prescription is an important legal
principle designed to ensure that individuals are not subject to prosecution for an
indefinite period, as it provides for the expiration of the right to prosecute or punish an
offender after a certain period has elapsed. Here are some key points regarding the
prescription of Special Penal Laws:

1. Prescription Periods: The prescription period for criminal offenses can vary depending
on the nature and severity of the offense. Under the Revised Penal Code (RPC), which
also provides general rules on prescription, the basic prescription periods are as follows:
• 20 years - For offenses punishable by death, reclusion perpetua, or reclusion
temporal.
• 15 years - For offenses punishable by other afflictive penalties.
• 10 years - For offenses punishable by correctional penalties.
• 5 years - For offenses punishable by light penalties.
2. Special Penal Laws: Special Penal Laws may have their own specific prescription periods
that differ from those mentioned above. These prescription periods are typically
specified within the text of the Special Penal Law itself. If a Special Penal Law does not
specify a prescription period, the general prescription periods outlined in the RPC may
apply.
3. Suspension of Prescription: The prescription period for a criminal offense may be
suspended or interrupted under certain circumstances. Common reasons for suspension
include:
• Filing of a criminal complaint or information.
• The accused is absent from the country or goes into hiding to evade prosecution.
• The accused is under trial for the same offense.
4. Tolling of Prescription: Tolling of prescription means that the running of the
prescription period is temporarily stopped. Special Penal Laws may specify conditions
under which prescription is tolled. For example, some offenses may have a longer
prescription period if the accused is a public officer or employee.
5. Effect of Prescription: Once the prescription period expires, the right to initiate or
continue criminal proceedings against the accused is extinguished. The accused cannot
be prosecuted or punished for the offense, even if the evidence against them is strong.
6. Non-Prescription for Heinous Crimes: It's important to note that certain heinous
crimes, such as murder, rape, and kidnapping for ransom, do not prescribe under
Philippine law. This means that there is no time limit for prosecuting these offenses.
7. Legal Consultation: Determining the specific prescription period for a particular offense
under a Special Penal Law requires careful review of the law itself. Legal practitioners
and authorities should consult the relevant Special Penal Law and seek legal guidance
when dealing with prescription issues.

In summary, the prescription of Special Penal Laws in the Philippines is subject to the
specific provisions of those laws. Each Special Penal Law may have its own prescription
period, or it may adopt the general prescription periods outlined in the Revised Penal
Code if not otherwise specified. Understanding the prescription periods is crucial for
legal practitioners and law enforcement agencies to ensure that they take appropriate
action within the prescribed time limits.

Jurisdictional rules and principles related to Special Penal Laws in the Philippines govern
which courts have the authority to hear cases involving offenses under these laws.
Special Penal Laws, as distinct from offenses under the Revised Penal Code, often have
their own specific jurisdictional provisions. Here are some key jurisdictional rules and
principles related to Special Penal Laws:

1. Specific Jurisdictional Provisions: Special Penal Laws may include provisions

specifying which courts have jurisdiction over cases involving offenses under the law.
These provisions can designate particular courts, such as regional trial courts, municipal
trial courts, or specialized courts, as the proper venues for prosecution.
2. Nature and Severity of the Offense: Jurisdiction may be determined based on the
nature and severity of the offense. More serious offenses under Special Penal Laws may
fall under the jurisdiction of higher-level courts, such as regional trial courts, while less
serious offenses may be heard in lower-level courts, such as municipal or metropolitan
trial courts.
3. Territorial Jurisdiction: Special Penal Laws may also specify the territorial jurisdiction of
the courts that can hear cases. Jurisdiction can be based on where the offense was
committed, where the effects of the offense were felt, or other factors related to the
location of the crime.
4. Exclusivity of Jurisdiction: Some Special Penal Laws provide that certain courts have
exclusive jurisdiction over cases related to specific offenses. In such cases, only the
designated court has the authority to hear and decide those cases, excluding other
courts.
5. Hierarchical Jurisdiction: In the Philippine court system, there is a hierarchy of courts,
with the regional trial courts being the highest trial courts and the municipal or
metropolitan trial courts being lower-level courts. Hierarchical jurisdiction principles
 dictate that cases should be filed in the lowest court that has jurisdiction over the
offense. If the offense is within the jurisdiction of multiple courts (e.g., both municipal
trial court and regional trial court), the case should typically be filed in the lower court
first. Appeals can then be made to higher courts if necessary.
6. Appeal and Review: If a party is dissatisfied with the decision of a lower court in a
Special Penal Law case, they may have the right to appeal to a higher court. The
appellate courts have the authority to review the decisions and findings of lower courts
to ensure that they were made in accordance with the law.
7. Specialized Courts: Some Special Penal Laws may establish specialized courts to handle
specific types of cases. For example, laws related to environmental protection may
create environmental courts to hear cases involving environmental offenses.
8. Concurrent Jurisdiction: In some instances, multiple courts may have concurrent
jurisdiction over certain offenses. In such cases, the complainant may have some
discretion in choosing which court to file the case in, as long as the chosen court has
proper jurisdiction.

It is essential for legal practitioners and law enforcement agencies to carefully review the
specific Special Penal Law in question to understand its jurisdictional provisions and to
ensure that cases are filed in the appropriate court. Violating jurisdictional rules can lead
to delays and complications in the legal process. Additionally, seeking legal guidance
when dealing with complex jurisdictional issues is advisable to avoid potential
procedural errors.

Republic Act No. 9346, also known as "An Act Prohibiting the Imposition of Death
Penalty in the Philippines," is a significant piece of legislation in the Philippines. It was
signed into law on June 24, 2006, and it effectively abolished the death penalty in the
country. Here is a summary of the key provisions and implications of RA 9346:

1. Abolition of the Death Penalty: RA 9346 explicitly abolished the death penalty in the
Philippines for all crimes, including heinous offenses that were previously punishable by
execution. This marked a significant change in the country's criminal justice system.
2. Commutation of Death Sentences: The law mandated the conversion of all death
sentences to reclusion perpetua (life imprisonment) without the possibility of parole.
This meant that individuals who had been previously sentenced to death had their
sentences commuted to life imprisonment.
3. Prohibition on Reimposition: RA 9346 prohibited the reimposition of the death
penalty. This means that even if the law were to be amended or repealed in the future,
 the death penalty could not be imposed on individuals who had been sentenced to life
imprisonment under this law.
4. International Commitments: The abolition of the death penalty was seen as a
fulfillment of the Philippines' international commitments, particularly its adherence to
international human rights agreements that discouraged the use of capital punishment.
5. Retrospective Effect: The law had a retrospective effect, meaning that it applied to all
cases, regardless of when the crime was committed or when the sentence was imposed.
It was designed to provide relief to individuals who were on death row at the time of its
enactment.
6. Life Imprisonment Without Parole: Individuals sentenced to life imprisonment under
RA 9346 were not eligible for parole. This meant that they were to serve their sentences
in prison for the rest of their lives without the possibility of release on parole.
7. Reconciliation and Reformation: The law emphasized the goal of reconciliation and
reformation of offenders within the criminal justice system rather than seeking
retribution through the death penalty.

RA 9346 was a significant legislative milestone in the Philippines as it marked the

country's move away from the use of capital punishment. The law reflected a shift in the
country's criminal justice philosophy toward a more rehabilitative and humane approach
to dealing with serious crimes. It also aligned with international human rights norms
advocating for the abolition of the death penalty.

Republic Act No. 9344, also known as the "Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act of 2006," and
its amendments under Republic Act No. 10630, are significant pieces of legislation in the
Philippines that focus on the treatment and welfare of children in conflict with the law.
Below is a summary of the key provisions and implications of these laws:

RA 9344: Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act of 2006

1. Definition of Children in Conflict with the Law: RA 9344 defined "children in conflict
with the law" as those who are 15 years old or older but below 18 years old at the time
of the commission of the offense. It recognized that children who commit crimes should
be treated differently from adult offenders.
2. Diversion Program: The law introduced the concept of diversion, which emphasizes the
rehabilitation and reintegration of child offenders into society. It allows for the
resolution of cases involving children without resorting to formal court proceedings.
3. Exemption from Criminal Liability: Children under the age of 15 at the time of the
commission of an offense are exempt from criminal liability. Instead of facing criminal
charges, they are subject to appropriate interventions and support services.
4. Rights of the Child in Conflict with the Law: The law outlined the rights of children in
conflict with the law, including the right to be treated with dignity and respect, the right
to legal representation, and the right to remain silent.
5. Establishment of Bahay Pag-Asa: The law mandated the establishment of Bahay Pag-
Asa (Houses of Hope), which are community-based rehabilitation centers designed to
provide a supportive and rehabilitative environment for child offenders.
6. Protection of Child Offenders: RA 9344 emphasized the protection of child offenders
from physical, psychological, or emotional abuse while in custody. It also prohibited the
use of handcuffs and other restraints on children.
7. Amendments by RA 10630:
a. Lowering the Age of Criminal Responsibility: RA 10630 lowered the age of criminal
responsibility from 15 years old to 12 years old for certain serious offenses, such as
murder, rape, and drug-related crimes. This amendment aimed to address concerns
about youth involvement in serious criminal activities.
b. Strengthening Interventions: RA 10630 strengthened the interventions and support
services for child offenders, with an emphasis on diversion and rehabilitation. It sought
to address the root causes of juvenile delinquency.
c. Protection of Child Witnesses: The amendment enhanced the protection of child
witnesses, including those who testify in cases involving child offenders.
d. Local Councils for the Protection of Children: RA 10630 established Local Councils
for the Protection of Children (LCPCs) to ensure that the rights and welfare of children
are promoted and protected at the local level.

RA 9344 and its amendments under RA 10630 reflect the Philippines' commitment to
the welfare and rehabilitation of children in conflict with the law. These laws recognize
that children have unique needs and vulnerabilities, and they aim to provide a more
compassionate and rehabilitative approach to juvenile justice while holding young
offenders accountable for their actions.

Republic Act No. 4103, also known as the "Indeterminate Sentence Law," is a Philippine
law that was enacted to provide a more flexible and rehabilitative approach to
sentencing for certain offenses. Below is a summary of the key provisions and
implications of RA 4103:
 Objective of the Indeterminate Sentence Law:

The primary objective of the Indeterminate Sentence Law is to promote the

rehabilitation of offenders by allowing for the imposition of a minimum and maximum
prison term, with the minimum sentence intended to provide a rehabilitative aspect,
while the maximum sentence serves as the punitive aspect.

Key Provisions:

1. Minimum and Maximum Sentences: Under this law, when a person is convicted of a
crime that carries a penalty of imprisonment exceeding one year, the court imposes a
minimum sentence within the range of the penalty and a maximum sentence that does
not exceed the maximum limit prescribed by the law for that offense.
2. Board of Indeterminate Sentence: RA 4103 established the Board of Indeterminate
Sentence, which is tasked with determining the minimum and maximum terms of
imprisonment for the offender based on the facts and circumstances of the case. The
board considers the individual's age, character, and conduct, among other factors, in
making its determination.
3. Eligibility for Parole: Offenders who are sentenced under the Indeterminate Sentence
Law become eligible for parole after serving the minimum term of their sentence. Parole
is a form of conditional release from prison, subject to specific conditions and
supervision.
4. Rehabilitation and Reformation: The law emphasizes the principles of rehabilitation
and reformation of offenders. By allowing for the possibility of parole after serving the
minimum sentence, it encourages the rehabilitation and positive change of the offender
while still holding them accountable for their actions.
5. Excluded Offenses: RA 4103 excludes certain offenses from its application, such as
those involving heinous crimes or those specifically designated as non-applicable by
other laws.
6. Judicial Discretion: The law gives judges discretion in determining the minimum and
maximum sentences based on the facts of each case and the individual circumstances of
the offender.

Purpose and Impact:

The Indeterminate Sentence Law serves several important purposes:

• It allows for the rehabilitation and reformation of offenders by providing an incentive for
good behavior during imprisonment.
• It addresses the issue of overcrowding in prisons by providing a mechanism for
conditional release (parole) based on rehabilitation progress.
• It recognizes that not all offenders are the same and allows for individualized
sentencing.
• It aligns with the principles of restorative justice, focusing on the offender's potential for
rehabilitation rather than solely on punitive measures.

Overall, RA 4103, the Indeterminate Sentence Law, reflects a more flexible and
rehabilitative approach to criminal sentencing in the Philippines, with the aim of
balancing punishment with the potential for positive change in offenders.

Presidential Decree No. 968 (P.D. 968), as amended, is the "Probation Law of the
Philippines." It provides a framework for the rehabilitation and reformation of certain
offenders by allowing them to serve their sentences in the community under probation
supervision, rather than serving time in jail or prison. Below is a summary of the key
provisions and implications of P.D. No. 968:

Objective of the Probation Law:

The primary objective of the Probation Law is to promote the rehabilitation and social
reintegration of offenders into society while reducing the burden of incarceration on the
country's prison system.

Key Provisions:

1. Eligibility for Probation: P.D. No. 968 outlines the eligibility criteria for individuals who
may be considered for probation. Generally, offenders who are convicted of a crime
punishable by imprisonment of not more than six years and who have not been
previously convicted of a crime involving moral turpitude are eligible for probation.
2. Probation Sentence: When a court grants probation, it suspends the sentence of the
offender and places them under the supervision of a probation officer. The probationer
is required to adhere to specific conditions during the probationary period.
3. Probationary Period: The law allows for a probationary period of not more than six
years, depending on the nature and circumstances of the offense. During this period,
the probationer is expected to maintain good behavior, avoid further criminal
involvement, and engage in activities that promote rehabilitation and reintegration.
4. Conditions of Probation: The court may impose various conditions of probation, which
can include regular reporting to a probation officer, participation in rehabilitative
 programs, restitution to the victim, community service, and refraining from contact with
certain individuals or places.
5. Revocation of Probation: If a probationer violates the conditions of probation, the
court may revoke probation and order the enforcement of the original sentence, which
typically involves serving time in jail or prison.
6. Juvenile Probation: P.D. No. 968 also covers probation for juvenile offenders, with
specific provisions addressing the rehabilitation and supervision of young offenders.

Purpose and Impact:

• The Probation Law serves the purpose of reducing overcrowding in prisons and
detention facilities by offering an alternative to incarceration for eligible offenders.
• It emphasizes rehabilitation and reformation by providing probationers with an
opportunity to reintegrate into society as law-abiding citizens.
• It allows for individualized sentencing and supervision, taking into account the specific
circumstances of the offender and the offense.
• The law promotes the principles of restorative justice, focusing on the rehabilitation of
offenders and their accountability to the community.

Overall, P.D. No. 968, as amended, reflects a commitment to a more rehabilitative and
community-oriented approach to criminal justice in the Philippines. It provides a means
for certain offenders to address their criminal behavior and make positive changes while
still being held accountable for their actions.

Republic Act No. 10592, commonly referred to as the "Subsidiary Penalty Law,"
introduced significant amendments to the Revised Penal Code (RPC) of the Philippines.
It primarily addresses the computation and application of subsidiary penalties for
individuals who are unable to pay fines imposed as part of their criminal sentences. Here
is a summary of the key provisions and implications of RA 10592, specifically focusing
on subsidiary penalties:

Objective of RA 10592:

The main objective of RA 10592 is to provide an alternative means of serving sentences

when an individual is unable to pay the fines imposed by the court. It aims to prevent
the unjust incarceration of individuals who cannot afford to pay fines while still ensuring
that they are held accountable for their offenses.
 Key Provisions:

1. Subsidiary Imprisonment: RA 10592 allows individuals who are unable to pay fines to
serve their sentences through subsidiary imprisonment. Subsidiary imprisonment
involves serving a specific period of imprisonment in lieu of paying the fine. The law
provides a formula for calculating the duration of subsidiary imprisonment based on the
amount of the fine imposed.
2. Limit on Subsidiary Imprisonment: The law establishes a maximum limit on the
duration of subsidiary imprisonment. This limit varies depending on the amount of the
fine and whether the offense is punishable by an afflictive, correctional, or light penalty.
3. Subsidiary Penalty for Indeterminate Sentences: RA 10592 also introduced provisions
for the application of subsidiary penalties to individuals who are serving indeterminate
sentences. If an offender cannot pay the fine imposed as part of an indeterminate
sentence, they may serve subsidiary imprisonment in accordance with the law.
4. Restitution and Damages: The law clarifies that the subsidiary penalty does not cover
restitution to the victim or the payment of civil damages. Offenders are still required to
fulfill these obligations in addition to serving subsidiary imprisonment.
5. Credit for Time Served: The law allows individuals to receive credit for time already
served in custody during their detention, investigation, or trial, as long as this time was
not previously credited to another sentence.
6. Beneficial Retroactivity: RA 10592 is retroactive in a beneficial manner, meaning that it
applies to both pending and future cases. This ensures that individuals currently serving
sentences can also benefit from its provisions.

Purpose and Impact:

• RA 10592 addresses issues related to poverty and the inability of some individuals to
pay fines by providing an alternative means of fulfilling their sentences.
• It promotes a more equitable and humane approach to criminal justice by preventing
the incarceration of individuals solely due to their inability to pay fines.
• The law ensures that sentences are proportional to the gravity of the offense and the
offender's ability to pay.
• It aligns with principles of restorative justice by allowing individuals to serve their
sentences while maintaining their ability to reintegrate into society more effectively.

Overall, RA 10592, the Subsidiary Penalty Law, contributes to a more balanced and just
criminal justice system in the Philippines by addressing the issue of fines and penalties
in a manner that considers the socioeconomic circumstances of the offenders.
 Republic Act No. 10592, also known as the "Good Conduct Time Allowance (GCTA) Law,"
made significant amendments to the Revised Penal Code (RPC) of the Philippines. It
primarily addresses issues related to the preventive imprisonment, good conduct time
allowance, and other allowances for prisoners. Here is a summary of the key provisions
and implications of RA 10592:

Objective of RA 10592:

The primary objective of RA 10592 is to address concerns related to prison

overcrowding, promote rehabilitation and reformation among prisoners, and provide
incentives for good behavior during incarceration. It introduces mechanisms for the
reduction of prison sentences based on an inmate's conduct and participation in
rehabilitative activities.

Key Provisions:

1. Expanded Coverage: RA 10592 expanded the coverage of the GCTA, preventive

imprisonment, and other allowances to include all persons deprived of liberty (PDLs),
regardless of their offense and sentence, subject to certain exceptions.
2. Increase in Good Conduct Time Allowance: The law increased the rate of GCTA for
good behavior from 15 days to 20 days for each month of imprisonment for prisoners
who exhibit good behavior, provided that they meet the criteria set forth in the law.
3. Expanded Allowances: The law introduced additional allowances for prisoners, such as
the Special Time Allowance for Loyalty (STAL) and the Loyalty Award, which are given to
prisoners who have demonstrated exceptional conduct during their incarceration.
4. Preventive Imprisonment Credit: Under RA 10592, the period of preventive
imprisonment is credited to the prisoner as part of the service of his or her sentence,
provided that the detainee agrees to abide by prison rules and regulations and
participates in rehabilitation programs.
5. Excluded Offenses: The law excludes certain categories of offenders from the benefits
of GCTA and other allowances, such as those convicted of heinous crimes, recidivists,
habitual delinquents, escapees, and those previously granted parole.
6. Notification of Victims: RA 10592 mandates that victims of the crimes committed by
prisoners who benefit from GCTA, STAL, or Loyalty Award must be notified before the
prisoner's release, provided that the victim has filed a written request with the
appropriate authorities.
7. Regulations and Guidelines: The Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Department of
the Interior and Local Government (DILG) are responsible for promulgating the
necessary rules and guidelines for the implementation of the law.

Purpose and Impact:

• RA 10592 seeks to address issues related to prison overcrowding and promote

rehabilitation by incentivizing good behavior and participation in rehabilitative activities.
• It aims to strike a balance between retribution and rehabilitation within the criminal
justice system.
• The law encourages inmates to engage in activities that contribute to their reformation
and prepare them for successful reintegration into society.
• It also recognizes the rights of victims by requiring notification before the release of
prisoners benefiting from GCTA and other allowances.

Overall, RA 10592, the GCTA Law, represents an effort to reform the Philippine criminal
justice system by providing mechanisms for prisoners to reduce their sentences through
good behavior and participation in rehabilitation programs, while still ensuring that
certain categories of offenders are excluded from these benefits.

Presidential Decree No. 1829 (P.D. 1829) is a law in the Philippines known as the
"Obstruction of Justice Law." It was enacted to address and penalize actions that hinder
or obstruct the administration of justice, particularly those committed by public officials.
Here is a summary of the key provisions and implications of P.D. 1829:

Objective of P.D. 1829:

The primary objective of P.D. 1829 is to deter and penalize actions that obstruct the
proper functioning of the justice system, especially those carried out by public officials.
The law aims to uphold the integrity and efficiency of legal proceedings.

Key Provisions:

1. Definition of Obstruction of Justice: P.D. 1829 defines the offense of obstruction of

justice as any deliberate act or omission by a public official that hinders, delays, or
impedes the administration of justice.
2. Examples of Obstruction: The law provides examples of acts that constitute
obstruction of justice. This includes, but is not limited to, influencing or attempting to
 influence the outcome of a case, preventing the prosecution of a criminal offense, and
harboring or concealing a criminal offender.
3. Penalties: P.D. 1829 prescribes penalties for individuals found guilty of obstruction of
justice. These penalties may include imprisonment, fines, and disqualification from
holding public office.
4. No Probation or Suspension of Sentence: The law specifies that individuals convicted
of obstruction of justice are not eligible for probation or the suspension of sentence.
5. Liability of Public Officials: P.D. 1829 places a heavier responsibility on public officials
who commit acts of obstruction of justice. They may face administrative sanctions in
addition to criminal charges.
6. Prosecution of Offenses: The law allows for the prosecution of offenses under P.D.
1829 by the appropriate authorities, including the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the
Office of the Ombudsman.

Purpose and Impact:

• P.D. 1829 aims to ensure the smooth and fair administration of justice by deterring
actions that obstruct or impede the legal process.
• The law particularly targets public officials, recognizing their significant role in
upholding the rule of law and preventing any abuse of their authority to undermine
legal proceedings.
• By prescribing penalties for obstruction of justice, P.D. 1829 seeks to maintain the
integrity of the justice system and uphold the rights of individuals involved in legal
processes.

Overall, P.D. 1829, the Obstruction of Justice Law, plays a crucial role in maintaining the
integrity of the justice system in the Philippines. It serves as a deterrent to individuals,
especially public officials, who may attempt to hinder or impede the proper
administration of justice through unlawful means.

Act No. 3326, entitled "An Act to Establish Prescription for Violations of Special Laws," is
a law in the Philippines that prescribes time limits for the prosecution of violations of
special laws and municipal ordinances. The law was enacted to provide clarity and
certainty regarding the time within which such violations can be prosecuted. Here is a
summary of the key provisions and implications of Act No. 3326:
 Objective of Act No. 3326:

The primary objective of Act No. 3326 is to establish clear prescriptive periods for the
prosecution of violations of special laws and municipal ordinances, ensuring that cases
are pursued within reasonable time frames and preventing indefinite delays in legal
proceedings.

Key Provisions:

1. Prescriptive Periods: Act No. 3326 prescribes specific time limits within which violations
of special laws and municipal ordinances must be prosecuted. These time limits vary
depending on the nature of the offense and its corresponding penalty.
2. Offenses Punishable by Fine or Imprisonment: For offenses punishable by a fine only
or imprisonment not exceeding six months, the prescriptive period is two years. This
means that prosecution must commence within two years from the commission of the
offense.
3. Offenses Punishable by Imprisonment Exceeding Six Months: For offenses
punishable by imprisonment exceeding six months, the prescriptive period is generally
four years. This covers a wide range of special laws and municipal ordinances that
impose imprisonment as a penalty.
4. Suspension of Prescription: Act No. 3326 allows for the suspension of the prescriptive
period under certain circumstances, such as when the offender is continuously absent
from the jurisdiction of the court or when prosecution is temporarily halted for various
reasons.
5. Tolling of Prescription: The law specifies instances where prescription may be tolled,
meaning that the running of the prescriptive period is temporarily stopped. For
example, prescription is tolled when the offender is under investigation or trial for the
same offense.
6. No Prescription for Serious Offenses: Importantly, Act No. 3326 stipulates that there is
no prescriptive period for offenses punishable by life imprisonment or death. These
offenses can be prosecuted at any time, even many years after their commission.

Purpose and Impact:

• Act No. 3326 brings clarity and predictability to the prosecution of violations of special
laws and municipal ordinances by specifying time limits for filing charges.
• It helps ensure that legal proceedings are initiated within a reasonable time frame,
preventing the indefinite postponement of cases.
• The law recognizes the importance of prosecuting serious offenses without time
constraints, as reflected in the absence of prescription for certain grave offenses.
• By establishing prescriptive periods and rules for suspension and tolling, the law
promotes fairness and legal certainty within the Philippine justice system.

Overall, Act No. 3326, the Prescriptive Periods for Violations of Special Laws and
Municipal Ordinances, is a significant piece of legislation that helps regulate the
prosecution of offenses covered by special laws and municipal ordinances in the
Philippines, ensuring that cases are pursued within reasonable time limits.

The Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020, officially known as Republic Act No. 11479, is a law in
the Philippines that was enacted to strengthen the government's efforts in combating
terrorism and addressing security concerns. The law has generated significant attention
and debate, both domestically and internationally, due to concerns about potential
human rights abuses and violations. Here is a summary of key provisions and
implications of the Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020:

Objective of the Anti-Terrorism Act:

The primary objective of the Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020 is to enhance the government's
capability to prevent and respond to acts of terrorism and to ensure national security. It
seeks to provide law enforcement agencies with more tools to combat terrorism
effectively.

Key Provisions:

1. Definition of Terrorism: The law provides a broad and comprehensive definition of

terrorism, encompassing acts intended to cause death or serious bodily injury, extensive
damage to property, or widespread fear among the public. It also includes acts
committed to create a public emergency or undermine public safety.
2. Designation of Terrorist Individuals and Organizations: The Anti-Terrorism Council
(ATC), composed of government officials, has the authority to designate individuals and
groups as terrorists. Once designated, the assets of these individuals or organizations
can be frozen, and they can be subject to surveillance, arrest, and detention.
3. Detention Without Warrant: The law allows the detention of suspected terrorists
without a judicial warrant for up to 24 days, extendable by another 10 days upon court
approval. Critics have expressed concerns about this provision, arguing that it could lead
to potential abuses.
4. Surveillance and Wiretapping: The law permits law enforcement agencies to conduct
surveillance and wiretapping of suspected terrorists with court authorization. Critics
worry that this provision could infringe on privacy rights.
5. Penalties for Terrorism: The law imposes severe penalties for individuals found guilty
of terrorism, including life imprisonment without parole. It also allows for a wide range
of activities to be considered as terrorism, potentially raising concerns about freedom of
expression and assembly.
6. Safe Harbor Provision: The law includes a "safe harbor" provision to protect those who
report or provide information about terrorist activities in good faith from liability.
7. Examination of Anti-Terrorism Council Decisions: The law allows for the judicial
review of ATC decisions, including designations, orders, and proscriptions.

Impact and Concerns:

• The Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020 is seen by its proponents as a necessary tool to combat
terrorism and protect national security.
• Critics, including human rights organizations, have raised concerns about potential
abuses, violation of civil liberties, and the broad definition of terrorism, which could be
used to target political dissent and activism.
• International human rights groups and foreign governments have expressed concern
about the law's potential impact on democratic freedoms.

The implementation of the Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020 has been the subject of ongoing
debate and legal challenges in the Philippines. Concerns about human rights and
potential abuse of power have led to calls for revisions or amendments to address these
issues. The law remains a topic of discussion and contention within the Philippines and
internationally.

Republic Act No. 9745, commonly known as the "Anti-Torture Act of 2009," is a
Philippine law that prohibits the use of torture and other cruel, inhuman, or degrading
treatment or punishment by law enforcement officials and provides safeguards against
torture. Here is a summary of the key provisions and implications of RA 9745:

Objective of the Anti-Torture Act of 2009:

The primary objective of RA 9745 is to prevent and prohibit the use of torture in the
Philippines and to hold perpetrators accountable for their actions. It aligns with
international human rights standards and treaties that the Philippines is a party to, such
 as the United Nations Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or
Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT).

Key Provisions:

1. Definition of Torture: RA 9745 defines torture as any act by which severe pain or
suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for purposes
such as obtaining information, punishing, intimidating, or coercing the person or a third
party. It also includes acts committed with the consent or acquiescence of public
officials or persons acting in an official capacity.
2. Prohibition of Torture: The law explicitly prohibits the use of torture and other cruel,
inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment. It recognizes that no exceptional
circumstances can justify torture, and it provides no immunity for law enforcement
officials who engage in such acts.
3. Penalties: RA 9745 imposes severe penalties on individuals found guilty of torture,
including life imprisonment. There are no parole or pardon provisions for those
convicted of torture.
4. Non-Refoulement: The law incorporates the principle of non-refoulement, which
prohibits the deportation, expulsion, or extradition of a person to another country where
they may face the risk of torture.
5. Rights of the Accused: The law emphasizes the rights of accused persons, including the
right to remain silent and the right to counsel. It also requires the presence of a lawyer
during custodial investigation.
6. Prohibition of Evidence Obtained Through Torture: Evidence obtained through
torture is deemed inadmissible in court proceedings. This provision aims to deter law
enforcement officials from using torture to extract information or confessions.
7. Protection of Victims and Witnesses: RA 9745 provides for the protection of victims
and witnesses of torture, including measures to ensure their safety and security during
investigations and legal proceedings.

Impact and Significance:

• RA 9745 represents a significant step in the Philippines toward preventing and

addressing torture, which had been a concern in the country.
• The law aligns with international human rights standards and demonstrates the
Philippines' commitment to upholding its obligations under the UN Convention Against
Torture.
• It establishes a legal framework to hold perpetrators accountable for acts of torture,
ensuring that those who engage in such conduct are subject to prosecution and severe
penalties.
 Overall, the Anti-Torture Act of 2009 is a vital piece of legislation aimed at eradicating
torture and other forms of cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment in the
Philippines. It underscores the importance of respecting human rights and the rule of
law, while also providing safeguards for victims and witnesses of torture.

Republic Act No. 10353, also known as the "Anti-Enforced or Involuntary Disappearance
Act of 2012," is a Philippine law that criminalizes enforced or involuntary disappearances
and seeks to prevent and punish this grave violation of human rights. Here is a summary
of the key provisions and implications of RA 10353:

Objective of RA 10353:

The primary objective of the Anti-Enforced or Involuntary Disappearance Act is to

combat and prevent enforced disappearances, protect the rights of victims, and hold
perpetrators accountable for this heinous crime. Enforced disappearance refers to the
arrest, detention, abduction, or any other form of deprivation of liberty by government
officials or individuals acting with the support or acquiescence of the government,
followed by a refusal to acknowledge the detention or fate of the disappeared person.

Key Provisions:

1. Definition and Prohibition: RA 10353 defines enforced or involuntary disappearance as

a criminal act and explicitly prohibits it. It holds perpetrators criminally liable, even if the
body of the victim is not found.
2. No Amnesty or Pardon: The law specifies that enforced disappearance is not subject to
amnesty, pardon, or any other form of clemency, ensuring that those responsible cannot
evade accountability through such means.
3. Presumption of Abduction: In cases of persons who have gone missing, if there is
sufficient evidence to support the presumption of abduction or enforced disappearance,
the burden of proof shifts to the state to demonstrate that it is not involved in the
disappearance.
4. Criminal Penalties: RA 10353 prescribes severe penalties for individuals found guilty of
enforced disappearance, including imprisonment. It also recognizes civil liability for
damages, which can be pursued by the victim or their family.
5. Compensation and Rehabilitation: The law provides for compensation and
rehabilitation programs for victims and their families, acknowledging the physical,
psychological, and social impact of enforced disappearances.
6. Protection of Witnesses and Whistleblowers: RA 10353 includes provisions to protect
witnesses and whistleblowers who come forward with information related to enforced
disappearances.
7. Statute of Limitations: The law establishes a specific statute of limitations, ensuring
that prosecutions for enforced disappearances are not time-barred.
8. Right to the Truth: RA 10353 recognizes the right to the truth about the circumstances
of enforced disappearances, acknowledging the importance of acknowledging and
addressing this crime's impact on victims and society.

Impact and Significance:

• RA 10353 is a landmark piece of legislation that addresses a significant human rights

concern and reflects the Philippines' commitment to upholding human rights standards.
• It provides a legal framework for the prosecution of individuals involved in enforced
disappearances and ensures that the crime is not subject to amnesty or pardon.
• The law acknowledges the rights of victims and their families to justice, compensation,
and rehabilitation, recognizing the long-lasting impact of enforced disappearances on
individuals and society as a whole.

Overall, the Anti-Enforced or Involuntary Disappearance Act of 2012 is a crucial step

toward ending impunity for this serious human rights violation and ensuring that those
responsible are held accountable under Philippine law.

Republic Act No. 9851, also known as the "Philippine Act on Crimes Against
International Humanitarian Law, Genocide, and Other Crimes Against Humanity," is a
Philippine law that incorporates international humanitarian law (IHL) and principles into
the country's legal framework. It criminalizes acts that constitute serious violations of
IHL, including genocide and crimes against humanity. Here is a summary of the key
provisions and implications of RA 9851:

Objective of RA 9851:

The primary objective of RA 9851 is to fulfill the Philippines' obligations under

international law by adopting measures to prevent and punish serious violations of IHL,
genocide, and crimes against humanity. It seeks to ensure accountability for individuals
who commit these grave offenses, even if they are not nationals of the Philippines.

Key Provisions:
1. Crimes Against International Humanitarian Law: RA 9851 defines and criminalizes
serious violations of IHL, including acts such as willful killing, torture, inhumane
treatment, taking of hostages, and other offenses listed in the law. It also incorporates
the principles of IHL, such as the protection of civilians and combatants who are no
longer taking part in hostilities.
2. Genocide: The law criminalizes genocide, which includes acts committed with the intent
to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial, or religious group.
3. Crimes Against Humanity: RA 9851 addresses crimes against humanity, such as
widespread or systematic attacks directed against any civilian population, including
murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation, and other inhumane acts.
4. Non-Applicability of Amnesty and Pardon: The law specifies that amnesty, pardon, or
any other form of clemency shall not be granted to individuals accused or convicted of
offenses under RA 9851.
5. Jurisdiction: RA 9851 provides that Philippine courts have jurisdiction over these
offenses, regardless of where they were committed or the nationality of the accused,
provided that the accused is present in the Philippines.
6. Extradition and Surrender: The law enables the Philippines to extradite individuals
accused of these offenses or surrender them to international criminal tribunals in
accordance with international agreements and obligations.
7. Victims' Rights: RA 9851 recognizes the rights of victims to reparations and ensures
their participation in legal proceedings.
8. Protection of Witnesses and Whistleblowers: The law includes provisions to protect
witnesses and whistleblowers who come forward with information related to these
offenses.

Impact and Significance:

• RA 9851 signifies the Philippines' commitment to upholding its obligations under

international law, particularly in the context of IHL, genocide, and crimes against
humanity.
• The law provides a legal framework for prosecuting individuals who commit these grave
offenses and ensures that they cannot evade accountability through amnesty or pardon.
• It underscores the Philippines' commitment to the prevention and punishment of the
most serious violations of IHL and human rights.

Overall, RA 9851 represents an important step toward ensuring accountability for

individuals who commit serious violations of IHL, genocide, and crimes against
humanity, aligning the Philippines with international standards and obligations in this
regard.
 Republic Act No. 7438, known as the "An Act Defining Certain Rights of Persons
Arrested, Detained, or Under Custodial Investigation," is a Philippine law that safeguards
the rights of individuals who are arrested, detained, or subjected to custodial
investigation by law enforcement authorities. It is often referred to as the "Miranda
Rights Law" because it is similar in principle to the Miranda warning in the United States.
Here is a summary of the key provisions and implications of RA 7438:

Objective of RA 7438:

The primary objective of RA 7438 is to protect the rights and welfare of persons under
custodial investigation, including those in police custody. It aims to prevent torture and
other forms of ill-treatment during questioning and to ensure that individuals are
informed of their rights.

Key Provisions:

1. Right to Be Informed of Rights: The law mandates that law enforcement authorities
inform a person arrested, detained, or under custodial investigation of their right to
remain silent and to have competent and independent counsel of their choice. The
person must also be informed of the consequences of waiving these rights.
2. Right to Counsel: The law recognizes the right of the person to have a counsel present
during custodial investigation. If the person cannot afford one, a lawyer from the Public
Attorney's Office (PAO) or a lawyer's organization must be provided.
3. Right to Communicate with Relatives or Friends: Individuals under custodial
investigation have the right to communicate with their relatives or friends, as well as the
right to have them informed of their detention.
4. Prohibition of Torture and Coercion: RA 7438 explicitly prohibits the use of torture,
force, violence, threat, intimidation, or any other means that vitiate the free will to
extract a confession or compel information from the person under investigation.
5. Custodial Investigation Defined: The law defines custodial investigation as the
"questioning initiated by law enforcement officers after a person has been taken into
custody or otherwise deprived of his freedom of action in any significant way."
6. Penalties for Violations: Violations of the rights of individuals under custodial
investigation, as outlined in RA 7438, can lead to administrative, civil, and criminal
liabilities for law enforcement officers or officials involved.
7. Recording of Custodial Investigation: The law requires that custodial investigations be
recorded in audio, video, or other similar means in cases of capital offenses.
 Impact and Significance:

• RA 7438 is a crucial piece of legislation aimed at safeguarding the rights of individuals

under arrest or detention and preventing the use of coercion or torture during custodial
investigation.
• It aligns with international human rights standards and principles that prohibit torture
and ill-treatment.
• The law reinforces the importance of respecting the rights of individuals during
interactions with law enforcement authorities and ensuring that they are aware of their
rights to remain silent and have legal counsel.

Overall, RA 7438, also known as the Miranda Rights Law in the Philippines, is essential in
protecting the rights and welfare of individuals during custodial investigation,
promoting fair and just legal processes, and preventing abuses by law enforcement
authorities.