3 Criminal Law 2022 Ust Golden Notes Confidential Converted 2

Crimes under the RPC – Book 2 Criminal Law
Court which has jurisdiction over piracy Kinds of Allegiance: 1st Mode: “Levying war”
II. CRIMES UNDER THE REVISED PENAL CODE committed in the high seas
Revised Penal Code – Book 2 1. Permanent – a citizen’s obligation of fidelity This requires the concurrence of two things:
Pirates are in law hostes humani generis. Piracy is and obedience to his government or 1. That there be an actual assembling of men;
a crime not against any particular state but sovereign; or and
against all mankind. It may be punished in the
competent tribunal of any country where the 2. Temporary – allegiance which a foreigner 2. For the purpose of executing a treasonable
A. CRIMES AGAINST NATIONAL SECURITY design by force.
offender may be found or into which he may be owes to the government or sovereign of the
AND THE LAW OF NATIONS
carried. territory wherein he resides, so long as he
ARTS. 114-123, RPC, TITLE I NOTE: The levying of war must be with intent to
remains there, in return for the protection he
The jurisdiction of piracy, unlike all other crimes, receives, and which consists in the obedience overthrow the government and not merely to
has no territorial limits. As it is against all so may, to the laws of the government or sovereign. resist a particular statute or to repel a particular
Crimes against National Security it be punished by all. Nor does it matter that the officer.
crime was committed within the jurisdictional 3- Elements of Treason (FA-W-L-A)
1. Treason (Art. 114, RPC); mile limit of a foreign state, “for those limits, 2nd Mode: Adherence to Enemies
2. Conspiracy and proposal to commit treason though neutral to war, are not neutral to crimes." 1. That the offender is a Filipino citizen; or an
(Art. 115, RPC); (People v. Lo-lo and Saraw, G.R. No. 17958, 27 Feb. Alien residing in the Philippines (R.A. No. There is adherence to enemies when a citizen,
3. Misprision of Treason (Art. 116, RPC); and 1922) 7659); intellectually or emotionally, favors the enemies
4. Espionage (Art. 117, RPC). and harbors sympathies or convictions disloyal
GR: All crimes against national security can only 2. That there is a War in which the Philippines to his country’s policy or interest.
Crimes against the Law of Nations be committed in times of war. is involved; and
Adherence alone without aid and comfort does
1. Inciting to war and giving motives for XPNs: 3. That the offender either: not constitute treason, but such adherence may
reprisal (Art. 118, RPC); 1. Espionage (Art. 117, RPC); a. Levies war against the Government; or be inferred from the acts committed by a person.
2. Violation of Neutrality (Art. 119, RPC); 2. Inciting to war or giving motives for reprisal b. Adheres to the enemies, giving them
3. Correspondence with hostile country (Art. (Art. 118, RPC); aid or comfort. Aid and Comfort
120, RPC); 3. Violation of Neutrality (Art. 119, RPC); and
4. Flight to enemy country (Art. 121, RPC); 4. Mutiny and piracy (Art. 122, RPC). (Boado, NOTE: Treason cannot be committed in times of It means overt acts which strengthen or tend to
5. Piracy and mutiny (Art. 122, RPC); and 2008) peace because there are no traitors until war has strengthen the enemy of the government in the
6. Qualified Piracy and Mutiny (Art. 123, RPC). started. conduct of war against the government or an act
CHAPTER 1: CRIMES AGAINST which weakens or tends to weaken the power of
NOTE: Crimes against National Security and the NATIONAL SECURITY Commission of Treason Outside the the government to resist or to attack the enemies
Law of Nations are exceptions to the principle Philippines of the government.
of territoriality under Art. 2(5) of the RPC which TREASON
provides that one can be held criminally liable ART. 114, RPC 1. If the offender is a Filipino citizen, he can Specified Acts of Aid and Comfort Constituting
even if those crimes were committed outside the commit this crime even if he is outside the Treason
Philippine jurisdiction. Treason Philippines; or
2. Treason by an alien must be committed in the 1. Serving as an informer and active member of
However, the prosecution for the said crimes can Treason is a breach of allegiance to a government, Philippines (E.O. 44) except in case of the enemy’s military police; or
proceed only if the offender is: committed by a person who owes allegiance to it. conspiracy. 2. Serving in the enemy’s army as agent or spy.
a. Already within Philippine territory; or Allegiance Modes of Committing Treason (LA) Extent of Aid and Comfort
b. Brought to the Philippines pursuant to an
extradition treaty after the commission of It is the obligation of fidelity and obedience which 1. Levying war against the government; or The overt act of giving aid or comfort to the
said crimes. the individuals owe to the government under 2. Adhering to the enemies, giving them aid and enemy must be intentional. As a general rule, to
which they live or to their sovereign, in return for comfort. be treasonous, the extent of the aid and comfort
the protection they receive. given to the enemies must be to render assistance
NOTE: Formal declaration of the existence of a to them as enemies and not merely as individuals
state of war is NOT necessary. and in addition, be directly in furtherance of the
enemies’ hostile designs.
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 160 161 UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS

2022 GOLDEN NOTES FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
To make a simple distinction: To lend or give may be gathered from the testimony of one overt acts he has intentionally committed to give Kim Cham v.
money to an enemy as a friend or out of charity to witness, or from the nature of the act itself, or aid to the enemy. Valdez, G.R. No. L-5,
the beneficiary so that he may buy personal from circumstances surrounding the act. NOTE: The offender can still be prosecuted even 17 Sept. 1945)
necessities is to assist him as an individual and is after the war.
not technically traitorous. On the other hand, to On the other hand, an overt act must be Q: A was charged with the crime of treason. In
lend or give him money to enable him to buy arms established by the deposition of two witnesses. Common Crimes Committed in the his defense, he asserts that he can no longer
or ammunition to use in waging war against the Each witness must testify to the whole of the Furtherance of the Crime of Treason that be prosecuted for treason since he already
giver’s country enhance his strength and by the overt act; or if it is separable, there must be two Cannot be Considered Crimes Separate from lost his Filipino citizenship under paragraphs
same count injures the interest of the witnesses to each part of the overt act. (People v. Treason 3, 4, and 6 of C.A. No. 63, which provides that
government of the giver, which then constitutes Adriano, G.R. No. L-477, 30 June 1947) “…a Filipino may lose his citizenship by
treason. (People v. Perez, G.R. No. L-856, 18 Apr. The common crimes committed in furtherance of accepting commission in the military, naval,
1949) Confession treason are the overt acts of aid and comfort in or air service of a foreign country…” when he
favor of the enemy and are therefore inseparable joined the Japanese armed forces. Is his
Treason cannot be committed through Confession of guilt in an open court before the from treason itself. They become an element of defense tenable?
negligence. The overt acts of aid and comfort judge, while actually hearing the case. treason.
must be intentional as distinguished from merely Extrajudicial confession or confession made A: NO. A cannot divest himself of his Philippine
negligent or undesigned act. (Cramer v. U.S., 325 before the investigators is not sufficient to However, if the prosecution should elect to citizenship by the simple expedient of accepting a
U.S. 1, 1945) convict a person of treason. prosecute the culprit specifically for these crimes, commission in the military, naval, or air service of
instead of relying on them as an element of such country. If such contention would be
How Treason may be Proved Q: X furnished women to the enemy. Does the treason, punishment for these common crimes is sustained, the very crime would be the shield that
act constitute treason? not precluded. (People v. Prieto, G.R. No. L-399, 29 would protect him from punishment. (People v.
1. Testimony of two witnesses, at least, to the Jan. 1948) Manayao, G.R. No. L-322, 28 July 1947)
same overt act (Two-Witness Rule); or A: NO. Commandeering of women to satisfy the
2. Confession of the accused in open court. lust of the enemies or to enliven the Aggravating Circumstances in the Crime of Why Suspended Allegiance or Change of
entertainment held in their honor was NOT Treason Sovereignty is NOT a Defense in Treason
Two-Witness Rule treason even though the women and the
entertainments helped to make life more ALLOWABLE NOT ALLOWABLE/ 1. A citizen owes an absolute and permanent
A rule which requires the testimony of at least pleasant for the enemies. (People v. Perez, G.R. No. (I-C-A-G) INHERENT (E-A-T) allegiance to his government;
two witnesses to prove the overt act of giving aid L-856, 18 Apr. 1949) 1. Ignominy;
or comfort. The two-witness rule is severely 2. Cruelty; 1. Evident 2. The sovereignty of the Government is not
restrictive and requires that each witness must Accepting a Public Office under the Enemy 3. Amount and premeditation; transferred to the enemy by mere
testify to the whole overt act; or if it is separable, does Not Constitute the Felony of Treason degree of aid; and 2. Abuse of superior occupation;
there must be two witnesses to each part of the 4. Gravity or strength; and
overt act. (People v. Escleto, G.R. No. L-1006, 28 Mere acceptance of a public office and the seriousness of the 3. Treachery. 3. The subsistence of the sovereignty of the
June 1949) discharge of the duties connected therewith do acts of treason. legitimate Government in a territory
not constitute per se the crime of treason, unless occupied by the military forces of the enemy
Illustration: Witness A testified that he saw the such office was accepted as an aid and for the during the war is one of the rules of
Defenses against Treason
defendant going to the house of X in search of the comfort of the enemy and the person who International Law; and
latter’s revolver. Witness B testified that when X accepted the office adheres to the enemy.
DEFENSES NOT A DEFENSE
went to the garrison, the defendant required him 4. What is suspended is merely the exercise of
(Du-La) (Su-Lo)
(X) to produce his revolver. It was held that the Treason as a Continuing Offense the rights of sovereignty. (Laurel v. Misa, G.R.
1. Duress or 1. Suspended
search for the revolver in the house of X is one No. L-409, 30 Jan. 1947)
uncontrollable allegiance and
overt act and the requirement to produce the It can be committed by a single act or by a series
fear (People v. change in
revolver in the garrison is another. Thus, there of acts. It can be committed in one single or
Bagwis, G.R. No. L- sovereignty; and
must be two witnesses for each act. (People v. different time. In treason, there is only one
262, 29 Mar. 2. Loss of
Abad, G.R. No. L-430, 30 July 1947) criminal intent.
1947); and citizenship by the
2. Lawful obedience mere joining in
Adherence need not be proved by the oaths of A person who commits treason is not criminally
to a de facto the army of the
two witnesses. Criminal intent and knowledge responsible for as many crimes of treason as the
government (Go enemy.

CONSPIRACY AND PROPOSAL TO Riboli could complete their fundraising conspiracy and proposal to commit treason Penalty (2010 BAR)
COMMIT TREASON activities for the brothers, the AFP was able to because conspiracy and proposal to commit
ART. 115, RPC reclaim the island and defeat the Ratute-led treason is separate and distinct offense from that Art. 116 does not provide for a penalty, but the
uprising. of treason. (U.S. v. Bautista, G.R. No. 2189, 03 Nov. offender is punished as an accessory to the crime
Conspiracy to Commit Treason 1906) of treason. Therefore, the penalty is two degrees
Ricalde and Riboli were charged with lower than that provided for treason.
It is committed when, in times of war, two or more conspiracy to commit treason. During the Crime Committed if Actual Acts of Treason are
persons come to an agreement to levy war against hearing of the two cases, the government only Committed After the Conspiracy or After the NOTE: The offender in Art. 116 is considered a
the government or to adhere to the enemies and presented as witness, General Riturban, who Proposal is Accepted principal in the crime of misprision of treason,
to give them aid or comfort, and decide to commit testified on the activities of the Ratute not as an accessory to the crime of treason. The
it. (Reyes, 2017) brothers, Ricalde, and Riboli. The crime of treason is already consummated term accessory refers only to the penalty to be
since the perpetrator had already executed what imposed, not to the person who acted subsequent
Elements of Conspiracy to Commit Treason Can Ricalde and Riboli be convicted of the was agreed upon or what was proposed to be to the commission of the offense.
crime of conspiracy to commit treason? (2018 done. The conspiracy or proposal is then
(W-A-L-A-D)
BAR) considered merely as means in the commission Q: X, a Filipino citizen, has knowledge of
1. The Philippines is at War; thereof. treason committed by someone and does not
A: Ricalde and Riboli cannot be convicted of the
2. Two (2) or more persons come to an report its commission to the proper
crime of conspiracy to commit treason, because
Agreement to: MISPRISION OF TREASON authorities. Can he be held liable for
there was no war existing when they committed
a. Levy war against the government, or ART. 116, RPC Misprision of Treason?
the acts. Jurisprudence considers treason as a
b. Adhere to enemies and to give them aid crime committed in times only of an international
or comfort; and Elements of Misprision of Treason (2010 A: NO. Art. 116 does not apply when the crime of
armed conflict. The same is true with the felony
3. They Decide to commit it. BAR) (C-K-C) treason is already committed. This is because Art.
of conspiracy to commit treason. Moreover, the
116 speaks of “knowledge of any conspiracy
crimes were committed outside the jurisdiction
Q: The brothers Roberto and Ricardo Ratute, 1. That the offender is a Citizen of the against” the Government of the Philippines, not
of Philippine Court.
both Filipino citizens, led a group of armed Philippines, and not a foreigner; knowledge of treason actually committed by
men in seizing a southern island in the another.
Proposal to Commit Treason
Philippines, and declaring war against the 2. That he has Knowledge of any conspiracy to
duly constituted government of the country. It is committed when in time of war a person who commit treason against the Government; and ESPIONAGE
The Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP), has decided to levy war against the Government ART. 117, RPC
led by its Chief of Staff, General Riturban, or to adhere to the enemies and to give them aid 3. That he Conceals or does not disclose or
responded and a full-scale war ensued or comfort, proposes its execution to some other make known the same as soon as possible to Espionage
between the AFP and the armed men led by person or persons. (Reyes, 2017) the Governor or Fiscal of the province or
the brothers. The armed conflict raged for Mayor or Fiscal of the city in which he Espionage is the offense of gathering,
months. Elements of Proposal to Commit Treason resides. transmitting, or losing information respecting the
(War-D-LA-P) national defense with intent or reason to believe
When the brothers-led armed men were This crime is an exception to the rule that mere that the information is to be used to the injury of
running out of supplies, Ricalde, also a 1. The Philippines is at War; silence does not make a person criminally liable. the Republic of the Philippines or to the
Filipino, and a good friend and supporter of 2. A person who has Decided to Levy war It is a crime of omission. advantage of any foreign nation.
the Ratute brothers, was tasked to leave for against the government, or to Adhere to the
abroad in order to solicit arms and funding enemies and give them aid and comfort; and NOTE: Art. 116 does not apply when the crime of NOTE: Espionage can be committed in times of
for the cash-strapped brothers. 3. Proposes its execution to some other person treason is already committed by someone and the war and peace.
or persons. accused does not report its commission to the
He was able to travel to Rwanda, and there he proper authority. Two (2) Ways of Committing Espionage under
met with Riboli, a citizen and resident of The mere conspiracy and proposal to commit Art. 117 of the RPC
Rwanda, who agreed to help the brothers by treason are punishable as felonies under Art. 115 Misprision of Treason Cannot be Committed
raising funds internationally, and to send of the RPC. This is due to the fact that in treason, by a Resident Alien 1. By entering, without authority therefor, a
them to the Ratute brothers in order to aid the very existence of the State is endangered. warship, fort, or naval or military
them in their armed struggle against the The offender must be owing allegiance to the establishment or reservation to obtain any
Philippine government. Before Ricalde and NOTE: The two-witness rule does not apply to Government “without being a foreigner.” information, plans, photographs, or other

data of a confidential nature relative to the information by reason of the public office he INCITING TO WAR OR GIVING Q: From 1658 to 2012, the inhabitants of
defense of the Philippines. holds. MOTIVES FOR REPRISALS Sabah Malaysia were paying rents to the
ART. 118, RPC Sultanate of Sulu. On 2013, Sultan J of the
Elements: NOTE: When the offender is a public officer or Sultanate of Sulu decided to send its royal
a. That the offender enters in any place employee, the penalty next higher in degree shall Elements of Inciting to War or Giving Motives forces in order to claim ownership over Sabah
mentioned therein; be imposed. for Reprisals (U-ProGE) on the basis of a document ceding ownership
of Sabah from Brunei in favor of Sulu.
NOTE: The offender is any person, Other Acts of Espionage that are Punishable 1. That the offender performs Unlawful or
whether a citizen or a foreigner, a under C.A. No. 616 (An Act to Punish Espionage unauthorized acts; and Since Sabah is already part of the territory of
private individual or a public officer. and Other Offenses against National Security) 2. That such acts Provoke or Give occasion for Malaysia and claiming that the act of Sultan J
a war involving or liable to involve the violates Art. 118 of the RPC, the Philippine
b. That he has no authority therefor; and 1. Unlawfully obtaining or permitting to be Philippines or Expose Filipino citizens to government sued Sultan J. Will the suit
obtained information affecting national reprisals on their persons or property. prosper?
c. That his purpose is to obtain defense;
information, plans, photographs, or 2. Unlawful disclosing of information affecting NOTE: If both elements concur, the crime is A: NO. Art. 118 is applicable only when the
other data of confidential nature national defense; committed regardless of his intentions. offender performs unlawful or unauthorized acts.
relative to the defense of the 3. Disloyal acts or words in time of peace; Sultan J was merely asserting his right to own the
Philippines. 4. Disloyal acts or words in time of war; Time of Commission territory of Sabah when he sent its royal forces.
5. Conspiracy to violate preceding acts; The cession made by Brunei in favor of the
NOTE: The offender must have the 6. Harboring or concealing violators of law; and The crime of inciting to war or giving motives for Sultanate of Sulu is a lawful and authorized basis
intention to obtain information relative 7. Photographing from aircraft of vital military reprisals is committed in times of peace. upon which the claim of Sultan J may be made.
to the defense of the Philippines, but it information.
is not necessary to have actually NOTE: If the offender is a private individual, the VIOLATION OF NEUTRALITY
obtained such information. Espionage vs. Treason penalty is prision mayor. If the offender is a public ART. 119, RPC
officer or employee, the penalty is reclusion
2. By disclosing to the representative of a ESPIONAGE TREASON temporal. Neutrality
foreign nation the contents of the articles, As to the Citizenship of the Offender
data or information referred to in the With the amendment, Reprisal A condition of a nation wherein, in times of war,
preceding paragraph, which he had in his It is a crime not under Art. 114, treason takes no part in the dispute but continues
possession by reason of the public office he conditioned by may be committed by a It is any kind of forcible or coercive measure peaceful dealings with the belligerents.
holds. citizenship of the Filipino citizen or an whereby one State seeks to exercise a deterrent
offender. alien residing in the effect or to obtain redress or satisfaction, directly Elements of Violation of Neutrality (W-R-V)
Elements: Philippines. or indirectly, for consequences of the illegal acts
a. That the offender is a public officer; As to the Time it may be Committed of another State which has refused to make 1. That there is a War in which the Philippines
b. That he has in his possession the It may be committed amends for such illegal conduct. is not involved;
articles, data, or information referred to It is committed only in
either in times of war 2. That there is a Regulation issued by a
in Art. 117(1), by reason of the public times of war.
or in time of peace. Reprisal is resorted to for the purpose of settling competent authority for the purpose of
office he holds; and As to the Manner of Committing the Crime a dispute or redressing a grievance without going enforcing neutrality; and
c. That he discloses their contents to a There are only two to war. 3. That the offender Violates such regulation.
representative of a foreign nation. It may be committed in modes of committing
different ways. treason as provided Extent of Reprisals Authority to Issue a Regulation for the
Offenders under Art. 117 under Art. 114. Enforcement of Neutrality
Reprisals are not limited to military action. It
1. Par. 1 – the offender is any person, whether could be economic reprisals or denial of entry The regulation must be issued by a competent
a citizen or foreign individual or a public into their country. (e.g., X burns a Singaporean authority like the President of the Philippines or
officer. flag. If Singapore bans the entry of Filipinos, that the Chief of Staff of the Armed Forces of the
is reprisal.) Philippines, during a war between different
2. Par. 2 – the offender is a public officer, who countries in which the Philippines is not taking
has in his possession, articles, data, or sides.

CORRESPONDENCE WITH HOSTILE COUNTRY FLIGHT TO ENEMY COUNTRY Elements of Piracy (2006 BAR) (Ve-No-AS) have jurisdiction over the offense?
ART. 120, RPC ART. 121, RPC
1. That a Vessel is on the high seas or in the A: YES, for piracy falls under Title I Book 2 of the
Correspondence Elements of Flight to Enemy Country Philippine waters; RPC. As such, it is an exception to the rule on
(W-O-A-P) territoriality in criminal law under Art. 2 of the
Communication by means of letters; or it may 2. That the offenders are Not members of its RPC.
refer to the letters which pass between those who 1. That there is a War in which the Philippines complement or passengers of the vessel; and
have friendly or business relation. is involved; The same principle applies even if the offenders
2. That the offender must be Owing allegiance 3. That the offenders either: were charged, not with a violation of qualified
Elements of Correspondence with Hostile to the Government; a. Attack or seize that vessel, or piracy under the RPC but under a special law, P.D.
Country (Wa-Co-Pro-C-No) 3. That the offender Attempts to flee or go to b. Seize the whole or part of the cargo of 532 which penalizes piracy in Philippine waters.
enemy country; and said vessel, its equipment or personal (People v. Catantan, G.R. No. 118075, 05 Sept.
1. There is a War in which the Philippines is 4. That going to an enemy country is Prohibited belongings of its complement or 1997)
involved; by competent authority. passengers.
2. That the offender makes Correspondence Piracy under the RPC vs. Piracy under P.D. 532
with an enemy country or territory occupied NOTE: It should be noted that the mere attempt High Seas
by enemy troops; and to flee or go to enemy country when prohibited NOTE: P.D. 532 or the Anti-Piracy and Anti-
by competent authority consummates the felony. Any waters on the sea coast which are without Highway Robbery Law of 1974 is NOT included in
3. That the correspondence is either: the boundaries of the low-water mark, although the 2022 Bar Syllabus in Criminal Law.
a. Prohibited by the government; Persons Liable such waters may be within the jurisdictional
b. Carried on in Ciphers or conventional limits of a foreign government. The Convention PIRACY UNDER PIRACY UNDER
signs; or Alien residents, not only Filipino citizens, can be on the Law of the Sea defines “high seas” as parts THE RPC P.D. 532
c. Containing Notice or information held liable under this article. That law does not of the seas that are not included in the exclusive As to Where it can be Committed
which might be useful to the enemy. say “not being a foreigner.” Hence, allegiance economic zone, in the territorial seas, or in the Can be committed Can be committed
herein may be permanent or temporary. internal waters of a State, or in the archipelagic while the vessel is on only when the vessel
NOTE: Even if the correspondence contains waters of an archipelagic State. It does not mean high seas or in is in Philippine
innocent matters, but the correspondence has that the crime is committed beyond the three- Philippine waters waters
PIRACY IN GENERAL AND MUTINY IN THE
been prohibited by the Government, it is still mile limit of any State. As to Who may be the Offender
HIGH SEAS OR IN PHILIPPINE WATERS
punishable. However, in paragraphs 2 and 3 of ART. 122, RPC Can only be committed Can be committed by
Court which has Jurisdiction over Piracy
Art. 120, prohibition by the Government is not by persons who are not any person, including
Committed in the High Seas
essential. members of the the vessel’s
Piracy
vessel’s complement, complement, or the
Pirates are in law hostes humani generis. Piracy is
Ciphers or the passengers of passengers of the
It is robbery or forcible depredation on the high a crime not against any particular state but
the vessel (strangers) vessel
seas, without lawful authority and done with against all mankind. It may be punished in the
A secret message or code.
animo furandi (intent to steal) and in the spirit competent tribunal of any country where the
and intention of universal hostility. NOTE: There is, thus, no piracy when members of
offender may be found or into which he may be
Circumstances Qualifying the Offense under the vessel’s complement or its passengers attack
carried.
Art. 120 or seize the vessel or its cargo on high seas. The
Modes of Committing Piracy
offense would then be theft or robbery cognizable
The jurisdiction of piracy, unlike all other crimes,
Two things must concur to qualify the offense: 1. By attacking or seizing a vessel on the high by Philippine courts, if the crime is committed on
has no territorial limits. As it is against all so may,
1. That the notice or information might be a Philippine ship, pursuant to Art. 2(1) of the RPC.
seas; or it be punished by all. Nor does it matter that the
useful to the enemy; and
crime was committed within the jurisdictional 3-
2. That the offender intended to aid the enemy. Mutiny
2. By seizing the vessel while on the high seas mile limit of a foreign state, “for those limits,
or the whole or part of its cargo, its though neutral to war, are not neutral to crimes."
NOTE: If the offender intended to aid the enemy equipment or personal belongings of its It is the unlawful resistance to a superior officer,
(People v. Lo-lo and Saraw, G.R. No. 17958, 27 Feb.
by giving such notice or information, the crime or the raising of commotions and disturbances on
complement or passengers, by non- 1922)
amounts to treason; hence, the penalty is the board a ship against the authority of its
passengers or non-members of the crew.
same as that for treason. commander.
Q: If piracy was committed outside the
Philippine waters, will the Philippine courts

Piracy vs. Mutiny cannot be punished as separate crimes, nor can Constitutional Bases of the Crimes under this
they be complexed with piracy. B. CRIMES AGAINST THE FUNDAMENTAL Title
PIRACY MUTINY LAWS OF THE STATE
When piracy is accompanied by murder, ARTS. 124-133, RPC, TITLE II RPC 1987 CONSTITUTION
Offenders are Offenders are
homicide, physical injuries, or rape, it is
strangers to the vessel. members of the Art. 124 (Arbitrary
Hence, offenders are complement or the considered a special complex crime, and is
Detention);
punishable by reclusion perpetua to death
neither passengers nor passengers of the Rationale Sec. 1 of Art. III (Bill of
crew members vessel regardless of the number of victims. Art. 125 (Delay in Rights) “No person
Done with animo They are called crimes against “the fundamental the Delivery of shall be deprived of xxx
Against the authority
furandi (intent to steal) laws of the State” because they violate certain Detained Persons); liberty xxx without due
of the commander of
and with the intention provisions of the Bill of Rights under the 1987 process of law xxx.”
the ship.
of universal hostility. Philippine Constitution. Art. 126 (Delaying
Intent to gain is Release)
immaterial. The Crimes against the Fundamental Laws of the Sec. 6, Art. III; “The
Intent to gain is an
offenders only intend State liberty of abode and of
element of piracy
to ignore the ship’s Art. 127 changing the same
officers. 1. Arbitrary detention (Art. 124, RPC); (Expulsion) within the limits
Attack from the Attack from the 2. Delay in the delivery of detained persons to prescribed by law shall
outside inside the proper judicial authorities (Art. 125, not be impaired.”
RPC); Art. 128 (Violation
QUALIFIED PIRACY 3. Delaying release (Art. 126, RPC); of Domicile);
ART. 123, RPC 4. Expulsion (Art. 127, RPC);
5. Violation of domicile (Art. 128, RPC); Art. 129 (Search Sec. 2, Art. III; “The
6. Search warrants maliciously obtained and Warrants right of the people to be
Circumstances Qualifying the Crimes of Piracy
and Mutiny (2006 BAR) (S-A-M-RaMuHoP) abuse in the service of those legally obtained Maliciously secure in their persons,
(Art. 129, RPC); Obtained and Abuse houses, papers and
7. Searching domicile without witnesses (Art. in the Service of effects against
1. Whenever they have Seized a vessel by
boarding or firing upon the same; 130, RPC); those Legally unreasonable searches
8. Prohibition, interruption, and dissolution of Obtained); and seizure xxx shall be
peaceful meetings (Art. 131, RPC); inviolable.”
NOTE: For this to be a qualifying
circumstance, the offenders must have 9. Interruption of religious worship (Art. 132, Art. 130 (Searching
SEIZED the vessel. RPC); and Domicile Without
10. Offending the religious feelings. (Art. 133, Witnesses)
NOTE: This qualifying circumstance does RPC) Sec. 4 Art. III; “No law
NOT apply to mutiny since the offenders are shall be passed
already on board the ship. Offenders under this Title abridging the freedom
Art. 131 of speech, of
2. Whenever the pirates have Abandoned their GR: Offenders under this title are public officers (Prohibition, expression, or of the
victims without means of saving themselves; or employees. Interruption and press, or the right of the
or (2008 BAR) Dissolution of people peaceably to
XPNs: Peaceful Meetings) assemble and petition
3. Whenever the crime is accompanied by 1. Under Art. 133 (Offending the Religious the Government for
Murder, Homicide, Physical injuries, or Rape. Feelings), the offender may be any person; redress of grievances
xxx.”
No Complex Crime of Piracy with Murder 2. When a private person conspires with a Art. 132 Sec. 5, Art. III; “No law
public officer or acts as accomplice or (Interruption of shall be made
There is only one crime committed – qualified accessory in the commission of the crime. Religious Worship); respecting an
piracy. Murder, rape, homicide, physical injuries establishment of
are mere circumstances qualifying piracy and Art. 133 religion, or prohibiting

(Offending the the free exercise correccional in its maintenance of peace and order. Thus, if the in good faith and cannot be held liable for
Religious Feelings) thereof. The free minimum person, who arrests another without legal arbitrary detention. (U.S. v. Batalliones, G.R. No.
exercise and enjoyment Prision correccional in its ground, is without authority to do so, like a clerk 7284, 23 Aug. 1912)
4 to 15 days
of religious profession medium and maximum in the Office of the Central Bank Governor,
and worship without 16 days to arbitrary detention is not the proper charge but NOTE: R.A. No. 7438 mandates the duties of
Prision mayor
discrimination or 6 months illegal detention. arresting officer under pain of penalty
preference shall forever More than (imprisonment of eight [8] years to ten [10] years
Reclusion Temporal NOTE: A barangay chairman can be guilty of or fine of Php 6, 000 or both) in case of failure to
be allowed. 6 months
arbitrary detention. In order to maintain peace comply.
Classes of Arbitrary Detention (2006 BAR) Arbitrary Detention even if the Victims were and order, he must have the authority to cause
Not Kept in an Enclosure the arrest and detention of a person. (Boado, Arbitrary Detention Can be Committed thru
1. Detaining a person without legal ground (Art. 2008) Imprudence
124, RPC); There is arbitrary detention even if the victims
2. Delay in the delivery of detained persons to were not kept in an enclosure. The prevailing Legal Grounds for the Detention of Persons Illustration: A police officer re-arrests a woman
the proper authorities (Art. 125, RPC); and jurisprudence on kidnapping and illegal (2006 BAR) who had been released by means of verbal order
3. Delaying release. (Art. 126, RPC) detention is that the curtailment of the victim’s of the judge. The police officer acted without
liberty need not involve any physical restraint GR: malice, but did not verify the order of release
NOTE: The imposable penalties for violation of upon the victim’s person. If the acts and 1. Commission of a crime; before proceeding to make the re-arrest. He is
Arts. 125 and 126 are those provided for under actuations of the accused can produce such fear a. Arrest with a warrant liable for arbitrary detention through simple
Art. 124. in the mind of the victim sufficient to paralyze the b. Warrantless arrest imprudence. (People v. Misa, 36 O.G. 3496)
latter, to the extent that the victim is compelled to
Sec. 1: Arbitrary Detention and Expulsion limit his own actions and movements in NOTE: Instances of a valid warrantless Arbitrary Detention vs. Illegal Detention
accordance with the wishes of the accused, then arrest under Rule 113, Sec. 5 of the Revised
the victim is, for all intent and purposes, detained Rules of Court: ARBITRARY ILLEGAL
ARBITRARY DETENTION
against his will. (Astorga v. People, G.R. No. DETENTION DETENTION
ART. 124, RPC
154130, 01 Oct. 2003) a. Suspect is caught in flagrante delicto; As to the Principal’s Capacity
b. Suspect is caught immediately after the The principal The principal
Elements of Arbitrary Detention (1992 BAR) commission of the offense when the offender must be a offender is a private
Q: Who is the offender under Art. 124?
(P-D-W) officer has probable cause to believe public officer. person.
A: A public officer or employee. However, it is based on personal knowledge of facts As to his Duty to Detain a Person
1. Offender is a Public officer or employee and circumstances that the person to be
necessary that the public officer must be vested The offender, even if
vested with the authority and jurisdiction to arrested committed it; and The offender who is a
with the authority to detain or order the he is a public officer,
effect arrest and detain a person; c. Escaping prisoners. public officer has a
detention of persons accused of a crime such as does not include as
2. He Detains a person; and duty which carries
policemen and other agents of law, judges or his function the
3. Detention is Without legal grounds. (U.S. v. 2. Violent insanity or other ailment requiring with it the authority
mayors, barangay captain and a municipal power to arrest and
Braganza, G.R. No. 3971, 03 Feb. 1908) compulsory confinement of the patient in a to detain a person.
councilor. (Reyes, 2017) detain a person.
hospital;
Detention
Effect if the Public Officer has No Authority to Arbitrary Detention vs. Unlawful Arrest
Detain a Person XPN: When the peace officers acted in good faith
The actual confinement of a person in an even if the grounds mentioned above are not
enclosure, or in any manner detaining and ARBITRARY
If the offender does not have the authority to obtained, there is no arbitrary detention. UNLAWFUL ARREST
depriving him of his liberty. DETENTION
detain a person or to make such arrest, the crime
Illustration: Two BIR secret agents, strangers in As to the Capacity of the Offender
committed by him is illegal detention. A public
Periods of Detention and Punishment the municipality who were spying on the
officer who is acting outside the scope of his The offender is a
official duties is no better than a private citizen. neighborhood of the marketplace and acting public officer
PERIOD OF generally in a manner calculated to arouse the The offender may be
PUNISHMENT possessed with
DETENTION suspicion of any one not advised as to their duty, any person.
NOTE: In arbitrary detention, the offender is a authority to make
Arresto mayor in its public officer whose functions have something to were arrested by policemen of the town. The
3 days or less arrests.
maximum to prision Supreme Court held that the police officers acted
do with the protection of life and/or property and

As to the Purpose of Detainment b. 18 hours for crimes/offenses punishable periods of time Person Arrested Without a Warrant who Opts
To accuse the by correctional penalties or their specified in Art. 125 to Avail his Right to Preliminary Investigation
offended party of a equivalent; without the person
crime he did not c. 36 hours for crimes/offenses punishable detained having been Under the Revised Rules of Court, he should
commit, to deliver the by afflictive penalties or their equivalent. charged before the waive in writing his rights under Art. 125 of the
To deny him of his
person to the proper proper judicial RPC. The waiver must be under oath and with the
liberty
authority, and to file Q: Is Art. 125 applicable to violation of Special authority. assistance of counsel.
the necessary charges Penal Laws?
in a way of trying to Warrantless Arrest is Lawfully Effected When Rights of the Person Detained
incriminate him A: YES. The phrase “or their equivalent” means
that it is applicable even in violation of special 1. In Flagrante Delicto – When, in his presence, 1. He shall be informed of the cause of his
Q: X, a police officer, falsely imputes a crime laws. the person to be arrested has committed, is detention; and
against A to be able to arrest him but he actually committing, or is attempting to 2. He shall be allowed, upon his request to
appears to be not determined to file a charge Delivery (1990 BAR) commit an offense. communicate and confer at any time with his
against him. What crime, if any, did X commit? attorney or counsel.
The filing of correct information or complaint 2. Hot Pursuit – When an offense has in fact
A: The crime is arbitrary detention through with the proper judicial authorities. It does not been committed, and he has probable cause NOTE: The illegality of detention is not cured by
mean physical delivery or turnover of arrested to believe based on personal knowledge of the filing of the information in court.
unlawful arrest. (Boado, 2008)
person to the court. facts and circumstances that the person to be
DELAY IN THE DELIVERY OF DETAINED arrested has committed it. Length of Waiver
Proper Judicial Authorities
PERSONS TO THE PROPER
JUDICIAL AUTHORITY Probable cause refers to such facts and 1. Light offense – 5 days
It refers to the courts of justice or judges of said circumstances which could lead a 2. Serious and less serious offenses – 7 to 10 days
ART. 125, RPC
courts vested with judicial power to order the reasonable, discreet, and prudent man to
temporary detention or confinement of a person believe than an offense has been committed If the Person Arrested Does Not Want to
Situation contemplated by Art. 125, RPC charged with having committed a public offense. by the person sought to be arrested. Waive his Rights under Art. 125
Art. 125 contemplates a situation where arrest Circumstances Considered in Determining Personal knowledge of facts means it must be The arresting officer will have to comply with Art.
was made without a warrant but there exists a Liability of Officer Detaining a Person Beyond based upon probable cause, which means an 125 and file the case immediately in court
legal ground for the arrest. It does not apply when the Legal Period actual belief or reasonable grounds of without preliminary investigation.
the arrest is on the strength of a warrant of arrest,
because in the latter case, there is no period suspicion.
1. The means of communication;
required for the delivery of a detained person to DELAYING RELEASE
2. The hour of arrest; and 3. Escaping Prisoner - When the person to be
the proper judicial authorities except that it must ART. 126, RPC
3. Other circumstances such as the time of arrested is a prisoner who has escaped from
be made within a reasonable time. The person surrender and material possibility of the
arrested can be detained indefinitely until his a penal establishment or place where he is Punishable Acts under Art. 126, RPC
fiscal to make the investigation and file in serving final judgment or temporarily
case is decided by the court or until he posts bail time the necessary information.
for his temporary release. confined while his case is pending, or has 1. Delaying the performance of judicial or
escaped while being transferred from one executive order for the release of a prisoner;
Delay in the Delivery of Detained Persons confinement to another.
Elements of Delay in the Delivery of Detained 2. Unduly delaying the service of the notice of
(Art. 125) vs. Arbitrary Detention (Art. 124)
Persons (1990 BAR) (P-D-F-12-18-36) such order to said prisoner; and
Duty of the Officer if the Judge is Not Available
3. Unduly delaying the proceedings upon any
DELAY IN THE
1. Offender is a Public officer or employee; ARBITRARY petition for the liberation of such person.
DELIVERY OF If a judge is not available, the arresting officer is
2. He has Detained a person for some legal DETENTION
DETAINED PERSONS duty-bound to release a detained person, if the
ground; and Elements of Delaying Release (POD-SePP)
The detention is legal The detention is maximum hours for detention had already
3. He Fails to deliver such person to the proper
at the outset but illegal at the very expired. Failure to cause the release may result in
judicial authorities within: 1. Offender is a Public officer or employee;
becomes arbitrary inception because of an offense under Art. 125 of the RPC. (Albor v.
when the detention the absence of lawful Auguis, A.M. No. P-01-1472, 26 June 2003)
a. 12 hours for crimes/offenses punishable 2. There is a judicial or executive Order for the
exceeds any of the cause for such arrest.
by light penalties or their equivalent; release of the prisoner or detention prisoner,

or that there is a proceeding upon a petition b. Compels a person to change residence; surreptitiously entered said dwelling and Applicability of Provisions under Art. 128 if
for the liberation of such person; and and after having been required to leave the same. the Occupant of the Premises is NOT the
3. Offender is Not authorized to do so by law. Owner
NOTE: The prisoners could be prisoners by NOTE: What is punished is the refusal to leave,
final judgment or detention prisoners. Essence of the Crime of Expulsion the entry having been made surreptitiously. It would be sufficient if the inhabitant is in the
dwelling, although he is not the property owner.
3. Offender without good reason Delays: It is coercion, but it is specifically termed “Against the will of the owner”
a. Service of notice of such order to the expulsion when committed by a public officer. Art. 128, when NOT applicable
prisoner; or It presupposes opposition or prohibition by the
b. Performance of such judicial or Grave Coercion owner, whether express or implied, and not If a public officer, not armed with a search
executive order for the release of the merely the absence of consent. warrant or a warrant of arrest, searches a person
prisoner; or A private person who committed any of the outside his dwelling, the crime committed is
c. Proceedings upon a petition for the punishable acts under Art. 127 is responsible for NOTE: When one voluntarily admits to a search grave coercion, if violence and intimidation are
release of such person. the crime of grave coercion. or consents to have it made upon his person or used (Art. 286); or unjust vexation, if there is no
premises, he is precluded from later complaining violence or intimidation. (Art. 287)
NOTE: Wardens and jailers are the public officers Expulsion thereof. The right to be secure from unreasonable
most likely to violate this article. searches may, like every right, be waived and Qualifying Circumstances under Art. 128
The crime of expulsion is committed if aliens are such waiver may be either expressly or impliedly.
EXPULSION deported without an order from the President or 1. If committed at nighttime; and
ART. 127, RPC the Commissioner of Immigration and Elements of Violation of Domicile (PuNo- 2. If any papers or effects not constituting
Deportation after due proceedings. EnSeRef) evidence of a crime are not returned
Punishable Acts under Art. 127, RPC immediately after the search is made by the
NOTE: Pursuant to Sec. 69 of the Revised 1. Offender is Public officer or employee; offender.
1. Expelling a person from the Philippines; and Administrative Code, only the President of the
2. Compelling a person to change his residence. Philippines is vested with authority to deport 2. He is Not authorized by judicial order to SEARCH WARRANTS MALICIOUSLY
aliens. enter the dwelling and/or to make a search OBTAINED AND ABUSE IN THE SERVICE
This Article does NOT apply in cases of ejectment, for papers and for other effects; and OF THOSE LEGALLY OBTAINED
expropriation, or when the penalty imposed is The crime of expulsion is also committed when a ART. 129, RPC
destierro. Filipino who, after voluntarily leaving the 3. He either:
country, is illegally refused re-entry by a public a. Enters any dwelling against the will of Punishable Acts under Art. 129, RPC
Illustration: In Villavicencio v. Lukban, the mayor officer because he is considered a victim of being the owner thereof;
of the City of Manila wanted to make the city free forced to change his address. b. Searches papers or other effects found 1. Procuring a search warrant without just
from prostitution. He ordered certain prostitutes therein without the previous consent cause;
to be transferred to Davao, without observing Sec. 2: Violation of Domicile of such owner; and
due processes since they have not been charged c. Refuses to leave the premises after Elements:
with any crime at all. It was held that the crime having surreptitiously entered said a. That the offender is a public officer or
VIOLATION OF DOMICILE
committed was expulsion. dwelling and after having been employee;
ART. 128, RPC
required to leave the same. b. That he procures a search warrant; and
Only the court by final judgment can order a c. That there is no just cause.
Punishable Acts under Art. 128, RPC (2002, Trespass to Dwelling
person to change his residence. This is illustrated
2009 BAR)
in ejectment proceedings, expropriation 2. Exceeding his authority or by using
proceedings, and in the penalty of destierro. The crime committed is trespass to dwelling unnecessary severity in executing a search
1. Entering any dwelling against the will of the when the punishable acts under Art. 128 are
(Reyes, 2012) warrant legally procured.
owner thereof; committed by a private person.
Elements of Expulsion (P-ExCo-N) Elements:
2. Searching papers or other effects found
a. That the offender is a public officer or
therein without the previous consent of such
1. Offender is a Public officer or employee; owner; and employee;
2. He either: b. That he has legally procured a search
a. Expels any person from the Philippines warrant; and
3. Refusing to leave the premises after having

c. That he exceeds his authority or uses connection with the offense are in place sought to 4. Owner or any member of his family, or two A: NO, because the public officers are required to
unnecessary severity in executing the be searched. witnesses residing in the same locality are follow the search warrant by its letter. They have
same. not present. no discretion on the matter. Their remedy is to
Test for Lack of Just Cause ask the judge to change the address indicated in
Search Warrant NOTE: Art. 130 does not apply to searches of the search warrant.
Whether the affidavit filed in support of the vehicles or other means of transportation,
An order in writing, issued in the name of the application for a search warrant has been drawn because the searches are not made in the Sec. 3: Prohibition, Interruption, and
People of the Philippines, signed by a judge and in such a manner that perjury could be charged dwelling. Dissolution of Peaceful Meetings
directed to a peace officer, commanding him to thereon and the affiant could be held liable for
search for personal property described therein damages caused. (Alvarez v. Court, et al., G.R. No. This article does not apply to searches of vehicles
PROHIBITION, INTERRUPTION, AND
and bring it before the court. 45358, 29 Jan. 1937) and other means of transportation. (Reyes, 2008)
DISSOLUTION OF PEACEFUL MEETINGS
ART. 131, RPC
Personal Property to be Seized Consequence of Evidence Obtained using a The Witnesses During the Search should be in
Search Warrant that was Issued Without Just the following Order:
1. Subject of the offense; Cause Punishable Acts under Art. 131, RPC
2. Stolen or embezzled and the other proceeds 1. Homeowner;
or fruits of the offense; or When papers and effects are obtained during 2. Members of the family of sufficient age and 1. Prohibiting or interrupting, without legal
3. Used or intended to be used as the means of unreasonable searches and seizures, or under a discretion; and ground, the holding of a peaceful meeting, or
committing an offense. (Sec. 3, Rule 126, search warrant issued without probable cause, or 3. Responsible members of the community. by dissolving the same;
Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure; Reyes, in violation of the privacy of communications and
2017) correspondence, the papers or effects obtained Unlike in Art.128 where the public officer is not 2. Hindering any person from joining any lawful
are not admissible for any purpose in any armed with a warrant, in crimes under Art. 129 association or from attending any of its
Requisite for the Issuance of Search Warrant proceeding. (Sec. 2 and 3, Art. III, 1987 and 130, the search is made by virtue of a valid meetings; and
Constitution) warrant, but the warrant notwithstanding, the
A search warrant shall not issue except upon liability for the crime is still incurred through the 3. Prohibiting or hindering any person from
probable cause in connection with one specific Effect if the Search Warrant is Secured following situations: addressing, either alone or together with
offense to be determined personally by the judge through a False Affidavit others, any petition to the authorities for
after examination under oath or affirmation of 1. The search warrant was irregularly obtained; correction of abuses or redress of grievances.
the complainant and the witnesses he may The crimes committed are separate crimes of 2. The officer exceeded his authority under the
produce, and particularly describing the place to perjury and violation of Art. 128. The liability of warrant; Elements of Prohibition, Interruption, and
be searched and the things to be seized which the offender under Art. 129 shall be in addition to 3. The public officer employs unnecessary or Dissolution of Peaceful Meetings
may be anywhere in the Philippines. (Sec. 4, Rule his liability for the commission of any other excessive severity in the implementation of
126, Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure) offense. the search warrant; or In all three cases, the following elements must
4. The owner of dwelling or any member of the concur:
NOTE: A search warrant shall be valid for ten SEARCHING DOMICILE WITHOUT WITNESSES family was absent, or two witnesses residing
(10) days from its date. Thereafter, it shall be within the same locality were not present 1. Offender is a public officer; and
ART. 130
void. during the search. 2. He performs any of the acts mentioned
above.
Elements of Searching Domicile Without
Search Warrant Illegally Obtained Witnesses (P-A-S-O) Q: Suppose, X, a suspected pusher lives in a
condominium unit. Agents of the PDEA Necessity that the Offender be a Stranger to
Search warrant is considered illegally obtained obtained a search warrant but the name of the the Meeting that has been Interrupted and
1. Offender is a Public officer or employee;
when it was procured without a probable cause. person in the search warrant did not tally Dissolved
2. He is Armed with search warrant legally
procured; with the address indicated therein.
Probable Cause To be held liable under Art. 131, it is necessary
3. He Searches the domicile, papers or other
Eventually, X was found but at a different that the offender be a stranger to the meeting that
belongings of any person; and
It is defined as such facts and circumstances address. X resisted but the agents insisted on has been interrupted and dissolved. If the
which would lead a reasonably discreet and the search. Drugs were found and seized and offender is a participant of the meeting, he is
NOTE: The papers or other belongings must
prudent man to believe that an offense has been X was prosecuted and convicted by the trial liable for unjust vexation.
be in the dwelling of the owner at the time
committed and that the object sought in the search is made. court. Is the search valid?

Only a Public Officer or Employee can Commit Sec. 4: Crimes against Religious Worship b. During the celebration of any religious An act is said to be notoriously offensive to the
this Crime ceremony religious feelings of the faithful when a person
ridicules or makes light of anything constituting a
INTERRUPTION OF RELIGIOUS WORSHIP
If the offender is a private individual, the crime is 3. Acts must be Notoriously offensive to the religious dogma; works or scoffs at anything
ART. 132, RPC
disturbance of public order defined in Art. 153. feelings of the faithful. devoted to religious ceremonies; plays with or
damages or destroys any object of veneration by
Requiring a Permit Before any Meeting or Elements of Interruption of Religious NOTE: It is not necessary that there is religious the faithful.
Assembly Cannot be Construed as Preventing Worship (PuRe-PD) worship.
Peaceful Assemblies The mere act of causing the passage through the
1. Offender is a Public officer or employee; NOTE: Art. 133 is the only crime against the churchyard belonging to the Church, of the
The permit requirement shall be in exercise only 2. Religious ceremonies, or manifestations of fundamental law of the State that may be funeral of one who in life belonged to the Church
of the government’s regulatory powers and not any religious ceremonies are about to take committed not only by public officer but also by a of Christ, neither offends nor ridicules the
really to prevent peaceful assemblies. This place or are going on; and private person. religious feelings of those who belong to the
requirement is legal as long as it is not being 3. Offender Prevents or Disturbs the same. Roman Catholic Church. (People v. Baes, supra)
exercised as a prohibitory power. Religious Ceremonies
NOTE: If the offender is a private individual, he Q: While a “pabasa” was going on at a
NOTE: But if such application for permit is may be liable under Art. 133. Those religious acts performed outside of a municipality in the Province of Tarlac, Reyes
arbitrarily denied or conditions that defeat the church, such as processions and special prayers and his company arrived at the place, carrying
exercise of the right to peaceably assemble is Religious worship includes people in the act of for burying dead persons. (Reyes, 2012) bolos and crowbars, and started to construct
dictated by the officer, this article applies. performing religious rites for religious ceremony a barbed wire fence in front of the chapel.
or manifestation of religion. If the prohibition or Act considered Notoriously Offensive
Prohibition, Interruption, or Dissolution of disturbance is committed only in a meeting or The chairman of the committee in charge of
Peaceful Meetings vs. Tumults and other rally of a sect, it would be punishable under Art. An act is considered notoriously offensive when the “pabasa” persuaded them to refrain from
Disturbances 131. the act is directed against religious practice or said acts. A verbal altercation then ensued.
dogma or ritual for the purpose of ridicule, such The people attending the “pabasa” left the
PROHIBITION, Qualifying Circumstances of the Crime as mocking, scoffing at, or attempting to damage place hurriedly in confusion and the “pabasa”
TUMULTS AND
INTERRUPTION, OR an object of religious veneration. (People v. Baes, was discontinued until after investigation.
OTHER If the crime is committed with violence or threats.
DISSOLUTION OF G.R. No. 46000, 25 May 1939) Reyes and his company, in their defense claim
DISTURBANCES
PEACEFUL MEETINGS that the land where the chapel is built belongs
(ART. 153) Rationale for Punishing the Interruption of
(ART. 131) NOTE: There must be a deliberate intent to hurt to the Clemente family, of which they are
Religious Worship the feelings of the faithful. Mere arrogance or partisans. Are the accused guilty of the crime
The public officer is not
a participant. As far as The public officer is rudeness is not enough. under Art. 133?
Persons who meet for the purpose of religious
the gathering is a participant of the
worship, by any method which is not indecent Q: Baes, while holding the funeral of A: NO. The SC held that Art. 133 of the RPC
concerned, the public assembly
and unlawful, have a right to do so without being Macabigtas, in accordance with the rites of a punishes acts “notoriously offensive to the
officer is a third party
molested or disturbed. (U.S. v. Balcorta, G.R. No. religious sect known as “Church of Christ,” feelings of the faithful.” The construction of a
The offender could
8722, 10 Sept. 1913) caused the funeral to pass through the fence even though irritating and vexatious under
be a private person,
The offender must be a
whether a churchyard belonging to the Roman Catholic the circumstances to those present, is not such an
public officer OFFENDING THE RELIGIOUS FEELINGS act as can be designated as “notoriously offensive
participant of the Church. The parish priest filed a complaint
assembly or not ART. 133, RPC against Baes for the violation of Art. 133. Is to the faithful.”
Baes liable?
Elements of Offending the Religious Feelings In this case, the accused were acquitted of a
(A-P-Du-N) A: NO. The SC held that the act imputed to the violation of Art. 133 of the RPC but they were
accused does not constitute the offense found guilty of a violation of Art. 287 of the RPC
1. The offender is Any person; complained of. At most, they might be chargeable for the circumstances showed that their acts
with having threatened the parish priest or with were done in such a way as to vex and annoy the
2. The acts complained of were performed: having passed through private property without parties who had gathered to celebrate the
a. In a Place devoted to religious worship; the consent of the owner. “pabasa.” (People v. Reyes, et al., G.R. No. L-40577,
or 23 Aug. 1934)

Q: In his homily, Fr. Chris loudly denounced must be directed against religious practice, overthrowing the Government. It is generally
the many extrajudicial killings committed by dogma, or ritual for the purpose of ridicule as C. CRIMES AGAINST PUBLIC ORDER carried out by civilians.
the men in uniform. Policeman Stone, then mocking or scoffing at or attempting to ARTS. 134-160, RPC, TITLE III
attending the mass, was peeved by the damage an object of religious veneration. If there is no public uprising, the crime is direct
denunciations of Fr. Chris. He immediately (People v. Baes, G.R. No. 46000, May 25, 1939) assault.
approached the priest during the homily, Policeman Stone threatened the priest
Political Crimes
openly displayed his firearm tucked in his because the priest’s statements during his NOTE: Actual clash of arms with the forces of the
waist, and menacingly uttered at the priest: homily and not to mock or ridicule the Government is not necessary to convict the
Those that are directly aimed against the political
Father, may kalalagyan kayo kung hindi kayo ceremony; consequently, Policeman Stone accused who is in conspiracy with others actually
order, as well as such common crimes as may be
tumigil. His brazenness terrified the priest, may not be charged with the crime of taking arms against the Government.
committed to achieve a political purpose. The
who cut short his homily then and there. The offending religious feelings.
decisive factor is the intent or motive.
celebration of the mass was disrupted, and Rebellion vs. Insurrection
the congregation left the church in disgust
over the actuations of Policeman Stone, a co- CHAPTER 1: REBELLION, COUP D’ETAT,
REBELLION INSURRECTION
parishioner. SEDITION AND DISLOYALTY
It merely seeks to effect
Object of the
some change of minor
Policeman Stone was subsequently charged. REBELLION OR INSURRECTION movement is to
importance, or to
The Office of the Provincial Prosecutor is now ART. 134, RPC completely
prevent the exercise of
about to resolve the case, and is mulling on overthrow and
governmental
what to charge Policeman Stone with. May Nature of the Crime of Rebellion supersede the
authority with respect
Policeman Stone be properly charged with existing
to particular matters or
either or both of the following crimes, or, if Rebellion is a crime of the masses. It requires a government.
subjects.
not, with what proper crime? multitude of people. It is a vast movement of men
and a complex network of intrigues and plots.
Rebellion Cannot be Complexed with
a. Interruption of religious worship as
Common Crimes
defined and punished under Art. 132 of Elements of Rebellion (PT-PuReDe)
the Revised Penal Code; and/or
Being within the purview of “engaging in war”
1. That there be:
and “committing serious violence,” said resort to
b. Offending the religious feelings as defined a. Public uprising; and
arms, with the resulting impairment or
and punished under Art. 133 of the b. Taking of arms against the Government.
destruction of life and property, constitutes not
Revised Penal Code. (2017 BAR)
two or more offense, but only one crime that of
2. Purpose of uprising or movement is either to:
A: rebellion plain and simple. (People v. Hernandez
a. Remove from the allegiance to said
a. YES. Policeman Stone may be charged with et al., G.R. No. L-6025-26, 18 July 1956)
Government or its laws:
interruption of religious worship. Under the
i. The territory of the Philippines or
RPC, a public officer or employee who shall NOTE: Killing, robbing, etc. for private purposes
any part thereof; or
prevent or disturb the ceremonies or or profit without any political motivation, would
ii. Any body of land, naval or other
manifestations of any religion shall be liable be separately punished and would not be
armed forces;
for interruption of religious worship. Hence, absorbed in the crime of rebellion. (People v.
Policeman Stone, a public officer, approached Geronimo et al., G.R. No. L-8936, 23 Oct. 1956)
b. Deprive the Chief Executive or Congress,
the priest, displayed his firearm, and
wholly or partially, any of their powers
threatened the priest, which caused the Q: Is the ruling in Hernandez applicable even
or prerogatives
disruption of the mass and the leaving of the if the common crime committed is punishable
congregation. Policeman Stone, therefore, by a special law?
Essence of the Crime of Rebellion
may be charged of interruption of religious
worship. A: YES. All crimes, whether punishable under a
The essence of rebellion is public uprising and the
special or general law, which are mere
taking of arms for the purpose of overthrowing
b. NO. Policeman Stone may not be charged components or ingredients, or committed in
the Government by force although it is not
with the crime of offending religious feelings. furtherance thereof, become absorbed in the
necessary that the rebels succeed in
The Supreme Court has ruled that the acts crime of rebellion and cannot be isolated and

charged as separate crimes themselves. (Ponce sparrow unit is the liquidation squad of the New Mere giving of aid or comfort is not criminal in Application of the Theory of Absorption of
Enrile v. Amin, G.R. No. 93335, 13 Sept. 1990) People's Army with the objective of overthrowing cases of rebellion. There must be an actual Crimes
the duly constituted government. It is therefore participation. Hence, mere silence or omission of
Q: As a result of the killing of SPO3 Jesus not hard to comprehend that the killing of the public officer is not punishable in rebellion. Firstly, the doctrine of 'absorption of crimes' is
Lucilo, Elias Lovedioro was charged with and Manatad was committed as a means to or in peculiar to criminal law and generally applies to
subsequently found guilty of the crime of furtherance of the subversive ends of the NPA. Theory of Absorption in Rebellion (“Political crimes punished by the same statute. Secondly,
murder. On appeal, Lovedioro claims that he Offense Doctrine”) the doctrine applies only if the trial court has
should have been charged with the crime of Consequently, appellant is liable for the crime of jurisdiction over both offenses. (Gonzales v. Abaya,
rebellion, not murder as, being a member of rebellion, not murder with direct assault upon a If common crimes like homicide, murder, G.R. No. 164007, 10 Aug. 2006)
the NPA, he killed Lucilo as a means to or in person in authority, as the former crime absorbs physical injuries, and arson have been committed
furtherance of subversive ends. the crime of direct assault when done in in furtherance of or in connection with rebellion, Rebellion vs. Terrorism (2019 BAR)
furtherance thereof. (People v. Dasig, et. al., G.R. then it is considered as absorbed in the crime of
The Solicitor General, opposing appellant’s No. 100231, 28 Apr. 1993) rebellion. But before these common crimes can Rebellion is a crime punishable under the RPC. On
claim, avers that it is only when the defense be absorbed, it is necessary that there is evidence the other hand, under the Human Security Act of
had conclusively proven that the motive or Q: On May 5, 1992, at about 6:00 a.m., while to show that these common crimes have 2007, specifically on terrorism, the crime of
intent for the killing of the policeman was for Governor Alegre of Laguna was on board his promoted or espoused the ideals of rebels. rebellion is included in the list of predicate
"political and subversive ends" will the car traveling along the National Highway of Absent any of these, it cannot be absorbed in the crimes. In essence, rebellion becomes an element
judgment of rebellion be proper. Between the Laguna. Joselito and Vicente shot him on the crime of rebellion. of the crime of terrorism.
appellant and the Solicitor General, who is head resulting in his instant death. At that
correct? time, Joselito and Vicente were members of Political Offense Doctrine Asserted as Defense However, the Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020 (R.A.
the liquidation squad of the New People’s No. 11479), which took effect on 18 July 2020,
A: The Solicitor General is correct. It is not Army and they killed the governor upon Any ordinary act assumes a different nature by repealed the Human Security Act. Nevertheless,
enough that the overt acts of rebellion are duly orders of their senior officer Commander being absorbed in the crime of rebellion. Thus, all judicial decisions and orders issued, as well as
proven. Both purpose and overt acts are essential Tiago. when a killing is committed in furtherance of pending actions relative to the implementation of
components of the crime. With either of these rebellion, the killing is not homicide or murder. Human Security Act of 2007 prior to its repeal
elements wanting, the crime of rebellion legally According to Joselito and Vicente, they were Rather, the killing assumes the political shall remain valid and effective. (Sec. 57, R.A. No.
does not exist. If no political motive is established ordered to kill Governor Alegre because of his complexion of rebellion as its mere ingredient 11479)
and proved, the accused should be convicted of corrupt practices. If you were the prosecutor, and must be prosecuted and punished as
the common crime and not of rebellion. In cases what crime will you charge Joselito and rebellion alone. NOTE: The Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020 is NOT
of rebellion, motive relates to the act, and mere Vicente? (1998 BAR) included in the 2022 Bar Syllabus in Criminal Law.
membership in an organization dedicated to the However, this is not to say that public
furtherance of rebellion would not, by and of A: If I were the prosecutor, I would charge Joselito prosecutors are obliged to consistently charge COUP D’ETAT
itself, suffice. (People v. Lovedioro, G.R. No. and Vicente with the crime of rebellion, respondents with simple rebellion instead of ART. 134-A, RPC
112235, 29 Nov. 1995) considering that they were members of the common crimes. No one disputes the well–
liquidation squad of the New People's Army and entrenched principle in criminal procedure that Elements of Coup D’etat (Mi-S-Pur-D)
Q: For the killing of Redempto Manatad, a the killing was upon orders of their commander; the institution of criminal charges, including
policeman and who was then in the hence, politically-motivated. (People v. Avila, G.R. whom and what to charge, is addressed to the 1. Offender is a person or persons belonging to
performance of his official duties, accused No. 84612, 11 Mar. 1992) sound discretion of the public prosecutor. the Military or police or holding any public
Rodrigo Dasig, a self-confessed member of the office or employment;
sparrow unit, the liquidation squad of the Rebellion vs. Treason But when the political offense doctrine is
NPA, was found guilty of murder with direct asserted as a defense in the trial court, it becomes 2. There be a Swift attack accompanied by
assault. On appeal, he claims that he should be REBELLION TREASON crucial for the court to determine whether the act violence, intimidation, threat, strategy or
convicted at most of simple rebellion and not The uprising is The levying of war is of killing was done in furtherance of a political stealth;
murder with direct assault. Is the appeal against the done to aid the end, and for the political motive of the act to be
meritorious? government. enemy. conclusively demonstrated. (Ocampo v. Abando, 3. The Purpose of the attack is to seize or
The purpose is to The purpose is to G.R. No. 176830, 11 Feb. 2014) diminish State power; and
A: YES. Since the killing of Manatad is a mere substitute the deliver the
component of rebellion or was done in existing government government to the 4. The attack is Directed against duly
furtherance thereof. It is of judicial notice that the with another. enemy. constituted authorities of the Republic of the

Philippines, or any military camp or continued possession and exercise of 2. Participants Conspiracy to Commit Coup D’etat
installation, communication networks, governmental powers, and their purpose is to a. Any person who participates or
public utilities or other facilities needed for seize power by taking over such installations. executes the commands of others in There is conspiracy to commit coup d’etat when
the exercise and continued possession of rebellion, or insurrection; two or more persons belonging to the military or
power. (2013 BAR) Coup d’etat vs. Rebellion (1991, 1998, 2002, police or holding any public office or employment
2004 BAR) b. Any person in the government service come to an agreement to seize or diminish State
Q: How is the crime of coup d’etat committed? who participates, or executes directions power through a swift attack accompanied by
(1991, 2012 BAR) COUP D’ETAT REBELLION or commands of others in undertaking a violence, intimidation, threat, strategy or stealth
As to Essence of the Crime coup d’etat; or against duly constituted authorities of the
A: When a person holding public employment Swift attack against Republic of the Philippines, or any military camp
undertakes a swift attack, accompanied by the government, its c. Any person not in the government or installation, communication networks, public
strategy or stealth, directed against public military camp or service who participates, supports, utilities or other facilities needed for the exercise
utilities or other facilities needed for the exercise installations, Public uprising and finances, abets, or aids in undertaking a and continued possession of power and decide to
and continued possession of power for the communication taking up arms coup d’etat. commit it.
purpose of diminishing state power. network and public against the
facilities and utilities government Pursuant to Secs. 28 and 29 of R.A. No. 10591, the Proposal to Commit Coup D’etat
Essence of the Crime of Coup D’etat essential to the unlawful acquisition, possession of firearms and
continued exercise of ammunition, and use of loose firearm, in When the person belonging to the military or
The essence of the crime is a swift attack upon the
governmental powers furtherance of, or incident to, or in connection police or holding any public office or employment
facilities of the Philippine government, military
As to Purpose with the crime of rebellion or insurrection, or has decided to seize or diminish State power
camps and installations, communication
Merely to paralyze the To overthrow the attempted coup d’état, shall be absorbed as through a swift attack accompanied by violence,
networks, public utilities and facilities essential
existing government. existing government. element of the crime of rebellion or insurrection, intimidation, threat, strategy or stealth against
to the continued possession of governmental
As to its Commission or attempted coup d’état. duly constituted authorities of the Republic of the
powers.
May be carried out Requires a public Philippines, or any military camp or installation,
singly or uprising, or Q: If the attack is quelled but the leader is communication networks, public utilities or
Objective of Coup D’etat
simultaneously multitude of people unknown, who shall be deemed the leader other facilities needed for the exercise and
As to Persons Liable thereof? (2002 BAR) continued possession of power proposes its
The objective of coup d’etat is to destabilize or
Principal offenders execution to some other person or persons.
paralyze the government through the seizure of
must be members of A: The leader being unknown, any person who in
facilities and utilities essential to the continued Offenders need not
the military, national fact directed the others, spoke for them, signed Conspiracy to Commit Rebellion
possession and exercise of governmental powers. be uniformed
police or public receipts and other documents issued in their
personnel of the name, or performed similar acts, on behalf of the When two or more persons come to an
Principal Offenders of Coup D’etat officer, with or
military or the police. rebels shall be deemed the leader of such agreement to rise publicly and take arms against
without civilian
support. rebellion, insurrection or coup d'etat. the government for any of the purposes of
Members of the AFP or of the PNP organization or
rebellion and decide to commit it.
a public officer with or without civilian support.
CONSPIRACY AND PROPOSAL TO COMMIT
PENALTY FOR REBELLION OR
COUP D’ETAT, REBELLION, Proposal to Commit Rebellion
Q: If a group of persons belonging to the INSURRECTION OR COUP D’ETAT
ART. 135, RPC OR INSURRECTION
armed forces makes a swift attack,
ART. 136, RPC When the person who has decided to rise publicly
accompanied by violence, intimidation and
and take arms against the government for any of
threat against a vital military installation for Persons Liable for Rebellion, Insurrection or
Crimes Punished under Art. 136, RPC the purposes of rebellion proposes its execution
the purpose of seizing power and taking over Coup D’etat to some other person or persons.
such installation, what crime or crimes are
they guilty of? (2002 BAR) 1. Conspiracy to commit coup d’etat;
1. Leader Q: On account of the testimony of the
a. Any person who promotes, maintains, 2. Proposal to commit coup d’etat;
3. Conspiracy to commit rebellion or prosecution’s witness, the accused, together
A: The perpetrators, being persons belonging to or heads a rebellion or insurrection; or
insurrection; and with some more or less forty persons who
the Armed Forces, would be guilty of the crime of
4. Proposal to commit rebellion or insurrection. were said to be conspiring to overthrow the
coup d’etat, under Art. 134-A of the RPC, as b. Any person who leads, directs, or Government, was heard to have said, "What a
amended, because their attack was against vital commands others to undertake coup life this is, so full of misery, constantly
military installations which are essential to the d’etat.

increasing. When will our wretchedness end? criminal liability? (1994 BAR) INCITING TO REBELLION OR INSURRECTION inducement in the crime of rebellion, provided
When will the authorities remedy it? What ART. 138, RPC that the requisites of Art. 17(2) of the RPC are
shall we do?" Is there a conspiracy? A: NO, Father Abraham did not commit a crime. present.
His failure to report such conspiracy is due to an Elements of Inciting to Rebellion or
A: NONE. The prosecution failed to establish the insuperable cause, one of the exempting Insurrection (D-I-M) SEDITION
existence of conspiracy to rebel by showing that circumstances under Art. 12 of the RPC. Under ART. 139, RPC
there is (1) an agreement and (2) decision to our law, a priest cannot be compelled to disclose 1. Offender Does not take arms or is not in open
commit rebellion. Mere words of discontent, any information received by him by reason of hostility against the Government; Elements of Sedition (REP-PAIDE)
although they reveal dissatisfaction on account of confession made to him under his professional
the evils, real or fictitious, to which they refer, are capacity. 2. He Incites others to rise publicly and take 1. Offenders Rise (1) publicly and (2)
not alone sufficient to prove the existence of a arms against the Government for any of the tumultuously;
conspiracy to rebel, much less with the aid of NOTE: In the case of U.S. v. Vergara, the Supreme purposes of the rebellion; and
force, against the constituted Government. (U.S. v. Court held that persons who may be held 2. They Employ force, intimidation, or other
Figueras, et. al., G.R. No. 1282, 10 Sept. 1903) criminally liable under this Article are those who 3. The inciting is done by Means of speeches, means outside of legal methods; and
actually conspired with each other, not those who proclamations, writings, emblems, banners
Q: Accused is the founder and leader of the learned and failed to report the same to the or other representations tending to the same 3. The offenders employ any of those means to
Congress of Labor Organizations (CLO). The authorities. end. attain any of the following objects or
theory of the prosecution is that the accused Purposes:
has conspired with the Communist Party of DISLOYALTY OF PUBLIC OFFICERS NOTE: The act of inciting must have been
the Philippines by giving monetary aid, OR EMPLOYEES intentionally calculated to induce others to a. Prevent the Promulgation or execution
among others, to help the Huks. ART. 137, RPC commit rebellion. of any law or the holding of any popular
election;
Further, he gave speeches advocating the Punishable Acts of Disloyalty (F-C-A) Inciting to Rebellion vs. Proposal to Commit
principles of Communism and urging his Rebellion b. Prevent the National Government, or any
audience to join the uprising of laboring 1. Failing to resist a rebellion by all the means provincial or municipal government, or
classes against America and the Quirino in their power; PROPOSAL TO any public officer thereof from freely
administration. Is the accused guilty of INCITING TO
2. Continuing to discharge the duties of their COMMIT Exercising its or his functions, or prevent
conspiracy to commit rebellion? REBELLION
offices under the control of the rebels; and REBELLION the execution of any administrative
3. Accepting appointment to office under them. It is not required that order;
A: NO. There was no evidence showing that those The person who
the offender has
who heard his speeches agreed to rise up in arms proposes has decided
The crime presupposes the existence of rebellion, decided to commit c. Inflict any act of hate or revenge upon
to overthrow the government. Accused was to commit rebellion
but the offender under this article must NOT be rebellion the person or property of any public
merely a propagandist and indoctrinator of in conspiracy with the rebels; otherwise, he will officer or employee;
The person who
Communism. He was not a Communist conspiring be guilty of rebellion and not merely disloyalty, The act of inciting is proposes the
to commit the actual rebellion by the mere fact of because in conspiracy, the act of one is the act of d. Commit for any political or social end
done publicly execution of the crime
his leadership of the CLO. (People v. Hernandez, all. any Act of hate or revenge against
uses secret means
G.R. No. L-6025, 30 May 1964) private persons or any social class; and
Q: Can the public officer plead Art. 11 or 12 of NOTE: In both proposal and inciting to commit
Q: VC, JG, and GG conspired to overthrow the the RPC? e. Despoil, for any political or social end,
rebellion, the crime of rebellion should not be
Philippine Government. VG was recognized as any person, municipality or province, or
actually committed by the persons to whom it is
the titular head of the conspiracy. Several A: YES, i.e., insuperable cause. Disloyalty is an the National Government of all its
proposed or who are incited.
meetings were held and the plan was offense by omission. property or any part thereof.
finalized. JJ, bothered by his conscience,
Q: If the offender did commit the crime of
confessed to Father Abraham that he, VG, JG NOTE: Participants must at least be four (4) in
rebellion after proposal to commit the same
and GG have conspired to overthrow the numbers.
or inciting others, what crime is committed?
government. Father Abraham did not report
this information to the proper authorities. Nature of Sedition
A: If they commit the crime of rebellion because
Did Father Abraham commit a crime? If so,
of the proposal or the inciting, the proponent or
what crime was committed? What is his It is a violation of the public peace or at least such
the one inciting becomes a principal by

a course of measures as evidently engenders it, A: NO. There was no sedition because there was constitute sedition. (People v. Umali, et. al., G.R. Crime Committed if there is No Public
yet it does not aim at direct and open violence no public and tumultuous uprising. While it is No. L-5803, 29 Nov. 1954) Uprising
against the laws, or the subversion of the true that the council acceded to the demands of
Constitution. It is an offense not directed the assembly through fear and under the Sedition vs. Rebellion If the purpose of the offenders is to attain the
primarily against individuals but to the general influence of the threatening attitude of the crowd, objects of sedition by force or violence, but there
public peace; it is the raising of commotions or it is rather expected that more or less disorder SEDITION REBELLION is no public uprising, the crime committed is
disturbances in the State, a revolt against will mark the public assembly of the people to As to its Commission direct assault.
legitimate authority. (People v. Perez, G.R. No. L- protest against grievances. The prosecution It is sufficient that There must be taking
21049, 22 Dec. 1923) should not be permitted to seize upon every public uprising be up of arms against the PENALTY FOR SEDITION
instance of disorderly conduct by individual tumultuous. government. ART. 140, RPC
Main Objective members of a crowd as an excuse to characterize As to Purpose
the assembly as a seditious and tumultuous rising May be political or Persons Liable for Sedition with the
The ultimate object of sedition is a violation of the against the authorities. social, that is, merely Corresponding Penalties
public peace or at least such a course of measures Always political, that
to go against the
as evidently engenders it. Utmost discretion must be exercised in drawing is, to overthrow the
established 1. Leader – prision mayor in its minimum
the line between disorderly and seditious government.
government not to period, fine not exceeding Php10,000.
Sedition does NOT Contemplate Rising Up in conduct and between an essentially peaceable overthrow it.
Arms Against Government assembly and a tumultuous uprising. (U.S. v. As to Absorption of other Crimes 2. Other persons participating in the
Apurado, et. al., G.R. No. 1210, 07 Feb. 1907) Crimes associated Offenses committed sedition – prision correccional in its
The purpose of the offenders in rising publicly is with sedition can be pursuant to rebellion maximum period, fine not exceeding
merely to create commotion and disturbance by Q: Appellant, with about twenty armed men prosecuted. are absorbed. Php5,000.
way of protest to express their dissent and and Huk Commander Torio, raided and
disobedience to the government or to the attacked the house of Punzalan, his political NOTE: What distinguishes sedition from CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT SEDITION
authorities concerned. adversary and incumbent Mayor of Tiaong, rebellion is not the extent of the territory covered ART. 141, RPC
Quezon, with automatic weapons, hand by the uprising but rather the object at which the
NOTE: The objective of sedition is not always grenades, and bottles filled with gasoline. uprising aims. Conspiracy to Commit Sedition
against the government, its property, or officer. It
could be against a private person or social class. The raid resulted not only in the destruction Sedition vs. Treason When two (2) or more persons come to an
of Punzalan’s house and that of others but also
agreement to rise publicly and tumultuously to
“Tumultuous” in the death and injuries to several civilians.
SEDITION TREASON attain any of the objects specified under Art. 139,
The CFI found the appellant guilty of the
Treason is a violation and they decide to commit it.
The disturbance or interruption shall be deemed complex crime of rebellion with multiple Sedition is the
by a subject of his
to be tumultuous if caused by more than three murder, among others. Was the lower court raising of
allegiance to his NOTE: There is no crime of proposal to commit
persons who are armed or provided with means correct? commotions or
sovereign or the sedition; only conspiracy is punished and not
of violence. (Art. 153, RPC) disturbances in the
supreme authority of proposal to commit sedition.
A: NO. The accused is guilty of sedition, multiple State.
the State.
Q: Upon the opening of the session of the murder, and physical injuries, among others. The
municipal council of San Carlos, Occidental purpose of the raid and the act of the raiders in INCITING TO SEDITION
Negros, a large number of the town residents rising publicly and taking up arms was not Sedition vs. Crime of Tumults and Other ART. 142, RPC
assembled near the municipal building to exactly against the Government and for the Disturbance of Public Order
demand the dismissal from office of the purpose of doing the things defined in Art. 134 of Acts of Inciting to Sedition (2007 BAR)
municipal treasurer, the secretary and chief the RPC on rebellion. The raiders did not even TUMULTS AND (S-U-W)
of police. The persons who took part therein attack the Presidencia, the seat of local OTHER
SEDITION
were wholly unarmed while a few carried Government. Rather, the object was to attain by DISTURBANCE OF 1. Inciting others to the accomplishment of any
canes. The crowd was orderly and well means of force, intimidation, etc. one object, to PUBLIC ORDER of the acts which constitute sedition by
behaved. The council acceded to their wishes. wit, to inflict an act of hate or revenge upon the Sedition involves means of Speeches, proclamations, writings,
They were charged with sedition. Will the person or property of a public official, namely, disturbance of public There is no public emblems, etc.;
case prosper? Punzalan was then Mayor of Tiaong. Under Art. order resulting from uprising.
139 of the same Code this was sufficient to tumultuous uprising. 2. Uttering seditious words or speeches which
tend to disturb the public peace; and

3. Writing, publishing, or circulating scurrilous Q: The accused was heard to have shouted a
libels against the Government or any of the number of times: "The Filipinos, like myself, Rules Relative to Seditious Words CHAPTER 2: CRIMES AGAINST POPULAR
duly constituted authorities thereof, which must use bolos for cutting off Wood's head REPRESENTATION
tend to disturb the public peace. for having recommended a bad thing for the 1. Clear and Present Danger Rule – words
Filipinos, for he has killed our must be of such nature that by uttering them
Sec. 1: Crimes against Legislative Bodies
In inciting to sedition, the offender must not take independence." What crime did the accused there is a danger of public uprising and that
and Similar Bodies
part in any public or tumultuous uprising. commit? such danger should be both clear and
imminent
Elements of Inciting to Sedition: (D-I-M) A: The accused uttered seditious words, a ACTS TENDING TO PREVENT THE
violation of Art. 142 of the RPC. While criticism, 2. Dangerous Tendency Rule – if words used MEETING OF THE NATIONAL
1. Offender Does not take direct part in the no matter how severe, must be permitted, one tend to create a danger of public uprising, ASSEMBLY AND SIMILAR BODIES
crime of sedition; that has for its intent and effect is seditious must then those words could properly be subject ART. 143, RPC
not be tolerated. A statement is seditious when it of penal clause
2. He Incites others to the accomplishment of is tending to stir up the people against the lawful Elements of Art. 143, RPC (M-P)
any acts which constitute sedition; and authorities, one that will disturb the peace of the It is the dangerous tendency rule that is generally
community and the safety or order of the adopted in the Philippines with respect to 1. That there be a projected or actual Meeting of
3. The inciting is done by Means of speeches, Government, instigate others to cabal or meet sedition cases. It is enough that the words used the National Assembly (Congress of the
proclamations, writings, emblems, cartoons, together for unlawful purposes, or suggests and may tend to create danger of public uprising. Philippines) or any of its committees or
banners, or other representations tending to incites rebellious conspiracies. All its various subcommittees, constitutional committees
the same end. tendencies can be ascribed to the statement of the Instances of Inciting to Sedition or divisions thereof, or any of the provincial
accused. (People v. Perez, G.R. No. L-21049, 22 Dec. board or city or municipal council or board;
Uttering Seditious Words/Speeches and
1923) 1. Meeting for the purpose of discussing hatred and
Writing, Publishing, or Circulating Scurrilous
against the government; or
Libels
Q: After having his picture taken as one 2. Offender, who may be any person, Prevents
lifeless Alberto Reveniera, hanging by the end 2. Lambasting government officials to discredit such meeting by force or fraud.
They are punishable when they: (D-I-S-L)
of a rope tied to a limb of a tree, accused Oscar the government.
Espuelas sent a suicide note to several The crime is against popular representation
1. Tend to Disturb or obstruct any lawful officer
newspapers and weeklies, which contain: “If If the objective of the abovementioned acts is to because it is directed against officers whose
in executing the functions of his office;
someone asks to you why I committed suicide, overthrow the government, the crime would be public function is to enact laws. When these
tell them I did it because I was not pleased inciting to rebellion. legislative bodies are prevented from performing
2. Tend to Instigate others to cabal and meet
with the administration of Roxas; the their duties, the system is disturbed.
together for unlawful purposes;
government is infested with many Hitlers and Reasons why Seditious Utterances are
Mussolinis; teach our children to burn Prohibited NOTE: The chief of police and mayor who
3. Suggest or incite rebellious conspiracies or
pictures of Roxas.” What crime did the prevented the meeting of the municipal council
riots; and
accused commit? The legislature has the authority to forbid the are liable under Art. 143, when the defect of the
advocacy of a doctrine designed and intended to meeting is not manifest and requires an
4. Lead or tend to stir up the whole people
A: The letter is a scurrilous libel against the overthrow the Government without waiting until investigation before its existence can be
against the lawful authorities or to disturb
Government. Writings which tend to overthrow there is a present and immediate danger of the determined.
the peace of the community, the safety and or undermine the security of the government or success of the plan advocated. If the State was
order of the Government.
to weaken the confidence of the people in the compelled to wait until the apprehended danger DISTURBANCE OF PROCEEDINGS
government are against the public peace and are became certain, then its right to protect itself ART. 144, RPC
NOTE: “Scurrilous” means low, vulgar, mean, or criminal not only because they tend to incite a would come into being simultaneously with the
foul.
breach of the peace but because they are overthrow of the Government, when there would Elements of Disturbance of Proceedings
conducive to the destruction of the very be neither prosecuting officers nor courts for the (M-D-B)
NOTE: In order to be seditious, it is not necessary
government itself. Such are regarded as seditious enforcement of the law. (Gitlow v. New York, 268
that the words used should in fact result in a
libels. (Espuelas v. People, G.R. No. L-2990, 17 Dec. U.S. 652) 1. That there be a Meeting of the National
rising of the people against the constituted 1951)
authorities. The law is not aimed merely at actual Assembly (Congress of the Philippines) or
disturbance, as its purpose is also to punish any of its committees or subcommittees,
utterances which may endanger public order. constitutional commissions or committees or

divisions thereof, or of any provincial board a. Attending the meetings of the Assembly exempt the person present from criminal
or city or municipal council or board; and or of any of its committees or CHAPTER 3: ILLEGAL ASSEMBLIES liability.
subcommittees, constitutional AND ASSOCIATIONS
2. Offender does any of the following acts: commissions or committees or divisions If the presence of a person in the meeting is
a. Disturbs any of such meetings; or thereof; or merely out of curiosity, he is not liable because he
ILLEGAL ASSEMBLIES
b. Behaves, while in the presence of any b. From Expressing his opinions; or does not have an intent to commit the felony of
ART. 146, RPC
such bodies, in such a manner as to c. Casting his vote. illegal assembly.
interrupt its proceedings or to impair
the respect due it. NOTE: The offender in this case may be any Forms of Illegal Assemblies and their Criminal Liability of the Person Inciting
person. Elements
NOTE: The implied power to punish for contempt The person inciting is liable for the crime of
of the National Assembly is coercive in nature. 2. By Arresting or Searching any member 1. Any meeting attended by armed persons for inciting to rebellion or sedition.
The power to punish crime is punitive in thereof while the National Assembly is in the purpose of committing any of the crimes
character. Thus, the same act could be made the regular or special session, except in case such punishable under the Code. Gravamen of Illegal Assembly
basis for contempt proceedings and for criminal member has committed a crime punishable
prosecution. under the Code by a penalty higher than Elements: (M-A-P) The gravamen of illegal assembly is mere
prision mayor. a. There is a Meeting, a gathering or group assembly of or gathering of people for illegal
The disturbance can be in the form of utterances, of persons, whether in a fixed placed or purpose punishable by the RPC. Without a
speeches, or any form of expressing dissent NOTE: The offender in this case is a public moving; gathering, there is no illegal assembly.
which is done in such a manner as to interrupt its officer or employee. b. The meeting is attended by Armed
proceedings or to impair the respect due it. persons; and Persons Liable for Illegal Assembly
It is not necessary that the member is actually c. The Purpose of the meeting is to
Q: Suppose the meeting disturbed is one prevented from exercising any of his functions. It commit any of the crimes punishable 1. Organizers or leaders of the meeting; and
attended by municipal officials called by the is sufficient that Congress is in session and the under the Code. 2. Persons merely present at the meeting.
mayor, is the offender liable under Art. 144? offender, in using force and intimidation, threats,
or frauds, has the purpose to prevent a member 2. Any meeting in which the audience, whether Responsibility of Persons merely Present at
A: NO. Art. 144 presupposes that the meeting of the National Assembly from exercising any of armed or not, is incited to the commission of the Meeting
disturbed is that of a legislative body or of such prerogatives. (Reyes, 2012) the crime of treason, rebellion or
provincial, city, or municipal council or board. insurrection, sedition or direct assault. 1. If they are not armed, the penalty is arresto
Here, the offender may be liable of unjust NOTE: Parliamentary immunity does not protect mayor.
vexation under Art. 287. (People v. Calera, et al., members of the National Assembly from Elements: (M-I) 2. If they are armed, the penalty is prision
C.A. 45 O.G. 2576) responsibility before the legislative body itself. a. There is a Meeting, a gathering or group correccional.
of persons, whether in a fixed place or
The same act may be made the basis for contempt “Session” moving; and If the Gathering is for the Commission of a
since it is coercive in nature while the crime b. The audience, whether armed or not, is Crime Punishable under Special Laws
under this article is punitive. Refers to the entire period of time from its initial Incited to the commission of the crime
convening until its final adjournment. of treason, rebellion or insurrection, If the illegal purpose for the gathering is for the
sedition, or direct assault. commission of a crime punishable under special
Sec. 2: Violation of Parliamentary Immunity
Q: What is the criminal liability, if any, of a laws, illegal assembly is not committed. The
If the person present carries an unlicensed
police officer who, while Congress was in crime committed would be illegal association.
VIOLATION OF PARLIAMENTARY IMMUNITY firearm, the presumption, insofar as he is
session, arrested a member thereof for
ART. 145, RPC concerned, is that the purpose of the meeting is to
committing a crime punishable by a penalty ILLEGAL ASSOCIATIONS
commit acts punishable under this Code, and that
higher than prision mayor? (2012 BAR) ART. 147, RPC
Acts Punishable (F-A-S) he is the leader or organizer of the meeting.
A: The police officer incurs no criminal liability Illegal Associations

1. By using Force, intimidation, threats, or fraud Importance of Common Intent
because the member of Congress has committed
to prevent any member of the National
a crime punishable by a penalty higher than 1. Associations totally or partially organized for
Assembly (Congress of the Philippines) from: Persons merely present at the meeting should
prision mayor as such is the exception to the rule. the purpose of committing any of the crimes
(A-C-E) have a common intent to commit the felony of
illegal assembly. The absence of such intent may punishable under the Code; or

2. Associations totally or partially organized for CHAPTER 4: ASSAULT UPON, AND 4. The offender knows that the one he is If the attack was done while the person in
some purpose contrary to public morals. RESISTANCE AND DISOBEDIENCE TO assaulting is a person in authority or his authority or his agent is engaged in the actual
PERSONS IN AUTHORITY AND THEIR AGENTS agent in the exercise of his duties; and performance of official functions, the crime is
Public Morals always direct assault, whatever be the reason.
5. There is no public uprising.
DIRECT ASSAULTS
Refer to matters which affect the interest of Not in Actual Performance of Official Duties
ART. 148, RPC
society and public inconvenience and are not NOTE: The act of the accused in preventing by
limited to good customs. It refers to acts that are force the holding of a popular election in certain The following are considered as not in actual
in accordance with natural and positive laws. Ways of Committing the Crime of Direct precincts, without public uprising, is direct performance of official duties:
Assault assault.
Persons Liable for the crime of Illegal 1. When the person in authority or the agent of
Associations 1. Without public uprising, by employing force Q: As the town president failed to pay their a person in authority exceeds his powers or
or intimidation for the attainment of any of salaries, the defendant, accompanied by four acts without authority;
1. Founders, directors and president of the the purposes enumerated in defining the armed men, went to the house of the former 2. Unnecessary use of force or violence; and
association; and crimes of rebellion and sedition; and compelled him by force to leave and go to 3. Descended to matters which are private in
2. Mere members of the association. the Presidencia. He kept him there confined nature.
Elements: until the relatives of the town president had
Illegal Assembly vs. Illegal Association a. Offender employs force or intimidation; raised enough money to pay what was due “Qualified direct assault”
b. The aim of the offender is to attain any them as salaries. What crime did the accused
of the purposes of the crime of rebellion commit? Direct assault is qualified when:
ILLEGAL
ILLEGAL ASSEMBLY or any of the objects of the crime of
ASSOCIATION
sedition; and A: The facts constitute the crime of direct assault. 1. Assault is committed with a weapon;
As to Basis of Liability
c. There is no public uprising. There is no public uprising when the accused, 2. The offender is a public officer or employee;
The formation of or
organization of an accompanied by armed men, compelled by force or
The gathering for an 2. Without public uprising, by attacking, by
association to engage the town president to go with them to proceed to 3. Offender lays hands upon a person in
illegal purpose which employing force or by seriously intimidating
in an unlawful the municipal building and detained him there. authority.
constitutes a crime or by seriously resisting any person in
purpose which is not By reason of detaining the town president, he
under the RPC. authority or any of his agents, while engaged
limited to a violation inflicted upon a public officer an act of hate or No Liability under Art. 148 for Direct Assault
in the performance of official duties, or on the revenge. This is one of the objects of sedition,
of the RPC.
occasion of such performance. (2009, 2013, which is essentially what the accused intended to 1. If the public officer or officer in authority is a
As to Necessity of Actual Meeting
2015 BAR) attain. (U.S. v. Dirain, G.R. No. 1948, 05 May 1905) mere bystander;
Necessary that there Not necessary that
is an actual meeting there be an actual 2. If the accused did not know that the victim
Elements (1993, 1995, 2000, 2001, 2002 “On occasion of the performance of official was a person in authority; or
or assembly. meeting.
BAR) duties” 3. If the person assaulted was no longer a public
As to Acts Punished
1. Offender officer at the time of the attack even if the
Act of forming or
Meeting and the a. Makes an attack, It means that the assault was made because or by reason for the attack was due to past
organizing and
attendance at such b. Employs force, reason of the past performance of official duties performance of duties.
membership in the
meeting are the acts c. Makes a serious intimidation, or even if at the very time of the assault no official
association are the
punished. d. Makes a serious resistance; duty was being discharged. (Justo v. CA, G.R. No. L- Q: When the policemen effected the arrest of
acts punished.
8611, 28 June 1956) the accused, he approached them and hit one
2. Person assaulted is a person in of them in the breast with his hand or fist, at
authority or his agent; In this form, there is a need to determine the which instant the policeman seized him by the
reason why a person in authority or his agent was wrist and resistance ceased. Is the accused
3. That, at the time of the assault, the attacked. If the attack was made by reason of the guilty of direct assault?
person in authority or his agent past performance of official duties of the person
a. Is engaged in the performance of in authority or his agent, the accused is liable for A: NO. When the offended party is an agent of a
official duties, or direct assault. If the attack was made by reason of person in authority, any force or aggression is not
b. That he is assaulted on occasion of revenge, then the accused shall not be liable sufficient constitute to an assault. To come within
such performance; under this article, but for physical injuries. the purview of Art. 148, the force used against the

agent of a person in authority must be of serious Agents of persons in authority are persons who Crime of Direct Assault Can be Complexed performance of his duties.
character than that employed in this case. Logic by direct provision of law or by election or by With the Material Consequence of the
tells us that resistance is impossible without appointment by competent authority, are Unlawful Act In the case of People v. Hecto, the Supreme Court
force. (U.S. v. Tabiana, G.R. No. L-11847, 01 Feb. charged with maintenance of public order, the ruled that "as the barangay captain, it was his
1918) protection and security of life and property, such As a rule, where the spirit of the contempt or duty to enforce the laws and ordinances within
as barrio councilman, barrio policeman, barangay lawlessness is present, it is always complexed the barangay. If in the enforcement thereof, he
Q: When the news that his carabao, which leader and any person who comes to the aid of with the material consequences of the unlawful incurs, the enmity of his people who thereafter
earlier destroyed a planted area belonging to persons in authority. act. If the unlawful act was murder or homicide treacherously slew him, the crime committed is
another, was seized and taken to the police committed under circumstance of lawlessness or murder with assault upon a person in authority.”
station reached the accused, he confronted In applying the provisions of Arts. 148 and 151 of contempt of authority, the crime would be direct (People v. Dollantes, G.R. No. 70639, 30 June 1987)
and protested to the municipal president, the RPC, teachers, professors, and persons assault with murder or homicide, as the case may
who was then inspecting the quarantine of the charged with the supervision of public or duly be. INDIRECT ASSAULTS
animals. recognized private schools, colleges and ART. 149, RPC
universities, and lawyers in the actual However, when the material consequence is a
The president, upon hearing his protest, performance of their professional duties or on light felony, such as slight physical injuries, the Elements of Indirect Assault (A-A-U)
promised to intervene in the matter and to the occasion of such performance, shall be said offense is not complexed with direct assault
see whether the carabao could be withdrawn. deemed persons in authority. because the said injuries are considered as an 1. An Agent of a person in authority is the
Upon hearing this, the accused insulted the incident or a necessary consequence of the force victim of any of the forms of direct assault
president and gave him a slap on the face. Q: Lydia and Gemma, were public school or violence inherent in all kinds of assault. defined in Art. 148;
What crime did the accused commit? teachers. Lydia's son was a student of Gemma.
Lydia confronted Gemma after learning from Q: Because of the approaching town fiesta in 2. A person comes to the Aid of such authority;
A: The accused committed direct assault upon a her son that Gemma called him a "sissy" while San Miguel, Bulacan, a dance was held in and
person in authority. When the offended party is a in class. Lydia slapped Gemma in the cheek Barangay Carinias. A, the Barangay Captain, 3. That the offender makes Use of force or
person in authority, it is not necessary to and pushed her, thereby causing her to fall was invited to deliver a speech to start the intimidation upon such person coming to the
ascertain what force the law requires in order to and hit a wall divider. dance. While A was delivering his speech, B, aid of the authority or his agent.
constitute an assault since the law itself defines one of the guests, went to the middle of the
concretely this force in providing that it consists As a result of Lydia's violent assault, Gemma dance floor making obscene dance Victim in Indirect Assault
in mere laying of hands upon the person. suffered a contusion in her "maxillary area", movements, brandishing a knife, and
as shown by a medical certificate issued by a challenging everyone present to a fight. The victim in the crime of indirect assault is not
The degree of force employed by the offender doctor, and continued to experience the person in authority or his agent but the
against the person in authority is immaterial as abdominal pains. To what crime, if any, is A approached B and admonished him to keep person who comes to the aid of the agent of a
the law simply mentions the laying of hands Lydia liable? quiet and not to disturb the dance and peace person in authority.
sufficient. (U.S. v. Gumban, G.R. No. L-13658, 09 of the occasion. B, instead of heeding the
Nov. 1918) A: Lydia is liable for direct assault upon a person advice of A, stabbed the latter at his back NOTE: Art. 149 says “on occasion of the
in authority. On the day of the commission of the twice when A turned his back to proceed to commission of any of the crimes defined in the
NOTE: If the intent of the accused is to embarrass assault, Gemma was engaged in the performance the microphone to continue his speech. A fell next preceding article” (Art. 148, RPC).
the person in authority, the offense is Direct of her official duties, that is, she was busy with to the ground and died. At the time of the
Assault with Slander by Deed. paperwork while supervising and looking after incident A was not armed. What crime was Hence, indirect assault can be committed only
the needs of pupils who are taking their recess in committed? (2000 BAR) when direct assault is also committed.
Q: Who are deemed to be persons in authority the classroom to which she was assigned. Lydia
and agents of persons in authority? (1995, was already angry when she entered the A: The complex crime of direct assault with Commission of Indirect Assault
2000, 2002 BAR) classroom and accused Gemma of calling her son murder was committed. Since A was stabbed at
a "sissy". Gemma being a public school teacher, the back when he was not in a position to defend As Art. 149 now stands, the crime of indirect
A: Persons in authority are those directly vested belongs to the class of persons in authority himself nor retaliate, there was treachery in the assault can only be committed if a private person
with jurisdiction, whether as an individual or as a expressly mentioned in Art. 152 of the Revised stabbing. Hence, the death caused by such comes to the aid of the agent of a person in
member of some court or government Penal Code, as amended. (Gelig v. People, G.R. No. stabbing was murder. The Barangay Captain was authority, on the occasion of direct assault
corporation, board, or commission. Barrio 173150, 28 July 2010) in the act of trying to pacify B who was making against the latter.
captains and barangay chairmen are also deemed trouble in the dance hall when he was stabbed to
persons in authority. death. He was therefore killed while in the NOTE: When any person comes to the aid of a

person in authority, he is constituted as an agent 3. Refusing to answer any legal inquiry or to Elements of Resistance and Serious file proper complaints.
of the person in authority. (Art. 152(2), as produce any books, papers, documents, or Disobedience (1990, 2001 BAR) (E-R-I)
amended by B.P. 873) records in his possession, when required by However, the intoxicated Mallari, one of the
them to do so in the exercise of their 1. A person in authority or his agent is Engaged women, shouted at them, "Wala kayo
If such person was the one attacked, by functions; in the performance of official duty or gives a pakialam sa akin, hindi ako sasama sa inyo."
employing violence against him of serious nature lawful order to the offender; She then grabbed PO2 Navarro by the collar,
or character, the crime would be direct assault. 4. Restraining another from attending as a slapped his cheek, and kicked his legs several
witness in such legislative or constitutional 2. The offender Resists or seriously disobeys times. The incident was entered in the blotter
CRIMES body; or such person in authority or his agent; and and Mallari was detained for direct assault.
VICTIM #1 VICTIM #2
COMMITTED PO2 Navarro was treated at the James Gordon
A person in 5. Inducing disobedience to a summons or 3. That the act of the offender is not Included in Memorial Hospital for the minor injuries he
authority is A person refusal to be sworn by any such body or the provisions of Arts. 148, 149, and 150. got from Mallari. Dr. Ortiz issued him a
a victim of who comes Direct Assault official. medical certificate stating that he had
one of the to the aid of is committed The word seriously is not used to describe sustained swelling on the zygomatic area, or
forms of a person in against both Any of the acts enumerated may also constitute resistance, because if the offender seriously the cheekbone. Is Mallari liable for direct
direct authority contempt of Congress and could be punished as resisted a person in authority or his agent, the assault upon an agent of a person in
assault such independent of the criminal prosecution. crime is direct assault. (Reyes, 2012) authority?
Direct Assault –
insofar as the NOTE: This article does not apply when the If NO Force is Employed A: NO. Mallari is liable for resistance and
Agent of a agent of a papers or documents may be used in evidence disobedience to an agent of a person in authority
person in A person person in against the owner thereof because it would be If no force is employed by the offender in resisting under Art. 151 of the RPC, not for direct assault.
authority is who comes authority is equivalent to compelling him to be witness or disobeying a person in authority, the crime As clarified in People v. Breis, if the use of physical
a victim of to the aid of concerned against himself. (Uy Kheytin v. Villareal, G.R. No. committed is resistance or serious disobedience force against agents of persons in authority is not
one of the the agent of 16009, 21 Sept. 1920) under the first paragraph of Art. 151. serious, the offense is not direct assault, but
forms of a person in Indirect Assault resistance or disobedience. For this crime to be
direct authority – insofar as the The law only penalizes refusal without legal Elements of Simple Disobedience (E-D-N) proven, the two (2) key elements must be shown:
assault person who excuse. " (1) That a person in authority or his agent is
came to the aid 1. An agent of a person in authority is Engaged engaged in the performance of official duty or
of the agent Persons Liable under Art. 150 in the performance of official duty or gives a gives a lawful order to the offender; and (2) That
lawful order to the offender; the offender resists or seriously disobeys such
DISOBEDIENCE TO SUMMONS ISSUED 1. Any person who commits any of the above person or his agent."
BY THE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY OR acts; or 2. The offender Disobeys such agent of a person
CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSIONS in authority; and In this case, it was established that petitioner
ART. 150, RPC 2. Any person who: grabbed the shirt of PO2 Navarro, then slapped
a. Restrains another from attending as a 3. Such disobedience is Not of a serious nature. and kicked him several times. Based on the
witness; circumstances, petitioner's resistance and use of
Acts Punished
b. Induces him to disobey a summons; and NOTE: When the attack or employment of force is force are not so serious to be deemed as direct
c. Induces him to refuse to be sworn to not deliberate, the crime is only resistance or assault. While she exerted force, it is not
1. Refusing, without legal excuse, to obey
such body. disobedience dangerous, grave, or severe enough to warrant
summons of the National Assembly, its
the penalties attached to the crime. (Mallari v.
special or standing committees and
RESISTANCE AND DISOBEDIENCE TO A Q: At around 6:45 AM., the Olongapo Police People, G.R. No. 224679, 12 Feb. 2020)
subcommittees, the Constitutional
PERSON IN AUTHORITY OR HIS AGENTS Station 3 received a report of an altercation
commissions and its committees,
ART. 151, RPC on the ground floor of GenX Billiard Hall on Q: After an unfavorable decision against the
subcommittees or divisions, or by any
Gordon Avenue. At this, PO2 Navarro and defendant in an action filed against him by
commission or committee chairman or
Two (2) Acts under Art. 151, RPC SPO3 Merza, who were both in uniform, went one Sabino Vayson in an action for recovery of
member authorized to summon witnesses;
to the scene. There, they found two (2) groups land, the deputy sheriff Cosmo Nonoy, by
1. Resistance and Serious Disobedience; of women fighting and pulling each other’s virtue of a writ, demanded from the defendant
2. Refusing to be sworn or placed under
2. Simple Disobedience hair out. After stopping the fight, the officers the delivery the possession of the said land to
affirmation while being before such
asked the women to go to the police station to Vayson which the former refuse to do so. By
legislative or constitutional body or official;

reason thereof, the provincial fiscal filed the bandits, he was entirely justified in calling his Resistance or Serious Disobedience vs. Direct PERSONS IN AUTHORITY AND AGENTS OF
Information against the defendant for gross neighbors and making an attempt to expel them Assault PERSON IN AUTHORITY
disobedience to authorities. from his premises. (U.S. v. Bautista, G.R. No. L- ART. 152, RPC
10678, 17 Aug. 1915) RESISTANCE/
Defendant filed a demurrer on the ground SERIOUS DIRECT ASSAULT Person in Authority
that the facts do not constitute a crime, which Q: Sydeco, the cook, and waitress in his DISOBEDIENCE ART. 148, RPC
the court sustained. Is the court correct in restaurant were on the way home when they ART.151, RPC Those directly vested with jurisdiction, whether
doing so? were signaled to stop by police officers who As to Offended Party as an individual or as a member of some court or
asked him to open the vehicle’s door and Person in authority or government corporation, board, or commission.
A: YES, as the defendant did not disobey any alight for a body and vehicle search. Person in authority or his agent must be (2000 BAR)
order of the justice of peace. The disobedience his agent must be in engaged in the
contemplated in Art. 151 consists in the failure or When Sydeco instead opened the vehicle the actual performance of Barrio captains and barangay chairmen are also
refusal of the offender to obey a direct order from window and insisted on a plain view search, performance of his official duties or that deemed persons in authority. (1995 BAR)
the authority or his agent. one of the policemen, obviously irked by this duties. he is assaulted by
remark told him that he was drunk, pointing reason thereof. The following are persons in authority:
Here, the order issued is a writ of execution, one to three empty beer bottles in the trunk of the As to its Commission 1. Mayors;
that is addressed properly to a competent sheriff vehicle. The officers then pulled Sydeco out of Committed by any of 2. Division superintendent of schools;
and not to the defendant. Absolutely no order the vehicle and brought him to the Ospital ng the following: 3. Public and private school teachers;
whatsoever is made to the latter; the writ or Maynila where they succeeded in securing a 4. Provincial Fiscal;
order in question in no wise refers to him. Hence, medical certificate under the signature of one Committed only by 1. Attacking; 5. Judges;
he could not commit the crime he was charged. Dr. Harvey Balucating depicting Sydeco as resisting or seriously 2. Employing force; 6. Lawyers in actual performance of duties;
(U.S. v. Ramayrat, G.R. No. L-6874, 08 Mar. 1912) positive of alcoholic breath, although no disobeying a person 3. Seriously 7. Sangguniang Bayan member;
alcohol breath examination was conducted. in authority or his intimidating; or 8. Barangay Chairman; and
Q: Defendant appealed from the decision of agent. 4. Seriously resisting 9. Members of the Lupong Tagapamayapa.
the lower court finding him guilty of assault Sydeco was detained and released only in the a person in
upon agents of authority when he resisted the afternoon of the following day when he was authority or his NOTE: Items 7, 8, and 9 of the enumeration were
arrest effected by them. The record shows allowed to undergo actual medical agent. added by the LGC which expressly provides that
that the policeman entered the house of the examination where the resulting medical As to Force Used said persons “shall be deemed as person(s) in
defendant without permission and attempted certificate indicated that he has sustained The use of force is not The attack or authority in their jurisdictions.” (Sec. 388, LGC)
to arrest the defendant without explaining to physical injuries but negative for alcohol so serious, as there is employment of force
him the cause or nature of his presence there. breath. Is Sydeco criminally liable under Art. no manifest intention which gives rise to the Agent of a Person in Authority
151 of the RPC? to defy the law and crime of direct assault
Resisting the arrest, he called to his neighbors the officers enforcing must be serious and Any person who by direct provision of law or by
for help, “there are some bandits here and A: NO. Sydeco’s twin gestures cannot plausibly be it. deliberate. election or by appointment by competent
they are abusing me." Based on the foregoing, considered as resisting a lawful order. There can authority is charged with the:
is the defendant guilty of the crime of assault be no quibble that the police officer and his NOTE: If the person who was resisted is a person
upon agents of authority? apprehending team are persons in authority or in authority and the offender used force in such 1. Maintenance of public order; and
agents of a person in authority manning a legal resistance, the crime committed is direct assault. 2. Protection and security of life and property.
A: NO. As the defendant’s resistance is checkpoint. The use of any kind or degree of force will give
attributable to his belief that the policemen were rise to direct assault. However, if the offender did NOTE: Agents of persons in authority includes:
actually bandits. In order to come within the But surely petitioner’s act of exercising one’s not use any force in resisting a person in
purview of the law, the offender must have right against unreasonable searches to be authority, the crime committed is resistance or 1. Barangay Kagawad;
knowledge that the person he is assaulting is an conducted in the middle of the night cannot, in serious disobedience. 2. Barangay Tanod;
agent of or a person in authority. context, be equated to disobedience let alone 3. Barangay Councilman; and
resisting a lawful order in contemplation of Art. 4. Any person who comes to the aid of persons
What the law contemplates is the punishment of 151 of the RPC. (Sydeco v. People, G.R. No. 202692, in authority.
persons for resistance of the authorities who 12 Nov. 2014)
knew to be one. If the defendant believed that
those who had entered his house were, in fact,

CHAPTER 5: PUBLIC DISORDERS Q: When is the disturbance of public order physical injuries. Counsel for defendant 4. Printing, publishing or distributing books,
deemed to be tumultuous? (2012 BAR) moved to quash the second Information pamphlets, periodicals, or leaflets which do
invoking double jeopardy, which the trial not bear the real printer’s name, or which are
TUMULTS AND OTHER DISTURBANCES
A: The disturbance shall be deemed tumultuous court granted. Did the trial court err? classified as anonymous.
OF PUBLIC DISORDER
if caused by more than three persons who are
ART. 153, RPC
armed or provided with means of violence. A: YES. There can be separate crimes of physical NOTE: R.A. No. 248 prohibits the reprinting,
injuries thru reckless imprudence and reproduction, republication of government
Acts Punishable Outcry tumultuous disturbance caused by the single act publications and official documents without
of firing a submachine gun. The protection previous authority.
1. Causing any serious disturbance in a public Means to shout subversive or provocative words against double jeopardy is only for the same
place, office, or establishment; tending to stir up the people to obtain by means offense. Damage to the State NOT necessary
of force or violence any of the objects of rebellion
2. Interrupting or disturbing performances, or sedition. The outcry must be spontaneous; While both Informations have one common It is not necessary that the publication of the false
functions or gatherings, or peaceful otherwise, it would be the same as inciting to element, e.g., defendant having fired a news actually caused public disorder or caused
meetings, if the act is not included in Arts. rebellion or sedition. (Reyes, 2012) submachine gun, the two Informations do not damage to the interest or credit of the State, mere
131 and 132; pertain to the same offense: one charged him possibility to cause danger or damage is
Making Any Outcry Tending to Incite Sedition with physical injuries inflicted thru reckless sufficient.
NOTE: The crime is qualified if disturbance or Rebellion vs. Inciting to Rebellion or imprudence punished under Art. 263 of the RPC,
or interruption is of a tumultuous character. Sedition and the second accuses him of having NOTE: The offender must know that the news is
deliberately fired the machine gun to cause a false, otherwise he will not be held liable.
3. Making any outcry tending to incite rebellion MAKING ANY disturbance in the festivity or gathering, thereby
or sedition in any meeting, association or producing panic among the people present
OUTCRY TENDING INCITING TO ALARMS AND SCANDALS
public place; therein, referring to Art. 153. Conviction for the
TO INCITE SEDITION OR ART. 155, RPC
SEDITION OR REBELLION first does not bar trial for the second. (People v.
4. Displaying placards or emblems which Bacolod, G.R. No. L-2578, 31 July 1951)
REBELLION Punishable Acts (D-I-D-I)
provoke a disturbance of public disorder in
The meeting at the
such place;
outset was legal and The meeting from the UNLAWFUL USE OF MEANS OF PUBLICATION 1. Discharging any firearm, rocket, firecracker,
became a public beginning was AND UNLAWFUL UTTERANCES or other explosive within any town or public
5. Burying with pomp the body of a person who
disorder only because unlawful. ART. 154, RPC place, calculated to cause alarm or danger;
has been legally executed.
of such outcry.
The words uttered Punishable Acts NOTE: The discharge may be in one’s home
NOTE: This contemplates an ostentatious The outbursts which
are deliberately since the law does not distinguish as to
display of a burial as if the person legally by nature may tend to
calculated with 1. Publishing or causing to be published, by where in town. The discharge of firearms and
executed is a hero. incite rebellion or
malice, aforethought means of printing, lithography or any other rockets during town fiestas and festivals are
sedition are
to incite others to means of publication, as news any false news not covered by the law when the same is not
Essence of Tumultuous and Other spontaneous.
rebellion or sedition. which may endanger the public order, or intended to cause alarm or danger.
Disturbances
cause damage to the interest or credit of the
Q: Ladislao Bacolod fired a submachine gun State; 2. Instigating or taking an active part in any
The essence of this crime is creating public
during the town fiesta which wounded one charivari or other disorderly meeting
disorder. This crime is brought about by creating
Consorcia Pasinio. The Information was filed 2. Encouraging disobedience to the law or to offensive to another or prejudicial to public
serious disturbances in public places, public
charging him of the crime of serious physical the constituted authorities or by praising, tranquility;
buildings, and even in private places where
injuries thru reckless imprudence with the justifying or extolling any act punished by
public functions or performances are being held.
CFI of Cebu to which the defendant pleaded law, by the same means or by words, NOTE: The term “charivari” includes a
guilty. utterances or speeches; medley of discordant voices, a mockery of
NOTE: If the act of disturbing or interrupting a
serenade of discordant noises made on
meeting or religious ceremony is not committed
On the same date, he was arraigned in another 3. Maliciously publishing or causing to be kettles, tins, horns, etc., designed to annoy
by public officers, or if committed by public
case for having caused a public disturbance published any official resolution or and insult; (Reyes, 2008)
officers who are NOT participants therein, Art.
upon the same facts which constitute the document without proper authority, or
153 should be applied.
same basis of the indictment for serious before they have been published officially; or

3. Disturbing the public peace while wandering Charivari DELIVERING PRISONERS FROM JAIL another prisoner.
about at night or while engaged in any other ART. 156, RPC
nocturnal amusements; and It includes a medley of discordant voices, a mock NOTE: If the offender is a person who has custody
serenade of discordant noises made on kettles, Elements of Delivering Prisoners from Jail over the person of the prisoner, the crimes that
4. Causing any disturbance or scandal in public tins, horns, etc. designed to annoy and insult. (J-R) may be committed are:
places while Intoxicated or otherwise,
provided Art. 153 is not applicable. NOTE: The reason for punishing instigating or 1. There is a person confined in a Jail or penal 1. Conniving with or consenting to evasion
taking active part on charivari is to prevent more establishment; and (Art. 223, RPC) – if the public officer consents
NOTE: If the disturbance is of a serious nature, serious disorders. 2. That the offender Removes therefrom such to evasion.
the case will fall under Art. 153. (Reyes, 2012) person, or helps the escape of such person.
Q: Defendant was indicted before the CFI of (2014, 2015 BAR) 2. Evasion through negligence (Art. 224, RPC)
Essence Iloilo for discharging a firearm at one Sixto – if the evasion of prisoner shall have taken
Demaisip. He then moved to dismiss the NOTE: Art. 156 applies even if the prisoner is in a place through negligence of the officer.
The essence of the crime is disturbance of public Information as he claims the filing of hospital or an asylum as it is considered an
tranquility and public peace. Information for discharging of firearm has Means Employed by the Offender
extension of the penal institution. (Reyes, 2008)
placed him in peril of double jeopardy as he
Crimes that May Possibly Arise if a Firearm is had previously been charged with the offense The offender may use violence, intimidation, or
Commission of the Crime (2004, 2009 BAR)
Discharged of alarm and scandal in a complaint filed in bribery, in which case the penalty shall be higher.
the municipal court of Batad, Iloilo, upon the He may also use other means to remove the
Delivering prisoners from jail may be committed
1. Alarms and scandals, if the offender same facts which constitute the basis of the prisoner from jail or help in the escape of such
in two ways:
discharges a firearm in a public place but the indictment for discharge of firearm. Is the prisoner.
firearm is not pointed to a particular person defendant correct? 1. By removing a person confined in any jail
when discharged; Qualifying Circumstance of Bribery
or penal establishment – to take away a
A: NO. For double jeopardy to attach there must person from the place of his confinement,
2. Illegal discharge of firearm if the firearm was be “identity of offenses”. It is evident that the It refers to the offender’s act of employing bribery
with or without the active cooperation of the
directed to a particular person who was not offense of discharge of firearm is not the crime of as a means of removing or delivering the prisoner
person released.
hit if intent to kill is not proved; alarm and scandal. Neither may it be asserted from jail, and not the offender’s act of receiving or
3. Attempted homicide or murder if the person that every crime of discharge of firearm produces agreeing to receive a bribe as a consideration for
2. By helping such a person to escape – to
was hit and there is intent to kill; the offense of alarm and scandal. Although the committing the offense.
furnish that person with the material means
indictment for alarm and scandal filed under Art. such as a file, ladder, rope, etc. which greatly
4. Physical injuries if the person was hit and 155 (1) of the RPC and the information for Mitigating Circumstance
facilitate his escape. (Alberto v. Dela Cruz, G.R.
injured but there was no intent to kill; or discharge of firearm instituted under Art. 258 of No. L-31839, 30 June 1980)
the same Code are closely related in fact, they are If the escape of the prisoner shall take place
5. Grave coercion if the threat was directed, definitely diverse in law. outside of said establishments by taking the
Person Confined Need Not be a Prisoner by
immediate and serious and the person is guards by surprise, the same penalties shall be
Final Judgment
compelled or prevented to do something Firstly, the two indictments do not describe the imposed in their minimum period. (Art. 156(2),
against his will. same felony - alarm and scandal is an offense RPC)
It is not necessary that the person confined be a
against public order while discharge of firearm is prisoner by final judgment. He may also be a mere
Possible Offenses Committed by Creating a crime against persons. Secondly, the Q: A, a detention prisoner, was taken to a
detention prisoner.
Noise and Annoyance indispensable element of the former crime is the hospital for emergency medical treatment.
discharge of a firearm calculated to cause alarm His followers, all of whom were armed, went
Persons Liable
1. Alarms and scandals if the disturbance or danger to the public, while the gravamen of the to the hospital to take him away or help him
affects the public in general (e.g., by playing latter is the discharge of a firearm against or at a escape. The prison guards, seeing that they
1. Usually, an outsider to the jail.
noisily during the wee hours in the morning certain person, without intent to kill. (People v. were outnumbered, and that resistance
in the neighborhood); (2013 BAR) or Doriquez, G.R. Nos. L-24444-45, 29 July 1968) would endanger the lives of other patients,
2. It may also be:
deckled to allow the prisoner to be taken by
a. An employee of the penal establishment
2. Unjust vexation if the noise is directed to a his followers. What crime, if any, was
who does not have the custody of the
particular person or a family. committed by A's followers? Why? (2002
prisoner; or
BAR)
b. A prisoner who helps the escape of

A: They are liable for delivering prisoner from jail CHAPTER 6: EVASION OF SERVICE imprisonment and not when the sentence "escaping during the term of his imprisonment by
under Art. 156 of the RPC. The crime is not only OF SENTENCE imposed upon was destierro, as in his case. Is reason of final judgment." Indeed, evasion of
committed by removing the prisoner from an the defendant correct? sentence is but another expression of the term
establishment that the prisoner is confined in but "jail breaking.” (Tanega v. Masakayan, G.R. No. L-
EVASION BY ESCAPING DURING
also by helping said person to escape “by other A: NO. Art. 157 must be understood to include not 27191 28 Feb. 1967)
TERM OF SENTENCE
means,” such as by allowing the prisoner to be only deprivation of liberty by imprisonment but
ART. 157, RPC
taken by those unauthorized to do so, such as in also by sentence of destierro. Qualifying Circumstances (U-B-U-C)
the case at bar.
Elements of Evasion of Service of Sentence In the case of People v. Samonte, the Supreme If such evasion takes place by:
Liability of the Prisoner or Detainee who (Co-S-E) Court held that "a person under sentence of
Escaped destierro is suffering deprivation of his liberty.” 1. Means of Unlawful entry (must be read as
1. Offender is a Convict by final judgment; And a person sentenced to suffer such penalty “scaling/ climbing walls”);
1. If a detention prisoner, he does NOT incur 2. He is Serving his sentence which consists in evades his service of sentence when he enters the 2. Breaking doors, windows, gates, walls, roofs
liability from escaping; or deprivation of liberty; and prohibited area specified in the judgment of or floors;
3. He Evades the service of his sentence by conviction. (People v. Abilong, G.R. No. L-1960, 26 3. Using picklocks, false keys, disguise, deceit,
2. If a convict by final judgment, he will be liable escaping during the term of his sentence. Nov. 1948) violence or intimidation; or
for evasion of service of his sentence. (2009 BAR) 4. Conniving with other convicts or employees
“Escape” for purposes of applying Art. 157 of the penal institution.
Delivering the Prisoners in Jail vs. Infidelity in “Final judgment”
the Custody of Prisoners "Escape" in legal parlance and for purposes of Art. Q: Manny killed his wife under exceptional
The term “final judgment” employed in the RPC 157 of the RPC means unlawful departure of circumstances and was sentenced by the RTC
means judgment beyond recall. As long as a prisoner from the limits of his custody. Clearly, of Dagupan City to suffer the penalty of
DELIVERING INFIDELITY IN THE
judgment has not become executory, it cannot be one who has not been committed and never destierro during which he was not to enter the
PRISIONERS CUSTODY OF
truthfully said that defendant is definitely guilty brought to prison cannot be said to have escaped city. While serving sentence, Manny went to
FROM JAIL PRISONERS
of the felony charged against him. (People v. therefrom. (Del Castillo v. Torrecampo, G.R. No. Dagupan City to visit his mother. Later, he was
The offender is not the The offender is the Bayotas, G.R. No. 102007, 02 Sept. 1994)
custodian of the custodian at the time 139033, 18 Dec. 2002) arrested in Manila.
prisoner at the time of of the escape/ Under Sec. 7 of Rule 16 of the Rules of Court, a
the escape/removal. removal. Q: Adelaida Tanega failed to appear on the day a. Did Manny commit any crime?
judgment in a criminal case becomes final after of the execution of her sentence. On the same b. Where should Manny be prosecuted?
the lapse of the period for perfecting an appeal or day, the judge issued a warrant for her arrest. (1998 BAR)
In both, the offender may be a public officer or a when the sentence has been partially or totally She was never arrested. More than a year
private citizen. The person involved may be a satisfied or served, or the defendant has later, Tanega through counsel moved to quash A:
convict or a mere detention prisoner. expressly waived in writing his right to appeal. the warrant of arrest, on the ground that the a. YES. Manny committed the crime of evasion
(Reyes, 2008) penalty had prescribed. Tanega claimed that of service of sentence when he went to
NOTE: If the offender is a public officer who had
she was convicted for a light offense and since Dagupan City, which he was prohibited from
the prisoner in his custody or charge, he is liable Liability if the One who Escaped is Only a light offenses prescribe in one year, her entering under his sentence of destierro. A
for infidelity in the custody of a prisoner. (Art. Detention Prisoner penalty had already prescribed. Is the motion sentence imposing the penalty of destierro is
223, RPC)
meritorious? evaded when the convict enters any of the
He does not incur liability from escaping. place/places he is prohibited from entering
Applicability of P.D. No. 1829 (Obstruction of However, if such prisoner knows of the plot to A: NO. The penalty has not prescribed as she did under the sentence or come within the
Justice) remove him from jail and cooperates therein by not evade her service of sentence. Under Art. 93 prohibited radius. Although destierro does
escaping, he himself becomes liable for delivering of the RPC, the prescription of penalties “shall not involve imprisonment, it is nonetheless a
P.D. 1829 is absorbed in the crime of delivery of prisoners from jail as a principal by indispensable commence to run from the date when the culprit deprivation of liberty. (People v. Abilong, G.R.
prisoners from jail or infidelity in the custody of cooperation. should evade the service of his sentence.” To No. L-1960, 26 Nov. 1948)
prisoners.
come within the application of Art. 157, the
Q: On appeal, defendant-appellant questions culprit must evade one’s service of sentence by b. Manny may be prosecuted in Manila or
the judgment rendered by the CFI of Manila escaping during the term of his sentence. This Dagupan City. In the case of Parulan v.
finding him guilty of evasion of service of must be so for by the express terms of the statute, Director of Prisons (G.R. No. L-28519, 17 Feb.
sentence under Art. 157. Defendant maintains a convict evades "service of his sentence" by 1968), the Court held that the crime of
that Art. 157 applies only in cases of

evasion of sentence under Art. 157 of the RPC has not taken part in the mutiny. If one partakes who is regarded as having violated the provisions Q: While serving his sentence for the crime of
is a continuing crime. Hence, the accused may in mutiny, he will be liable for the offenses which thereof must be charged, prosecuted, and abduction after being found guilty thereof by
be prosecuted by the court of either province he committed during the mutiny whether or not convicted by final judgment before he can be the CFI of Cavite, defendant-appellant was
where any of the essential ingredients of the he returns. (People v. Padilla, G. R. No. 121917, 12 made to suffer the penalty prescribed in Art. 159. pardoned on Feb. 1923. Subsequently, he was
crime took place. Mar. 1997) (Torres v. Gonzales, G.R. No. 76872, 23 July 1987) tried for the crime of attempted robbery in
band with physical injuries and also charged
EVASION ON THE OCCASION OF DISORDERS NOTE: The penalty of commission of this felony Granting of Pardon Before a Judgment with a violation of the condition of his pardon
ART. 158, RPC is an increase by one-fifth (1/5) of the time becomes Final with the CFI of Rizal.
remaining to be served under the original
Elements of Evasion on the Occasion of sentence, in no case to exceed 6 months. As mandated by Sec. 19, Art. VII of the 1987 On appeal, defendant claims that it is the CFI
Disorders (C-D-E-F) Constitution, no pardon may be extended before of Cavite that has jurisdiction over the case. Is
The special allowance for loyalty (e.g., deduction a judgment of conviction becomes final. A the defendant correct?
1. Offender is a Convict by final judgment who of sentence) authorized by Art. 98 and 158(2) judgment of conviction becomes final: (a) when
is confined in a penal institution; refers to those convicts, who having evaded the no appeal is seasonably perfected, (b) when the A: NO. It is the court wherein the crime
service of their sentences by leaving the penal accused commences to serve the sentence, (c) committed, subsequent to the pardon, which has
2. There is Disorder, which results from: institution, give themselves up within forty-eight when the right to appeal is expressly waived in jurisdiction to determine whether the defendant
a. Conflagration (48) hours following the issuance of the writing, except where the death penalty was has violated the conditions of the pardon.
b. Earthquake proclamation by the President announcing the imposed by the trial court, and (d) when the
c. Explosion passing away of the calamity or catastrophe. They accused applies for probation, thereby waiving The proceeding under Art. 159 of the RPC is not a
d. Other similar catastrophe, or will be entitled to a deduction of one-fifth (1/5) of his right to appeal. Where the judgment of continuation or a part of the proceeding of the
e. Mutiny in which he has not their respective sentences. conviction is still pending appeal and has not yet crime previous to the grant of pardon. It is a new
participated; therefore attained finality, executive clemency proceeding, complete in itself, and independent
A deduction of two-fifths (2/5) of the period of his may not yet be granted by the President. (People of the latter. It refers to other subsequent facts
3. Offender Evades the service of his sentence sentence shall be granted in case said prisoner v. Salle, Jr. G.R. No. 103567, 04 Dec. 1995) which the law punishes as a distinct crime the
by leaving the penal institution where he is chose to stay in the place of his confinement penalty for which is not necessarily that remitted
confined on the occasion of such disorder or notwithstanding the existence of a calamity or Basis of the Power of the President to Grant by the pardon. (People v. Martin, G.R. No. L-46432,
during the mutiny; and catastrophe enumerated under Art. 158. (Art. 98 Pardon 17 May 1939)
as amended by R.A. No. 10592).
4. Offender Fails to give himself up to the The pardoning power of the President is NOTE: The condition imposed upon the prisoner
authorities within forty-eight (48) hours EVASION BY VIOLATION OF provided for in Art. VII as follows: “Except in that he should not commit another crime extends
following the issuance of a proclamation by CONDITIONAL PARDON cases of impeachment, or as otherwise provided to offenses punished by special laws like illegal
the Chief Executive announcing the passing ART. 159, RPC in this Constitution, the President may grant voting under the Election Law. (Reyes, 2008)
away of such calamity. reprieves, commutations, and pardons, and remit
Elements of Evasion by Violation of fines and forfeitures, after conviction by final Q: After serving two (2) years, five (5) months
Basis of Liability Conditional Pardon (Co-Gra-Vi) judgment.” (Sec. 19, Art. VII, 1987 Constitution) and twenty-two (22) days of the total duration
of his sentence of prision mayor, a conditional
Liability is based on the failure to return within 1. Offender was a Convict; As provided further in Sec. 64(i) of the Revised pardon was granted to the appellant
48 hours after the passing of the calamity, 2. That he was Granted a conditional pardon by Administrative Code, the President has the power remitting three (3) years, seven (7) months,
conflagration or mutiny had been announced and the Chief Executive; and “to grant to convicted persons reprieves or and eight (8) days. Subsequently, appellant
not the act of leaving from the penal 3. He Violated any of the conditions of such pardons, either plenary or partial, conditional, or was found guilty of the crime of estafa. By
establishment. pardon. unconditional; to suspend sentences without reason thereof, he was prosecuted under Art.
pardon, remit fines, and order the discharge of 159 to which he pled guilty. The court then
“Mutiny” as Referred under this Article A convict granted conditional pardon who is any convicted person upon parole, subject to such ordered his recommitment for the term
recommitted must be convicted by final judgment conditions as he may impose; and to authorize remitted by the pardon. The accused
The mutiny referred here involves subordinate of a court of the subsequent crime or crimes with the arrest and reincarceration of any such person appealed from this judgment. Is the appeal
personnel rising against the supervisor within which he was charged before the criminal penalty who, in his judgment, shall fail to comply with the meritorious?
the penal establishment. It is one of the causes for such subsequent offense(s) can be imposed condition, or conditions of his pardon, parole, or
which may authorize a convict serving sentence upon him. Since Art. 159 of the RPC defines a suspension of sentence.” A: YES. By express provision of Art. 159 of the
in the penitentiary to leave the jail provided he distinct, substantive felony, the parolee or convict RPC, the prescribed penalty is prision

correccional in its minimum period. The second G.R. No. 173473, 17 Dec. 2008) he stabbed Rannie which resulted in the Peralta, et. al., G.R. No. L-15959, 11 Oct. 1961). It is
part of said Article, which provides that the latter’s death, he had been convicted by final only the subsequent crime committed which is
convict shall suffer the unexpired portion of his Elements (1991 BAR) judgment and had been serving sentence at required to be a felony under the RPC.
original sentence should the penalty or term the National Penitentiary.
remitted be higher than six (6) years, is clearly 1. That the offender was already convicted by Q: Defendant-appellant, while serving
inapplicable in this case as the term remitted by final judgment of one offense; and In quasi-recidivism, the first and second sentence for the crime of homicide, killed one
the pardon is three (3) years, seven (7) months, 2. That he committed a new felony before offenses need not be embraced in the same Sabas Aseo, for which the CFI of Manila found
and eight (8) days. (People v. Sanares, G.R. No. L- beginning to serve such sentence or while title of the RPC. A recidivist, on the other him guilty with the crime of murder, meting
43499, 11 Jan. 1936) serving the same. hand, requires that the crimes committed him the penalty of death.
must be embraced in the same title of the
Conditional Pardon vs. Evasion of Service of Q: Robbie and Rannie are both inmates of the RPC. On appeal to the Supreme Court, appellant
Sentence National Penitentiary, serving the maximum contends that the CFI erred in applying Art.
penalty for robbery which they committed Because the killing of Rannie and the 160 of the RPC as it is applicable only when
VIOLATION OF EVASION OF some years before and for which they have robbery, in which Robbie was previously the new crime which is committed by a person
CONDITIONAL SERVICE OF been sentenced by final judgment. One day, convicted by final judgment, were not under already serving sentence is different from the
PARDON SENTENCE Robbie tried to collect money owed by Rannie. the same title, Robbie cannot be considered crime for which he is serving sentence. Is the
It is not a public offense Rannie insisted that he did not owe Robbie a recidivist. defendant correct?
for it does not cause It is a public offense anything, and after a shouting episode,
harm or injury to the separate and Rannie kicked Robbie in the stomach. Robbie b. NO. If proven, the presence of the mitigating A: NO. The new offense need not be different or
right of another person independent from fell to the ground in pain, and Rannie left him circumstances of lack of sufficient be of different character from that of the former
nor does it disturb any other act. to go to the toilet to relieve himself. provocation and voluntary surrender would offense. There is not the slightest intimation in
public order. be of no consequence as quasi-recidivism, a the text of Art. 160 that said article applies only in
As Rannie was opening the door to the toilet special aggravating circumstance, cannot be cases where the new offense is different in
and with his back turned against Robbie, offset by any ordinary mitigating character from the former offense for which the
CHAPTER 7: COMMISSION OF ANOTHER
Robbie stabbed him in the back with a bladed circumstance. (People v. Macariola, GR No. L- defendant is serving the penalty. Hence, even if he
CRIME DURING SERVICE OF PENALTY
weapon that he had concealed in his waist. 40757, 24 Jan. 1983) is serving sentence for homicide and was later
IMPOSED FOR ANOTHER PREVIOUS OFFENSE
Hurt, Rannie ran to the nearest “kubol” where found to be guilty of murder, Art. 160 applies.
he fell. Robbie ran after him· and, while Q: The CFI of Rizal found the defendants guilty (People v. Yabut, G.R. No. 39085, 27 Sept. 1933)
COMMISSION OF ANOTHER CRIME DURING Rannie was lying on the ground, Robbie of the crime of murder and imposed upon
SERVICE OF PENALTY IMPOSED FOR continued to stab him, inflicting a total of 15 them the penalty of death by reason of the The Second Crime must be a Felony
ANOTHER PREVIOUS OFFENSE stab wounds. He died on the spot. Robbie existence of special aggravating circumstance
ART. 160, RPC immediately surrendered to the Chief of quasi-recidivism. The second crime must be a felony, punishable
Warden. under RPC. But the first crime for which the
Quasi-recidivism When prosecuted for the murder of Rannie, On automatic review by the Supreme Court, offender is serving sentence may either be
Robbie raised provocation and voluntary the counsel of the defendants contends that punishable under RPC or special law.
It is a special aggravating circumstance where a surrender as mitigating circumstances. The the allegation of quasi-recidivism in the
person, after having been convicted by final prosecution, on the other hand, claimed that Information is ambiguous, as it fails to state Quasi-Recidivism vs. Reiteracion (Reyes,
judgment, shall commit a new felony before there was treachery in the commission of the whether the offenses for which the 2017)
beginning to serve such sentence, or while crime. defendants were serving sentence at the time
serving the same. He shall be punished by of the commission of the crime charged were QUASI-RECIVIDISM REITERACION
maximum period of the penalty prescribed by a. Is Robbie a recidivist, or a quasi- penalized by the RPC, or by a special law. Is
law for the new felony. (Reyes, 2017) recidivist? the argument of the counsel correct? As to Kind of Circumstance
NOTE: This circumstance has been interpreted b. Can the mitigating circumstances raised A: NO. It makes no difference, for purposes of the A special aggravating
by the Court as a special aggravating by Robbie, if proven, lower the penalty for effect quasi-recidivism, under Art. 160 of the circumstance; it
An aggravating
circumstance where the penalty actually imposed the crime committed? (2018 BAR) Revised Penal Code, whether the crime for which cannot be offset by
circumstance
is taken from the prescribed penalty in its an accused is serving sentence at the time of the ordinary mitigating
maximum period without regard to any generic A: commission of the offense charged, falls under circumstances.
mitigating circumstances. (People v. Temporada, a. Robbie is considered a quasi-recidivist said Code or under a special law (People v.
pursuant to Art. 160 of the RPC. At the time

As to Time of Commission 3. Illegal Use of Uniforms and Insignia (Art. 179,

Before beginning to D. CRIMES AGAINST PUBLIC INTEREST RPC);
After serving out his
serve his sentence, or ARTS. 161-187, RPC, TITLE IV 4. False Testimony Against a Defendant (Art.
sentences for the
while serving the 180, RPC);
prior offenses
same 5. False Testimony Favorable to the Defendant
(Art. 181, RPC);
Acts of Counterfeiting
6. False Testimony in Civil Cases (Art. 182, RPC);
7. False Testimony in Other Cases and Perjury
1. Forging the seal of the Government,
in Solemn Affirmation (Art. 183, RPC);
signature or stamp of the Chief Executive
8. Offering False Testimony in Evidence (Art.
(Art. 161, RPC);
184, RPC);
2. Using forged signature, seal or stamp (Art.
9. Machinations in Public Auctions (Art. 185,
162, RPC);
RPC);
3. Making and importing and uttering false
10. Monopolies and Combinations in Restraint of
coins (Art. 163, RPC);
Trade (Art. 186, RPC); and
4. Mutilation of coins (Art. 164, RPC); and
11. Importation and Disposition of Falsely
5. Forging treasury or bank notes or other
Marked Articles or Merchandise Made of
documents payable to bearer. (Art. 166, RPC)
Gold, Silver, or other Precious Metals or their
Alloys. (Art. 187, RPC)
Acts of Forgery
1. Illegal Possession and Use of False Treasury CHAPTER 1: FORGERIES

or Bank Notes and Other Instruments of
Credit (Art. 168, RPC); and Crimes called Forgeries
2. How Forgery is Committed. (Art. 169, RPC)
They are:
Acts of Falsification 1. Forging the seal of the Government,
signature or stamp of the Chief Executive
1. Falsification of legislative documents (Art. (Art. 161, RPC);
170, RPC); 2. Making and importing and uttering false
2. Falsification by public officer, employee, or coins (Art. 163, RPC);
notary, or ecclesiastical minister (Art. 171, 3. Mutilation of coins (Art. 164, RPC);
RPC); 4. Forging treasury or bank notes or other
3. Falsification by private individuals (Art. 172, documents payable to bearer (Art. 166,
RPC); RPC);
4. Falsification of wireless, cable, telegraph, and 5. Counterfeiting instruments not payable to
telephone messages (Art. 173, RPC); bearer (Art. 167, RPC);
5. Falsification of medical certificates, 6. Falsification of legislative documents (Art.
certificates of merit or service (Art. 174, RPC); 170, RPC);
6. Using False Certificates (Art. 175, RPC); and 7. Falsification by public officer, employee or
7. Manufacturing and Possession of notary or ecclesiastical minister (Art. 171,
Instruments or Implements for Falsification. RPC);
(Art. 176, RPC) 8. Falsification by private individuals (Art. 172,
RPC);
Other Falsities 9. Falsification of wireless, cable, telegraph
and telephone messages (Art. 173, RPC); and
1. Usurpation of Authority or Official Functions 10. Falsification of medical certificates,
(Art. 177, RPC); certificates of merit or service. (Art. 174,
2. Using Fictitious and Concealing True Name RPC) (Reyes, 2017)
(Art. 178, RPC);

Sec. 1: Forging the Seal of the Government of Executive. Otherwise, he will be penalized under “Utter” coin, but for estafa under Art. 318. (Reyes, 2008)
the Philippine Islands, the Signature or Art. 161.
Stamp of the Chief Executive To pass counterfeited coins, deliver or give away. MUTILATION OF COINS
The participation of the offender is in effect that ART. 164, RPC
of an accessory, and although the general rule is “Import”
COUNTERFEITING THE GREAT SEAL OF THE
that he should be punished by a penalty two Punishable Acts
GOVERNMENT OF THE PHILIPPINE ISLANDS,
degrees lower, under this article he is punished To bring into the Philippines ports any false or
FORGING THE SIGNATURE OR STAMP
by a penalty one degree lower. counterfeited coins. The importation is complete 1. Mutilating coins of the legal currency, with
OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE
before entry at the Customs House. the further requirement that there be intent
ART. 161, RPC
Sec. 2: Counterfeiting Coins to damage or to defraud another; and
Criterion Used in Determining whether a Coin
Punishable Acts (S-S-S) is a Counterfeit or Not
MAKING AND IMPORTING 2. Importing or uttering such mutilated coins,
1. Forging the Great Seal of the Government of AND UTTERING FALSE COINS with the further requirement that there must
The criterion is that the imitation must be such as be connivance with the mutilator or importer
the Philippines; ART. 163, RPC
to deceive an ordinary person in believing it to be in case of uttering.
2. Forging the Signature of the President; and genuine. Consequently, if the imitation is so
3. Forging the Stamp of the President. Elements of Making and Importing and imperfect that no one was deceived, the felony Mutilation
Uttering False Coins (F-M-C) cannot be consummated.
NOTE: If the signature of the president is forged,
the crime committed is covered by this provision 1. That there be False or counterfeited coins; To take off part of the metal either by filling it or
There must be an imitation of peculiar design of a substituting it for another metal of inferior
and not falsification of public document. The 2. That the offender either Made, imported or genuine coin. (U.S. v. Basco, G.R. No. L-2747, 11
name of the crime is forging the signature of the quality.
uttered such coins; and Apr. 1906)
Chief Executive. 3. That in case of uttering such false or
Requisites
counterfeited coins, he Connived with the NOTE: Former coins which have been withdrawn
Forgery counterfeiters or importers. from circulation can be counterfeited. This article 1. Coin mutilated is of legal tender in the
mentions “coin” without any qualifying words Philippines; and
Falsely making or materially altering, with intent Coin such as “current.” 2. Offender gains from the precious metal dust
to defraud, any writing which, if genuine, might
abstracted from the coin.
apparently be of legal efficacy or the foundation A piece of metal stamped with certain marks and Kinds of Coins the Counterfeiting of which is
of a legal liability. (Black’s Law Dictionary) made current at a certain value. Punished Requirement as to the Type of Coin that can be
Mutilated
USING FORGED SIGNATURE OR Acts of Falsification or Falsity 1. Silver coins of the Philippines or coins of the
COUNTERFEIT SEAL OR STAMP Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas; This is the only article that requires that the
ART. 162, RPC 1. Counterfeiting – refers to money or
mutilated coin be legal tender.
currency; 2. Coins of the minor coinage of the Philippines
Elements of Using Forged Signature or 2. Forgery – refers to instruments of credit and or of the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas; Counterfeiting of Coins vs. Mutilating coins
Counterfeit Seal or Stamp (F-K-U) obligations and securities; and
3. Falsification – can only be committed in NOTE: Minor coins of the Philippines are the COUNTERFEITING
respect of documents. MUTILATING COINS
1. That the Great Seal of the Republic was coins below 10-centavo denomination. COINS
counterfeited or the signature or stamp of As to Acts Punished
the Chief Executive was Forged by another Counterfeiting 3. Coins of the currency of a foreign country. Act of scratching the
person; Act of imitating
metal content
2. That the offender Knew of the counterfeiting The imitation of a legal or genuine coin such as to Q: A person gave a copper cent the As to Coin Involved
or forgery; and deceive an ordinary person in believing it to be appearance of a silver piece, it being silver Must be of legal Must be of legal
3. That he Used counterfeit seal or forged genuine. A coin is false or counterfeited if it is plated, and attempted to pay with it a package tender or old coin tender
signature or stamp. forged or if it is not authorized by the of cigarettes which he bought at a store. What
Government as legal tender, regardless of its crime, if any, was committed? Mutilation of Paper Bills under P.D. 247
NOTE: The offender should not be the one who intrinsic value.
forged the great seal or signature of the Chief A: Such person is not liable for counterfeiting of There can be no mutilation of paper bills under

Art. 164 but in P.D. 247 which punishes the act of in the drawer. May the Chinaman be convicted 5. When the only or last indorsement is an Forgery vs. Falsification
destruction of money issued by Central Bank of of illegal possession of false coin? indorsement in blank. (Sec. 9, R.A. No. 2031)
the Philippines, mutilation is not limited to coins. FORGERY FALSIFICATION
A: NO, because Art. 165 requires three things as NOTE: It can be negotiated by mere delivery. Committed by giving
Acts Punishable under P.D. 247 regards possession of false coins, namely: (1) to a treasury or bank
possession; (2) intent to utter; and (3) knowledge Importation of False or Forged Obligations or note or any
1. Willful defacement; that the coin is false. The fact that the Chinaman Notes Committed by
instrument payable to
2. Mutilation; received it in payment of his goods and place it in erasing, substituting,
the bearer or to order
3. Tearing; his drawer shows that he did not know that such Bringing false or forged obligation or notes into counterfeiting, or
the appearance of true
4. Burning; and coin was false. (People v. Go Po, G.R. No. 42697, 01 the Philippines, which presupposes that the altering by any
and genuine
5. Destruction of Central Bank Notes and coin. Aug. 1985) obligation or notes are forged or falsified in a means, the figures,
document.
foreign country. letters, words, or
NOTE: One who mutilates a coin does not do so NOTE: As long as the offender has knowledge signs contained
To make false
for the sake of mutilating, but to take advantage that the coin is false or mutilated, there is no need Uttering False or Forged Obligations or Notes therein.
instrument intended
of the metal abstracted, he appropriates a part of for him to connive with the counterfeiter or to be passed for the
the metal of the coin. Hence, the coin diminishes mutilator. Offering obligations or notes knowing them to be genuine one.
in intrinsic value. One who utters said mutilated false or forged, whether such offer is accepted or
coin receives its legal value, much more than its not, with a representation, by words or actions,
Sec. 3: Forging Treasury or Bank Notes, COUNTERFEITING, IMPORTING AND
intrinsic value. that they are genuine and with an intent to
Obligations and Securities; Importing and UTTERING INSTRUMENTS
Uttering False or Forged Notes, defraud. NOT PAYABLE TO BEARER
SELLING OF FALSE OR MUTILATED COIN, Obligations and Securities ART. 167, RPC
WITHOUT CONNIVANCE Notes and Other Obligations and Securities
ART. 165, RPC that May be Forged or Falsified
FORGING TREASURY OR BANK NOTES OR Elements under Art. 167, RPC (I-FIU-C)
OTHER DOCUMENTS PAYABLE TO BEARER;
Punishable Acts 1. Treasury or bank notes;
IMPORTING, AND UTTERING SUCH FALSE OR 1. That there be an Instrument payable to order
2. Certificates; and
FORGED NOTES AND DOCUMENTS or other document of credit not payable to
1. Possession of coin, counterfeited or 3. Other obligations and securities, payable to
ART. 166, RPC bearer;
mutilated by another person, with intent to bearer.
2. That the offender either Forged, Imported or
utter the same, knowing that it is false or
Acts Punished Uttered such instrument; and
mutilated. Kinds of Treasury or Bank Notes or Other
3. That in case of uttering, he Connived with the
Documents that May be Forged
1. Forging or falsification of treasury or bank forger or importer.
NOTE: Possession of or uttering false coin
notes or other documents payable to bearer; 1. Obligation or security issued by the
does not require that the counterfeiting coin
2. Importation of such false or forged NOTE: The counterfeiting under Art. 167 must
is legal tender. The possessor should not be Government of the Philippines;
obligations or notes; and involve an instrument payable to order or other
the counterfeiter, mutilator, or importer of 2. Circulating note issued by any banking
3. Uttering of such false or forged obligations or document of credit not payable to bearer.
the coins. institution duly authorized by law to issue
notes in connivance with the forgers or the same;
importers. When Payable to Order
2. Actually uttering such false or mutilated coin, 3. Document issued by a foreign government;
knowing the same to be false or mutilated. and
When Payable to Bearer When the instrument is drawn payable to the
4. Circulating note or bill issued by a foreign
order of a specified person or to him or his order.
NOTE: The offense punished under this bank duly authorized to issue the same.
1. When it is expressed to be so payable; Where the instrument is payable to order, the
article is the mere holding of the false or
2. When it is payable to a person named payee must be named or otherwise indicated
mutilated coin with intent to utter. NOTE: The falsification of PNB checks is not
therein or bearer; or therein with reasonable certainty. (Sec. 8, Act No.
forgery under Art. 166, but falsification of
3. When it is payable to the order of a fictitious 2031)
Q: A Chinese merchant was paid by a commercial document under Art. 172 in
purchaser of goods in the former’s store with or non-existing person, and such fact was connection with Art. 171.
known to the person making it so payable; NOTE: It is negotiated by indorsement and
a false 50-centavo coin. He placed it in his
4. When the name of the payee does not delivery.
drawer. During a search by some
constabulary officers, the false coin was found purport to be the name of any person;

Acts of Forgery punished under Art. 167 Q: Is mere possession of false bank notes made payable to B, or his order. A wrote B’s c. Residence certificate
enough to consummate the crime under Art. name on the back of said treasury warrant as d. Driver’s license
1. Forging instruments payable to order or 168 of RPC which is the illegal possession and if B had indorsed it, and then presented it for
documents of credit not payable to bearer; use of false treasury or bank notes and other payment. It was paid to A. Was there forgery? 2. Official Document – any instrument issued
2. Importing such false instruments; and instruments of credit? by the government or its agents or officers
3. Uttering such false instruments in A: YES, because when A wrote B’s name on the having authority to do so and the offices,
connivance with the forger or the importer. A: NO. As held in People v. Digoro, possession of back of the treasury warrant which was originally which in accordance with their creation, they
false treasury or bank notes alone, without made payable to B or his order, he converted, by are authorized to issue.
NOTE: Connivance is not required in uttering if anything more, is not a criminal offense. For it to such supposed indorsement, the treasury
the utterer is the forger. constitute an offense under Art. 168 of the RPC, warrant to one payable to bearer. It had the effect Examples: Register of Attorneys officially
the possession must be with intent to use said of erasing the phrase “or his order” upon the face kept by the Clerk of the Supreme Court in
Inclusion of Instruments or Other Documents false treasury or bank notes. (Clemente v. People, of the warrant. There was material alteration on which it is inscribed the name of each
of Credit Issued by a Foreign Government G.R. No. 194367, 15 June 2011) a genuine document. (U.S. v. Solito, G.R. No. 12546, attorney admitted to the practice of law.
25 Aug. 1917)
This article covers instruments or other NOTE: But a person in possession of falsified NOTE: Public document is broader than the
documents of credit issued by a foreign document and who makes use of the same is When Counterfeiting is NOT Forgery term official document. Before a document
government or bank because the act punished presumed to be the material author of may be considered official, it must first be
includes that of importing, without specifying the falsification. The subject of forgery should be treasury or bank public document. To become an official
country or government issuing them. notes. If the subject of forgery were a document document, there must be a law which
FORGERY other than these, the crime would be falsification. requires a public officer to issue or to render
Reason for Punishing Forgery ART. 169, RPC (Boado, 2008) such document.
Forgery of currency is punished so as to maintain Acts Punishable NOTE: Not any alteration of a letter, number, 3. Private Document – every deed or
the integrity of the currency and thus insure the figure or design would amount to forgery. At instrument by a private person without the
credit standing of the government and prevent Forgery is committed by (1999, 2008 BAR): most, it would only be frustrated forgery. intervention of the notary public or of any
the imposition on the public and the government other person legally authorized, by which
of worthless notes or obligations. 1. Giving to a treasury or bank note or any Sec. 4: Falsification of Legislative, Public, document some disposition or agreement is
instrument payable to bearer or to order Commercial, and Private Documents and proved, evidenced or set forth.
ILLEGAL POSSESSION AND USE OF FALSE mentioned therein, the appearance of a true Wireless Telegraph, and Telephone Messages
TREASURY OR BANK NOTES AND OTHER and genuine document; or 4. Commercial Document – any instrument
INSTRUMENTS OF CREDIT executed in accordance with the Code of
Document
ART. 168, RPC 2. Erasing, substituting, counterfeiting, or Commerce of any mercantile law containing
altering by any means the figures, letters, disposition of commercial rights or
Any written instrument by which a right is
Elements under Art. 168, RPC (1999 BAR) words, or sign contained therein. obligations.
established, or an obligation is extinguished, or
(T-K-UP) every deed or instrument executed by a person
Essence of Forgery Examples: Bills of exchange, Letters of
by which some disposition or agreement is
1. That any Treasury or bank note or Credit, Checks, Quedans, Drafts, Bills of
proved, evidenced, or set forth.
certificate or other obligation and security The essence of forgery is giving a document the lading
payable to bearer, or any instrument appearance of a true and genuine document. Kinds of Documents
payable to order or other document of Classes of Falsification
credit not payable to bearer is forged or NOTE: With the definition given in this article, 1. Public document – any instrument notarized
falsified by another person; the crime of counterfeiting or forging treasury or 1. Falsification of legislative documents;
by a notary public or competent public
bank notes or other documents payable to bearer 2. Falsification of a document by a public
official with the solemnities required by law.
2. That the offender Knows that any of the said or to order includes: (1) acts of counterfeiting or officer, employee or notary public;
instruments is forged or falsified; and forging said documents, and (2) acts of Examples: 3. Falsification of public or official, or
falsification. commercial documents by a private
a. Civil service examination papers
3. That he either Used or Possessed with individual;
b. Official receipt required by the
intent to use any of such forged or falsified Q: A received a treasury warrant, a check government to be issued upon receipt 4. Falsification of private document by any
instruments. issued by the Government. It was originally person; and
of money for public purposes

5. Falsification of wireless, telegraph and minister; NOTE: The Spanish text of Art. 171 is Here, all the elements of the crime are present.
telephone messages. “fingiendo” or feigning (for imitation). In Mayor Z signed the marriage certificate which
2. That he Takes advantage of his official feigning, there is no original signature, states that he solemnized the marriage of X and Y
A document is falsified by fabricating an position; handwriting or rubric, but a forgery of a when in fact, he did not participate in its
inexistent document or by changing the contents signature, handwriting or rubric that solemnization.
of an existing one through any of the eight (8) Q: Must there be a genuine document in does not exist.
ways enumerated under Art. 171. falsification? Q: Atty. Constantino notarized the Joint
b. Causing it to appear that persons have Acknowledgement of the last will and
FALSIFICATION OF LEGISLATIVE A: It depends. In paragraphs 6, 7, in its second participated in any act or proceeding testament of Severino. Dr. Asuncion was not
DOCUMENTS part, and 8 of Art. 171, the law requires that there when they did not in fact so participate. present during the execution, but his name
ART. 170, RPC be a genuine document where the intercalation (Art. 171, par. 2) was not crossed out from the document. He
or alteration is made changing its meaning. only signed the document after it was
Elements of Falsification of Legislative Elements: notarized. With this, Atty. Constantino was
Documents (B-A-N-C) In the other paragraphs of Art. 171, falsification i. That the offender caused it to charged of the crime of falsifying a public
may be committed by simulating or fabricating a appear in a document that a person document under Art. 171(2) of the RPC
1. That there be a Bill, resolution or ordinance document. (Reyes, 2017) or persons participated in an act or for making it appear that Dr. Asuncion
enacted or approved or pending approval by a proceeding; and appeared before him and witnessed the
either House of Legislature or any provincial Q: The accused simulated a warrant of arrest ii. That such person or persons did execution of the Last Will and Testament. Is
board or municipal council; against his common-law wife by making it not in fact so participate in the act Atty. Constantino guilty beyond reasonable
2. That the offender Alters the same; appear that the same was signed and issued or proceeding. doubt of the crime of falsifying a public
3. That he has No proper authority therefor; by the authority when in truth and in fact it document?
and was not. The accused sent it to the municipal Q: X and Y approached Mayor Z and requested
4. That the alteration has Changed the meaning president of Corregidor, and by virtue him to solemnize their marriage. On the day of A: NO. In falsification of public documents under
of the document. thereof, the woman was arrested. Is the the ceremony, X and Y proceeded to Mayor Z's Art. 171(2) of the RPC, the prosecution must
accused guilty of falsification of a public office but he was not there. Mayor Z's chief of prove that these elements exist: (1) that the
NOTE: The act of falsification in legislative document? staff, Mr. U, however, represented that he offender is a public officer, employee, notary
document is limited to altering it which changes himself can solemnize their marriage and just public, or an ecclesiastical minister; (2) that he
its meaning. A: YES. The simulation of a public or official have Mayor Z sign the marriage certificate takes advantage of his official position; (3) that he
document, done in such a manner as to easily lead when the latter comes back. Consequently, falsifies a document by causing it to appear that
Persons Liable under Art. 170 to error as to its authenticity, constitutes the upon X and Y's assent, Mr. U solemnized the persons have participated in any act or
crime of falsification. It is not essential that the marriage, despite his lack of authority proceeding; and (4) that such person or persons
The offender is any person who has no proper falsification shall have been made in a real public therefor. did not in fact so participate in the proceeding.
authority to make the alteration. He may be a or official document. (U.S. v. Corral, G.R. No. 5325,
private individual or a public officer. 03 Mar. 1910) Assuming that Mayor Z signed the marriage Here, the first element has already been proven
certificate which stated that he solemnized since petitioner is a notary public. The second
NOTE: Art. 170 does not require that the offender 3. That he falsified a document by committing the marriage of X and Y, what crime may element is presumed when the alleged falsity
be a private individual. All that the provision any of the following Acts (2008 BAR): Mayor Z be charged with under the RPC? committed by the notary public pertains to the
requires is that the offender has no proper Explain. (2019 BAR) notarization. However, the third and fourth
authority to make the alteration. a. Counterfeiting or imitating any elements are lacking. Even if Atty. Costantino
handwriting, signature, or rubric. (Art. A: Mayor Z may be charged with Falsification falsely certified that Dr. Asuncion was an
171, par. 1) under Art. 171, par. 2 of the RPC. Its elements are: instrumental witness to the execution of the will,
FALSIFICATION BY PUBLIC OFFICER,
one crucial detail remains: Dr. Asuncion signed
EMPLOYEE OR NOTARY OR
Elements: 1. That the offender is a public officer; the Joint Acknowledgement after it was
ECCLESIASTICAL MINISTER
i. That there be an intent to imitate, 2. That the takes advantage of his official notarized.
ART. 171, RPC
or an attempt to imitate; and position; and
ii. That the two signatures or 3. That he falsifies a document by causing it to Since Dr. Asuncion did not sign the Joint
Elements of Art. 171 (PuNoE-T-A-E)
handwritings, the genuine and the appear that persons have participated in any Acknowledgement before it was notarized, he
forged, bear some resemblance to act of proceeding when they did not in fact so cannot be considered as having attested and
1. That the offender is a Public officer,
each other. participate. subscribed to its due execution at the time of its
employee, Notary public, or an Ecclesiastical

notarization. It was not petitioner who made it NOTE: The perversion of truth in the narrated by him; and (3) the facts narrated by NOTE: The acts of falsification
appear that Dr. Asuncion participated in the narration of facts must be made with the him are absolutely false. mentioned in this paragraph cannot be
execution of the Joint Acknowledgement, but Dr. wrongful intent of injuring a third committed by a private individual or by
Asuncion himself. Petitioner, therefore, must be person. (Reyes, 2017) In this case, the element of taking advantage of a notary public or a public officer who
acquitted. (Atty. Constantino v. People, G.R. No. one's position is patently lacking. There is no does not take advantage of his official
225696, 08 Apr. 2019) iv. The untruthful narration must be showing that private respondent had the duty to position.
such as to affect the integrity of the make or prepare, or otherwise, to intervene in the
NOTE: When committed by a private individual, document or to change the effects preparation of the SALNs or he had the official h. Intercalating any instrument or note
he should be liable under Art. 172. which it would otherwise produce. custody of the same. (Department of Finance - relative to the issuance thereof in a
Revenue Integrity Protection Service v. Office of the protocol, registry or official book. (Art.
c. Attributing to persons who have Q: Clemente, a security guard of the Bureau of Ombudsman and Clemente Germar, G.R. No. 171, par. 8)
participated in an act or proceeding Customs, has declared in his SALNs, for the 238660, 03 Feb. 2021)
statements other than those in fact made years 2002 to 2014, only three (3) out of the 4. In case the offender is an Ecclesiastical
by them. (Art. 171, par. 3) seven (7) properties registered in his name. e. Altering true dates. (Art. 171, par. 5) minister, the act of falsification is committed
Furthermore, a criminal information for with respect to any record or document of
Elements: robbery was filed against him which was There is falsification under this such character that its falsification may affect
i. That a person or persons eventually provisionally dismissed. However, paragraph only when the date the civil status of persons.
participated in an act or a he made an untruthful statement when mentioned in the document is essential.
proceeding; answered in his 2014 Personal Data Sheet The alteration of the date in a document Persons Liable under Art. 171
ii. That such person or persons made (PDS) "NO" to the question, "Have you ever must affect either the veracity of the
statements in that act or been formally charged." A complaint against document of the effects thereof. 1. Public officer, employees, or notary public
proceeding; and him was filed for violation of Sec. 7 of R.A. No. who takes advantage of official position;
iii. That the offender, in making a 3019, Sec. 8 of R.A. No. 6713, Art. 171 for f. Making any alteration or intercalation in 2. Ecclesiastical minister if the act of
document, attributed to such Falsification by a Public Officer and False a genuine document which changes its falsification may affect the civil status of
person or persons statements Testimony, and Art. 183 for Perjury under the meaning. (Art. 171, par. 6) persons; or
other than those in fact made by RPC before the OMB. 3. Private individual, if in conspiracy with
such person or persons. Elements: public officer.
Did Clemente commit Falsification of Public i. That there be an alteration (change)
d. Making untruthful statements in a Documents by making untruthful statements or intercalation (insertion) on a Q: X was charged with falsification because in
narration of facts. (Art. 171, par. 4) in a narration of facts under Art. 171? document; her certificate of candidacy for the position of
ii. That it was made on a genuine councilor, she had ‘willfully and unlawfully’
Elements: A: NO. The third element of the crime, i.e., that the document; made the false statement that she was eligible
i. That the offender makes in a statements made are absolutely false, was iii. That the alteration or intercalation to said office although she knew fully well that
document untruthful statements in wanting. Under the crime of Falsification of had changed the meaning of the she was under 23 years old. Was the charge
a narration of facts; Public Documents, the following elements must document; and proper?
ii. That he has legal obligation to be established: (1) the offender is a public officer, iv. That the change made the
disclose the truth of the facts employee, or notary public; (2) he takes document speak something false. A: NO. When the accused certified she was
narrated by him; advantage of his official position; and (3) he eligible for the position, she practically wrote a
falsifies a document by committing any of the acts NOTE: The alteration which makes a conclusion of law. Hence, she may not be declared
NOTE: “Legal obligation” means that enumerated in Art. 171 of the RPC. document speak the truth does not guilty of falsification because Art. 171 punishes
there is a law requiring the disclosure of constitute falsification. untruthful statements in narration of facts.
truth of the facts narrated. The person To warrant conviction for Falsification of Public (People v. Yanza, G.R. No. L-12089, 29 Apr. 1960)
making the narration of facts must be Documents by making untruthful statements in a g. Issuing in authenticated form a
aware of the falsity of facts narrated by narration of facts under Art. 171, par. 4 of the document purporting to be a copy of an
him. (Reyes, 2017) RPC, the prosecution must establish beyond original document when no such original
reasonable doubt the following elements: (1) the exists, or including in such copy a
iii. The facts narrated by the offender offender makes in a public document untruthful statement contrary to, or different from,
are absolutely false; and statements in a narration of facts; (2) he has a that of the genuine original. (Art. 171,
legal obligation to disclose the truth of the facts par. 7)

Making Untruthful Statements vs. Perjury damage to the government, did he commit a documents notwithstanding that the Information original document when no such
crime? only charged the willful act of falsification of original exists, or including in such a
MAKING public documents. (Sevilla v. People, G.R. No. copy a statement contrary to, or
UNTRUTHFUL PERJURY A: YES. In falsification of a public document, it is 194390, 13 Aug. 2014) different from that of the genuine
STATEMENTS immaterial whether or not the contents set forth original;
The document must be therein were false. What is important is the fact FALSIFICATION BY PRIVATE INDIVIDUALS
The document must
subscribed and sworn that the signature of another was counterfeited. AND USE OF FALSIFIED DOCUMENTS b. Falsification was committed in any
not be subscribed and
to. In a crime of falsification of a public document, ART. 172, RPC private document; and
sworn.
the principal thing punished is the violation of
NOTE: What is public faith and the destruction of the truth as c. Falsification caused damage to a third
Ex: Cedula; driver’s Punishable Acts
violated is the therein solemnly proclaimed. Thus, intent to gain party or at least the falsification was
license
solemnity of the oath. or injure is immaterial. Even more so, the gain or committed with intent to cause such
1. Falsification of a public, official, or
damage is not necessary. (Caubang v. People, G.R. commercial document by a private damage.
Q: Augustina filed a criminal complaint No. L-62634, 26 June 1992) individual.
against Bernante for falsification of public Mere falsification of private document is not
document because the latter allegedly Q: Can falsification be committed by enough. Two things are required:
Elements (1991, 1992, 1993, 2000, 2009
falsified leave forms. It was alleged that omission? BAR):
Bernante made it appear in his leave 1. He must have counterfeited the false
a. Offender is a private individual or
application that he was on forced leave and on A: YES. Illustration: An assistant bookkeeper document; and
public officer or employee who did not
vacation leave on certain dates. In truth, who, having bought several articles for which he 2. He must have performed an independent
take advantage of his official position;
Bernante was serving a 20-day prison term signed several chits, intentionally did not record act which operates to the prejudice of a
because of his conviction of the crime of slight in his personal account most of the said chits and third person.
b. He committed any act of falsification
physical injuries. Is Bernante liable for the destroyed them so that he could avoid paying the enumerated in Art. 171; and
crime of falsification of documents? amount thereof is guilty of falsification by NOTE: “With the intent to cause damage” means
omission. (People v. Dizon, G.R. No. L-22560, 29 c. The falsification is committed in a that the offender performs some other
A: NO. Bernante may not be convicted of the Jan. 1925) independent act in order to make use of it – an act
public, official, or commercial
crime of falsification of public document by which, while it does not result in prejudice to a
document.
making false statements in a narration of facts Q: Can a person be convicted of the felony of third party, has been done nevertheless with the
absent any legal obligation to disclose where he falsification of public document through NOTE: Under this paragraph, damage or intention of causing such prejudice.
would spend his vacation leave and forced leave. reckless imprudence notwithstanding that intent to cause damage is not necessary.
(Enemecio v. Office of the Ombudsman [Visayas], the charge against him in the Information was What is punished in falsification of public Although one of the offenders did not personally
G.R. No. 146731, 13 Jan. 2004) for the intentional felony of falsification of document is the undermining of the profit from the falsification of the private
public document under Art. 171(4) of the public faith and the destruction of truth document, he is liable, as all that the law requires
Q: In falsification of public documents, is it RPC? as solemnly proclaimed therein. In this is an intent to prejudice another person. (Reyes,
necessary that there be the idea of gain or particular crime, the controlling 2017)
intent to injure a third person? A: YES. Sevilla’s claim that his constitutional right consideration lies in the public character
to be informed of the nature and cause of the of a document; and the existence of any Venue of Action
A: NO. In falsification of public or official accusation against him was violated when the prejudice caused to third persons or, at
documents, it is not necessary that there be Sandiganbayan convicted him of reckless least, the intent to cause such damage Q: The appellant was charged with having
present the idea of gain or the intent to injure a imprudence resulting to falsification of public becomes immaterial. sent to the Bureau of Labor at Manila the
third person because in the falsification of a documents, when the Information only charged letter alleged to have been falsified by him in
public document, what is punished is the the intentional felony of falsification of public 2. Falsification of private document by any Makati, Rizal. Where should the action be
violation of the public faith and the destruction of documents, is untenable. To stress, reckless person filed?
the truth as therein solemnly proclaimed. (Galeos imprudence resulting to falsification of public
v. People, G.R. Nos. 174730-37, 09 Feb. 2011) documents is an offense that is necessarily Elements: A: Makati, Rizal. The intent to cause damage must
included in the willful act of falsification of public a. Offender committed any of the acts of have co-existed with the act of falsification itself.
Q: A counterfeited the signature of B but what documents, the latter being the greater offense. falsification except Art. 171 (7), that is, If that is so, then the offense, if at all committed,
he entered in the Statement of Assets and As such, he can be convicted of reckless issuing in an authenticated form a was consummated in Makati, Rizal, and the courts
Liabilities of B are all true. Since there was no imprudence resulting to falsification of public document purporting to be a copy of an of which should assume jurisdiction to try the

same. (People v. Morales, C.A. 58 O.G. 5667) Document Need Not be an Authentic Official loan proceeds to the two payees. Thereafter, As to Commission of a Complex Crime
3. Use of falsified document. Paper these two manager’s checks were encashed, Can be complexed
and then deposited in the OCBC Savings with other crimes if There is no complex
Elements: The document need not be an authentic official Account of Jose Go. the act of falsification crime of estafa
a. In introducing in a judicial proceeding – paper since its simulation is the essence of was the necessary through falsification
i. Offender knew that the document falsification. So, the signatures appearing thereon PDIC, as receiver, sent demand letters to the means in the of a private
was falsified by another person; need not necessarily be forged. bank’s debtor-borrowers on record, including commission of such document. Hence,
ii. The falsified document is in Arts. Timmy’s, Inc. and Asia Textile Mills, Inc. crimes, like estafa, when one makes use
171 or 172 (1 or 2); Q: When is damage required under this However, it was discovered that the theft, or malversation. of a private
iii. He introduced said document in Article? signatures of the corporate officers were document, which he
evidence in a judicial proceeding. forgeries, and the purported loans were e.g., Malversation falsified, to defraud
A: obtained through falsified loan documents. through falsification another, there results
NOTE: Damage is not necessary in the 1. When a private document is falsified; What crime did Go, et al. commit? of a public document; only one crime: that
crime of introducing in judicial 2. When a falsified document is used in any Estafa through of falsification of a
proceeding a false document. proceeding other than judicial. A: Go, et. al., are liable for the crime of Estafa thru falsification of a private document.
Falsification of Commercial Documents. In a public document.
b. In use in any other transaction – Q: Is there a complex crime of estafa through prosecution for estafa, demand is not necessary
i. Offender knew that a document falsification of a private document? where there is evidence of misappropriation or No Falsification of Private Document through
was falsified by another person; conversion. The accused may be convicted of the Negligence or Reckless imprudence
ii. The false document is embraced in A: NONE. The fraudulent gain obtained through felony under Art. 315, par. 1(b) of the RPC if the
Arts. 171 or 172 (1 or 2); deceit in estafa, in the commission of which a prosecution proved misappropriation or In falsification of private document, there must
iii. He used such document (not in private document was falsified is nothing more or conversion by the accused of the money or be, at least, an intent to cause damage there must
judicial proceedings); and less than the very damage caused by the property subject of the information. be malice. On the other hand, in falsification
iv. The use caused damaged to another falsification of such document. through imprudence, it does not necessitate such
or at least used with intent to cause Moreover, the falsification of a public, official, or intent or malice.
damage The proper crime to be charged is estafa, if estafa commercial document may be a means of
can be committed without falsification, such as committing estafa because before the falsified No such Crime as Attempted/Frustrated
NOTE: The user of the falsified document is when a private document is falsified to conceal document is actually utilized to defraud another, Falsification
deemed the author of the falsification if: (1) the the misappropriation of money in possession of the crime of falsification has already been
use was so closely connected in time with the the offender, or when estafa was already consummated, damage or intent to cause damage Falsification is consummated the moment the
falsification, and (2) the user had the capacity of consummated. not being an element of the crime of falsification genuine document is altered on the moment the
falsifying the document. (1997, 1999 BAR) of public, official or commercial document. false document is executed. However, there may
If estafa cannot be committed without Therefore, the falsification of the public, official be a frustrated crime of falsification if the
The person who used the falsified document is falsification, then the crime is falsification such as or commercial document is only a necessary falsification is imperfect. (Reyes, 2008)
not the one who falsified the document. If the one when the private document is falsified to obtain means to commit the estafa. (People v. Jose Go, et.
who used the falsified document is the same the money which was later misappropriated. al, G.R. No. 191015, 06 Aug. 2014) FALSIFICATION OF WIRELESS TELEGRAPH
person who falsified it, the crime is only AND TELEPHONE MESSAGES, AND USE OF
falsification and the use of the same is not a Q: Orient Commercial Banking Corporation Falsification of Public Document vs. Private SAID FALSIFIED MESSAGES
separate crime. (OCBC), a commercial bank was ordered Document ART. 173, RPC
closed by the BSP. PDIC was designated as the
Good Faith is a Defense if a Private Individual receiver of OCBC. Based on their FALSIFICATION OF
FALSIFICATION OF Punishable Acts
Falsified a Public Document investigation, it appears that fictitious loans PRIVATE
PUBLIC DOCUMENT
in favor of two entities – Timmy’s, Inc. and DOCUMENT
1. Uttering fictitious wireless, telegraph or
There is no falsification of a public document if Asia Textile Mills, Inc. were approved. After As to Nature of the Crime telephone message;
the acts of the accused are consistent with good which, two manager’s checks representing Aside from 2. Falsifying wireless, telegraph or telephone
faith. Misstatements or erroneous assertion in a the supposed proceeds of these loans were falsification,
Mere falsification is message; and
public document will not give rise to falsification issued but made payable to two different prejudice to a third
enough.
as long as he acted in good faith and no one was entities without any documents issued by the person or intent to Elements of 1 and 2:
prejudiced by the alteration or error. supposed borrowers assigning the supposed cause it, is essential. a. That the offender is an officer or

employee of the Government or an Sec. 5: Falsification of Medical Certificates, Persons Liable under Art. 174 Sec. 6: Manufacturing, Importing and
officer or employee of a private Certificates of Merit or Service and the Like Possession of Instruments or Implements
corporation, engaged in the service of 1. Physician or surgeon who issues a false intended for the Commission of Falsification
sending or receiving wireless, cable or medical certificate in the practice of his
FALSE MEDICAL CERTIFICATES,
telephone message; and profession;
FALSE CERTIFICATES OF MERIT OR SERVICE MANUFACTURING AND POSSESSION OF
ART. 174, RPC INSTRUMENTS OR IMPLEMENTS FOR
b. That the offender commits any of the 2. Public officer who issues a false certificate of
FALSIFICATION
following acts: merit, service or good conduct, moral
Punishable Acts under Art. 174, RPC ART. 176, RPC
i. Uttering fictitious wireless, cable, character, etc.; or
telegraph or telephone message; or
ii. Falsifying wireless, cable, 1. Issuance of false certificate by a physician or 3. Private individual who makes or falsifies a Punishable Acts
telegraph, or telephone message. surgeon in connection with the practice of his certificate falling in the classes mentioned in
profession; nos. 1 and 2. 1. Making or introducing into the Philippines
3. Using such falsified message. any stamps, dies, marks, or other
NOTE: The crime is False Medical Certificate instruments or implements for
USING FALSE CERTIFICATES
Elements: by a physician. (Reyes, 2017) counterfeiting or falsification; and
ART. 175, RPC
a. Offender knew that wireless, cable,
telegraph, or telephone message was 2. Issuance of a false certificate or merit or 2. Possessing with intent to use the instrument
Elements of Using False Certificates (I-K-U)
falsified by an officer or employee of a service, good conduct or similar or implements for counterfeiting or
private corporation, engaged in the circumstances by a public officer; and falsification made in or introduced into the
1. A physician or surgeon had Issued a false
service of sending or receiving wireless, Philippines by another person.
medical certificate, or public officer issued a
cable or telephone message; NOTE: Intent to gain is immaterial. But if the
public officer issued the false certificate in false certificate of merit or service, good NOTE: It is not necessary that the implements
b. He used such falsified dispatch; and conduct, or similar circumstance, or a private
c. The use resulted in the prejudice of a consideration of a promise, gift or reward, he confiscated form a complete set for
person had falsified any of said certificates;
third party or at least there was intent will also be liable for bribery. counterfeiting, it being enough that they may be
2. Offender Knew that the certificate was false;
to cause such prejudice. employed by themselves or together with other
The crime is False Certificate of Merit or and implements to commit the crime of
Service by a public officer. (Reyes, 2017) 3. He Used the same. counterfeiting or falsification.
Q: Can a private individual commit the crime
of falsification of telegraphic dispatches? NOTE: When any of the false certificates
3. Falsification by a private person of any CHAPTER 2: OTHER FALSITIES
certificate falling within 1 and 2. mentioned in Art. 174 is used in the judicial
A: It depends. A private individual cannot proceeding, Art. 172 does not apply, because the
commit the crime of falsification of telegraphic use of false document in judicial proceeding Sec. 1: Usurpation of Authority, Rank, Title,
dispatches by direct participation, unless he is an NOTE: The crime is False Medical Certificate and Improper Use of Names,
by a private individual or False Certificate of under Art. 172 is limited to those false documents
employee of a corporation engaged in the embraced in Arts. 171 and 172. Such use of the Uniforms and Insignia
business of sending or receiving wireless Merit or Service by a private individual.
(Reyes, 2017) false certificates falls under Art. 175.
telegraph or telephone messages. USURPATION OF AUTHORITY OR
Certificate OFFICIAL FUNCTIONS
But a private individual can be held criminally ART. 177, RPC
liable as principal by inducement in the
Any writing by which testimony is given that a
falsification of telegraph dispatches or telephone
fact has or has not taken place. Offenses Contemplated in Art. 177
messages. If he knowingly uses falsified
telegraph, wireless, or telephone messages to the
NOTE: The phrase “or similar circumstances” in 1. Usurpation of Authority – by knowingly and
prejudice of a third person, or with intent to cause
Art. 174 does not seem to cover property, falsely representing oneself to be an officer,
such prejudice, it is not necessary that he be
because the circumstance contemplated must be agent, or representative of any department
connected with such corporation.
similar to “merit,” “service,” or “good conduct.” or agency of the Philippine Government or
any foreign government.
But certificate of residence for voting purposes is
certificate of “similar circumstances.” (Reyes, NOTE: The mere act of knowingly and falsely
2017) representing oneself to be an officer, etc. is

sufficient. It is not necessary that he Q: A councilor refused to vacate the office of Sendong and a 6.9-magnitude earthquake. b. He uses the fictitious name publicly;
performs an act pertaining to a public officer. the mayor despite an official opinion that it is The Office of the President approved the and
the vice mayor who should discharge the request. The Department, through its c. Purpose of use is to conceal a crime, to
2. Usurpation of Official Functions – by duties of the mayor during the latter’s Regional Office No. VII, issued a Special evade the execution of a judgment or to
performing any act pertaining to any person temporary absence. He was charged with Allotment Release Order which covered the cause damage (to public interest).
in authority or public officer of the Philippine usurpation of authority and official functions approved amount.
Government or of a foreign government or but he contended that such crime may only be NOTE: If the purpose is to cause damage to
any agency thereof, under pretense of official committed by private individuals. Is he In a letter-advice, Undersecretary Relampagos private interest, the crime will be estafa
position, and without being lawfully entitled correct? informed Negros Oriental Governor Degamo under Art. 315(2)(a).
to do so. (2015 BAR) that the Department is withdrawing the
A: NO. Violation of Art. 177 is not restricted to Special Allotment Release Order because its 2. Concealing true name.
NOTE: It is essential that the offender should private individuals. Public officials may also release did not comply with the guidelines on
have performed an act pertaining to a person commit this crime. (People v. Hilvano, G.R. No. L- large-scale fund releases for infrastructure Elements:
in authority or public officer, in addition to 8583, 31 July 1956) projects. Is Relampagos guilty of Usurpation of a. Offender conceals his true name and
other requirements. (Reyes, 2008) Authority or Official Functions? other personal circumstances; and
Non-applicability of the Provision to an b. Purpose is only to conceal his identity.
USURPATION OF Occupant under Color of Title A: NO. Relampagos did not commit the crime of (Reyes, 2008)
USURPATION OF
OFFICIAL usurpation of authority or official functions. The
AUTHORITY
FUNCTIONS This provision does NOT apply to an occupant crime of usurpation of official functions punishes
The offender should under color of title. This would only apply to a any person who, under pretense of official “Fictitious Name”
Mere representation
have performed an usurper or one who introduces himself into an position, performs any act pertaining to any
is sufficient
act office that is vacant, or who, without color of title, person in authority or public officer of the Any other name which a person publicly applies
ousts the incumbent and assumes to act as an Philippine Government or any foreign to himself without authority of law. (Id., citing U.S.
Q: X and Y approached Mayor Z and requested officer by exercising some functions of the office. government, or any agency thereof, without v. To Lee Piu)
him to solemnize their marriage. On the day of (People v. Buenaflor, G.R. No. 100992-CR, 17 Dec. being lawfully entitled to do so. In this case, there
the ceremony, X and Y proceeded to Mayor Z's 1974) was no attempt to represent the President in the NOTE: The prisoner who is replaced must
office but he was not there. Mayor Z's chief of letter. It appears that Relampagos was acting on necessarily use the name of another, thus he is
staff, Mr. U, however, represented that he The function or authority usurped must pertain behalf of Secretary Abad, upon the instructions of also guilty of using a fictitious name to evade the
himself can solemnize their marriage and just to: the President. execution of the judgment against him.
have Mayor Z sign the marriage certificate 1. The government;
when the latter comes back. Consequently, 2. Any person in authority; and Under the doctrine of qualified political agency, The one who takes his place and used a fictitious
upon X and Y's assent, Mr. U solemnized the 3. Any public officer department secretaries may act for and on behalf name to conceal the crime is guilty of delivering a
marriage, despite his lack of authority of the President on matters where the President prisoner from jail.
therefor. Usurpation of the authority or functions of a is required to exercise authority in their
diplomatic, consular or other accredited officers respective departments. (Degamo v. Office of the Fictitious Name vs. Concealing True Name
What crime may Mr. U be charged with under of a foreign government is punishable under R.A. Ombudsman, G.R. No. 212416, 05 Dec. 2018)
the RPC? Explain. (2018 BAR) No. 75, in addition to the penalties provided by USE OF FICTITIOUS CONCEALING TRUE
the Code. (Regalado, 2007) USING FICTITIOUS NAME AND NAME NAME
A: Mr. U can be charged with the crime of CONCEALING TRUE NAME As to Element of Publicity
Usurpation of Authority or Official Functions. NOTE: The law demands positive, express and ART. 178, RPC Element of publicity Element of publicity
Under Art. 177 of the RPC, Usurpation of explicit representation on the part of the offender must be present. is not necessary.
Authority may be committed by performing any before he can be convicted of usurpation of Acts Punishable under Art. 178 As to Purpose
act pertaining to any person in authority or public authority. (Reyes, 2017) Either:
officer of the Philippine Government or of a 1. Using fictitious name; a. to conceal a
foreign government or any agency thereof, under Q: The National Disaster Risk Reduction and crime, or
Management Council requested the release of Merely to conceal
the pretense of official position, and without Elements: b. to evade the
P961,550,000 to the Negros Oriental province identity
being lawfully entitled to do so. Here, despite his a. Offender uses a name other than his execution of a
lack of authority, Mr. U knowingly solemnized a to finance the rehabilitation of various real name; judgment, or
marriage pertaining to Mayor Z. infrastructures damaged by Typhoon c. to cause damage.

ILLEGAL USE OF UNIFORMS OR INSIGNIA competent authority, shall deny the truth or say testimony may produce. Q: Can a defendant who falsely testified in his
ART. 179, RPC something contrary to it. (Reyes, 2008) own behalf in a criminal case be guilty of false
NOTE: The witness who gave false testimony is testimony favorable to the defendant?
Elements of Illegal Use of Uniforms or Insignia Forms of False Testimony liable even if his testimony was not considered by
(U-P-P) the court. A: YES. The right of an accused to testify in his
Testimony given in: own behalf is secured to him to enable him to
1. Offender makes Use of insignia, uniform or 1. Criminal Cases; Imposition of Penalty under Art. 180 spread upon the record the truth as to any matter
dress; 2. Civil Cases; and within his knowledge which will tend to establish
2. The insignia, uniform or dress Pertains to an 3. Other Cases It depends upon the sentence of the defendant his knowledge. Defendant is liable if he testifies in
office not held by the offender, or to a class of against whom the false testimony was given. his favor by falsely imputing the crime to another
persons of which he is not a member; and False Testimony Cannot be Committed thru Defendant must be sentenced to at least a person. (U.S. v. Soliman, G.R. No. L-11555, 06 Jan.
3. Said insignia, uniform, or dress is used Negligence correctional penalty or a fine, or shall have been 1917)
Publicly and improperly. acquitted. Thus, if arresto mayor is imposed, Art.
False testimony requires criminal intent, and it 180 is not applicable. NOTE: The ruling in Soliman would only apply if
Wearing the Uniform of an Imaginary Office, cannot be committed thru negligence. It could not the defendant voluntarily goes upon the witness
NOT punishable be frustrated or attempted. FALSE TESTIMONY FAVORABLE stand and falsely imputes to some other person
TO THE DEFENDANT the commission of a grave offense. If he merely
The second element requires that the insignia, Reason for Punishing False Testimony ART. 181, RPC denies the commission of the crime or his
uniform, or dress pertains to an office or class of participation therein, he should not be
persons. Falsehood is always reprehensible; but it is Elements of False Testimony Favorable to the prosecuted for false testimony. (Reyes, 2008)
particularly odious when committed in a judicial Defendant
Exact Imitation of a Uniform or Dress is proceeding, as it constitutes an imposition upon The classification in determining whether the
Unnecessary the court and seriously exposes it to a 1. A person gives false testimony; testimony is in favor or against the accused is
miscarriage of justice. 2. In favor of the defendant; and significant in order to determine when the
A colorable resemblance calculated to deceive the 3. In a criminal case. prescriptive period begins to run:
common run of people, not those thoroughly FALSE TESTIMONY AGAINST A DEFENDANT
familiar with every detail or accessory thereof. ART. 180, RPC Q: Is conviction or acquittal of the defendant 1. In Favor – right after the witness testified
(People v. Romero, C.A. 58, O.G. 4402) in the principal case necessary? falsely, the prescriptive period commences to
Elements of False Testimony against a run because the basis of the penalty on the
Use of Ecclesiastical Habit of a Religious Order Defendant (Crim-F-AC-K) A: NO. The conviction or acquittal of a defendant false witness is the felony charged to the
in the principal case is not necessary. (Reyes, accused regardless of whether the accused
The unauthorized use of ecclesiastical habit of a 1. There is a Criminal proceeding; 2017) was acquitted or convicted or the trial has
religious order is punishable under this article. terminated.
2. Offender testifies Falsely under oath against NOTE: This is an important distinction between
“Improper” Use of Uniform or Insignia the defendant therein; False Testimony Favorable to the Defendant v. 2. Against – the prescriptive period will not
False Testimony Against a Defendant. begin to run if the case has not been decided
The use thereof by the offender is public and 3. Offender who gives false testimony Knows with finality because the basis of the penalty
malicious. (Regalado, 2007) It means that the that it is false; and Gravamen on the false witness is the sentence on the
offender has no right to use the uniform or accused who testified against it. When the
insignia. 4. Defendant against whom the false testimony Intent to favor the accused. False testimony in accused is acquitted, there is also a
is given is either Acquitted or Convicted in a favor of a defendant need not directly influence corresponding penalty on the false witness
final judgment. the decision of acquittal and it need not benefit for his false testimony. (Boado, 2008)
Sec. 2: False Testimony
the defendant. The intent to favor the defendant
How False Testimony is Committed False Testimony Even if the Testimony is NOT is sufficient. (People v. Reyes, C.A., 48 O.G. 1837)
Considered by the Court
Rectification After Realizing the Mistake
False testimony is committed by a person who,
being under oath and required to testify as to the What is being considered here is the tendency of
the testimony to establish or aggravate the guilt Rectification made spontaneously after realizing
truth of a certain matter at a hearing before a
of the accused and not the result that the the mistake is NOT a false testimony.

FALSE TESTIMONY IN CIVIL CASES FALSE TESTIMONY IN OTHER CASES AND the venue is the place where the affidavit was Perjury vs. False Testimony
ART. 182, RPC PERJURY IN SOLEMN AFFIRMATION notarized. (Union Bank et al., v. People, G.R. No.
ART. 183, RPC 192565, 28 Feb. 2012) PERJURY FALSE TESTIMONY
Elements of False Testimony in Civil Cases As to Definition
(C-Re-F-Ma-K) Perjury Oath Any willful and
corrupt assertion of
1. Testimony must be given in a Civil case; The willful and corrupt assertion of falsehood Any form of attestation by which a person falsehood on material Given in the course of
2. It must be Related to the issues presented in under oath or affirmation administered by signifies that he is bound in conscience to matter under oath a judicial proceeding.
said case; authority of law on a material matter. perform an act faithfully and truthfully. and not given in
3. It must be False; judicial proceedings.
4. It must be given by the defendant Knowing NOTE: Perjury committed in prosecutions under Affidavit As to Time Committed
the same to be false; and special laws, special proceedings, or under Art. There is perjury even
5. It must be Malicious, and given with an intent 180 where the penalty is only arresto mayor and A sworn statement in writing; a declaration in during the Contemplates actual
to affect the issues presented in said case. below, can be proceeded against under this writing, made upon oath before an authorized preliminary trial.
article. (Regalado, 2007) magistrate or officer. investigation.
NOTE: The criminal action of false testimony in
civil cases must be suspended when there is a Commission of Perjury Competent Person Subornation of Perjury
pending determination of the falsity or
truthfulness of the subject testimonies in the civil Perjury is committed thru: A person who has a right to inquire into the It is committed by a person who knowingly and
case. (Ark Travel Express v. Judge Abrogar, G.R. No. 1. Falsely testifying under oath; or questions presented to him upon matters under willfully procures another to swear falsely and
137010, 29 Aug. 2003) 2. Making a false affidavit. his jurisdiction. the witness suborned does testify under the
circumstances rendering him guilty of perjury.
NOTE: Falsely testifying under oath should not be “Material matter”
Penalty Depends on the Amount of the in a judicial proceeding. (Reyes, 2017) Subornation of perjury is not expressly penalized
Controversy The main fact which is the subject of the inquiry, in the RPC, but the person who induces another
Elements of Perjury (2005 BAR) or any circumstance which tends to prove that to commit a perjury may be punished under Art.
The penalties vary – if the amount of the fact, or any fact or circumstance which tends to 183, in relation to Art. 17, as a principal by
controversy is over P5,000; if not exceeding 1. Accused made a statement under oath or corroborate or strengthen the testimony relative inducement to the crime of perjury while the one
P5,000; or if it cannot be estimated. (Reyes, 2017) executed an affidavit upon a material matter to the subject of inquiry, or which legitimately induced is liable as a principal by direct
(2008 BAR); affects the credit of any witness who testifies. participation.
Non-applicability of this Article to Special 2. Statement or affidavit was made before a (U.S. v. Estraña, G.R. No. 5751, 06 Sept. 1910)
Proceedings competent officer, authorized to receive and OFFERING FALSE TESTIMONY IN EVIDENCE
administer oath; Test to Determine the Materiality of the
ART. 184, RPC
False testimony given to a special proceeding is Matter
NOT punishable under this article. Art. 182 3. In that statement or affidavit, the accused Elements of Offering False Testimony in
applies only to ordinary or special civil actions made a willful and deliberate assertion of a The test is whether if the evidence admitted could
Evidence (O-K-J)
and supplementary or ancillary proceedings falsehood (1996 BAR); and properly influence the result of the trial.
therein. Perjury committed in special 1. Offender Offered in evidence a false witness
proceedings, i.e., probate proceeding, are covered 4. Sworn statement or affidavit containing the Defense in Perjury
or false testimony;
by Art. 183. (Regalado, 2007 citing U.S. v. falsity is required by law. (1991 BAR) 2. He Knew that the witness or testimony was
Gutierrez and People v. Hernandez) Good faith or lack of malice is a defense in perjury.
false; and
The statement need not actually be required. It is Mere assertion of falsehood is not enough to
3. Offer was made in a Judicial or official
sufficient that it was authorized by law to be amount to perjury. The assertion must be
proceeding.
made. (People v. Angangco, G.R. No. L-47693, 12 deliberate and willful.
Oct. 1943) NOTE: Art. 184 does NOT apply when the
offender induced a witness to testify falsely. It
NOTE: The venue in perjury, if committed by applies when the offender knowingly presented a
falsely testifying under oath, is the place where he false witness, and the latter testified falsely. The
testified. If committed by making false affidavit, one offering the testimony is liable under Art. 184

while the witness who testified is liable under reduction of the price of the thing development, or investment; and Sec. 2: Frauds in Commerce and Industry
Arts. 180-183, depending on the proceedings on auctioned.
which the testimony was offered and for whose b. Dividing or sharing the market,
IMPORTATION AND DISPOSITION OF
favor the false testimony was made. NOTE: Mere attempt to cause prospective whether by volume of sales or
FALSELY MARKED ARTICLES OR
bidders to stay away from the auction by purchases, territory, type of goods or
MERCHANDISE MADE OF GOLD, SILVER, OR
CHAPTER 3: FRAUDS means of threats, gifts, promises or any other services, buyers or sellers, or any other
OTHER PRECIOUS METALS OR THEIR ALLOYS
artifice with the intent that the thing means;
ART. 187, RPC
auctioned, should command a lesser price, is
Sec. 1: Machinations, Monopolies,
sufficient to constitute an offense. The threat 3. Agreements other than those specified in
and Combinations Articles of the Merchandise
need not be effective nor the offer or gift nos. 1 and 2 of this section which have the
accepted. object or effect of substantially preventing,
MACHINATIONS IN PUBLIC AUCTIONS restricting or lessening competition shall 1. Gold
ART. 185, RPC also be prohibited; Provided, those which 2. Silver
MONOPOLIES AND COMBINATIONS
contribute to improving the production, or 3. Other precious metals
IN RESTRAINT OF TRADE
Punishable Acts distribution of goods and services, or to 4. Their alloys
ART. 186, RPC
promoting technical, or economic progress,
while allowing consumers a fair share of the Elements of Art. 187, RPC (Im-Fa-K)
1. Soliciting any gift or promise as a NOTE: Art. 186 has been repealed by the
consideration for refraining from taking part Philippine Competition Act or R.A. No. 10667. resulting benefits, may not necessarily be
deemed a violation of this Act. 1. Offender Imports, sells, or disposes of any of
in any public auction; and
those articles or merchandise;
Violations of Art. 186 of the RPC committed
Elements: before the effectivity of R.A. No. 10667 may NOTE: An entity that controls, is controlled by, or
is under common control with another entity or 2. Stamps, brands, or marks of those articles of
a. There is a public auction; continue to be prosecuted, unless the same has
entities, have common economic interests, and merchandise Fail to indicate the actual
b. Offender solicits any gift or compromise been barred by prescription, and subject to the
from any of the bidders; are not otherwise able to decide or act fineness or quality of said metals or alloys;
procedure under Sec. 31 of R.A. No, 10667. (Sec.
independently of each other, shall not be and
c. Such gift or promise is the 55(A), R.A. No. 10667; Reyes, 2017)
consideration for his refraining from considered competitors for purposes of this
section. (Sec. 14, R.A. No. 10667) 3. Offender Knows that the stamps, brands or
taking part in that public auction; and Anti-Competitive Agreements under the marks fail to indicate the actual fineness or
d. Offender has the intent to cause the Philippine Competition Act
reduction of the price of the thing Penalties under R.A. No. 10667 the quality of the metals or alloys.
auctioned. 1. The following agreements, between or
An entity that enters into any anti-competitive Alteration of Quality
among competitors, are per se prohibited:
NOTE: It is not required that the person agreement as covered by Chapter III, Secs. 14(a)
making the proposal actually refrains from and 14(b) under this Act shall, for each and every The manufacturer who alters the quality or
a. Restricting competition as to price, or fineness of anything pertaining to his art or
taking part in any auction. components thereof, or other terms of violation, be penalized by imprisonment from
2. Attempting to cause bidders to stay away two (2) to seven (7) years, and a fine of not less business is liable for estafa under Art. 315, (2) (b),
trade; and of the Code.
from an auction by threats, gifts, promises or than fifty million pesos (P50,000,000) but not
any other artifice. more than two hundred fifty million pesos NOTE: Selling the misbranded articles is not
b. Fixing price at an auction or in any form
(P250,000,000.00). The penalty of imprisonment necessary.
of bidding including cover bidding, bid
NOTE: The threat need not be effective nor suppression, bid rotation and market shall be imposed upon the responsible officers,
the offer or gift accepted for the crime to and directors of the entity. NOTE: Arts. 188 and 189 of the RPC were
allocation and other, analogous
arise. repealed by The Intellectual Property Code (R.A.
practices of bid manipulation;
When the entities involved are juridical persons, No. 8293, as amended).
Elements: 2. The following agreements, between or the penalty of imprisonment shall be imposed on
a. There is a public auction; its officers, directors, or employees holding NOTE: R.A. No. 9165, as amended by R.A. No.
among competitors which have the object or
b. Offender attempts to cause the bidders managerial positions, who are knowingly and 10640, repealed Title V of the RPC (Crimes
effect of substantially preventing, restricting
to stay away from that public auction; willfully responsible for such violation (Sec. 30, Relative to Opium and Other Drugs, Arts. 190-194).
or lessening competition: shall be prohibited:
c. It is done by threats, gifts, promises or R.A. No. 10667).
any other artifice; and (See discussion on R.A. No. 9165, as amended,
a. Setting, limiting, or controlling
d. Offender has the intent to cause the under Special Penal Laws – page 464)
production, markets, technical

highly scandalous conduct should not expressly manner that it scandalize the public, e. Contrary to law, public order, morals,
E. CRIMES AGAINST PUBLIC MORALS fall within any other article of the RPC. offends decency and but his acts produce good customs, established policies,
ARTS. 200-202, RPC, TITLE VI good customs. alarm or danger to lawful orders, decrees and edicts; or
NOTE: If the acts of the offender are punished the public.
under another article of the RPC, Art. 200 is not As to its Purpose 4. Those who shall Sell, give away, or exhibit
applicable. The scandal involved films, prints, engravings, sculptures, or
CHAPTER 1: GAMBLING AND BETTING literatures which are offensive to morals.
refers to moral
Commission of the Crime in a Private Place scandal offensive to
NOTE: Arts. 195-196 have been repealed and decency or good NOTE: The object of the law is to protect the
modified by P.D. Nos. 449, 483, and 1602, as An act offensive to decency, performed in a customs, although it The purpose is to morals of the public. (1993 BAR)
amended by Letters of Instructions No. 816. Arts. private place, constitutes grave scandal. does not disturb disturb public peace.
197-199 has been repealed and modified by P.D. However, the act must be open to public view for public peace. But such Mere possession of obscene materials, without
483 and P.D. 449. it to be actionable. conduct or act must intention to sell, exhibit, or give them away, is not
be open to the public punishable under Art. 201, considering the
CHAPTER 2: OFFENSES AGAINST DECENCY NOTE: If committed in a public place, the view. purpose of the law is to prohibit the
AND GOOD CUSTOMS performance of the act offensive to decency is dissemination of obscene materials to the public.
already a crime even though there is no third IMMORAL DOCTRINES, OBSCENE (Reyes, 2017)
party looking at it. Public view is not required. PUBLICATIONS AND EXHIBITIONS,
GRAVE SCANDAL
The public character of the place is sufficient. AND INDECENT SHOWS Obscenity
ART. 200, RPC
ART. 201, RPC, as amended by P.D. 969
Q: X, an 11-year-old girl, had sexual Obscenity is something which is offensive to
Grave Scandal
intercourse with her 18-year-old boyfriend Y. chastity, decency or delicacy. That which shocks
Persons Liable (P-O-S-E)
They performed the act in a secluded vacant the ordinary and common sense of men as an
It consists of acts which are offensive to decency
lot. Unknown to them, there was a roving indecency.
and good customs which, having been committed 1. Those who shall Publicly expound or
policeman at that time. Hence, they were
publicly, have given rise to public scandal to proclaim doctrines openly contrary to public
arrested. What crime did they commit? Publicity is an Essential Element of this
persons who have accidentally witnessed the morals;
Offense
same.
A: The sexual intercourse with the girl constitutes
2. Authors of Obscene literature, published
statutory rape. Though the act was carried out in This offense, in any of the forms mentioned, is
Elements (Pe-Hi-No-P) with their knowledge in any form, the editors
a public place, criminal liability for grave scandal committed only when there is publicity. It is an
publishing such literature; and the
cannot be incurred because the conduct of Y is essential element.
1. Offender Performs an act or acts; owners/operators of the establishment
punishable under another article of the RPC.
2. Such act or acts be Highly scandalous as selling the same;
Test of Obscenity (A-De-L)
offending against decency or good customs;
Essence of Grave Scandal
3. Highly scandalous conduct is Not expressly 3. Those who, in theaters, fairs,
1. Whether to the Average person, applying
falling within any other article of this Code; cinematography, or any other place, Exhibit
The essence of grave scandal is publicity and that contemporary standards would find the
and indecent or immoral plays, scenes, acts, or
the acts committed are not only contrary to work, taken as a whole, appeals to the
4. Act or acts complained of be committed in a shows, it being understood that the obscene
morals and good customs but must likewise be of prurient interest;
Public place or within the public knowledge literature or indecent or immoral plays,
such character as to cause public scandal to those
or view. (1996 BAR) scenes, acts or shows, whether live or in film,
witnessing it. (2013 BAR) 2. Whether the work Depicts or describes, in a
which are proscribed by virtue hereof, shall
patently offensive way, sexual conduct
NOTE: There should be consent to do the include those which: (Glo-S-O-D-Co)
Grave Scandal vs. Alarms and Scandal specifically defined by the applicable state
scandalous act. If the scandalous act was done
law; and
without consent, the crime committed may be a. Glorify criminals or condone crimes;
ALARMS AND
acts of lasciviousness or violation of R.A. No. 7610 GRAVE SCANDAL b. Serve no other purpose but to Satisfy the
SCANDAL 3. Whether the work, taken as a whole, Lacks
if a child is involved. market for violence, lust or
As to its Commission serious literary, artistic, political, or
pornography;
The acts of the The acts of the scientific value. (Miller v. California, 413 US
Grave Scandal is a Crime of Last Resort c. Offend any race, or religion;
offender are highly offender do not 15, 21 June 1973)
d. Tend to abet traffic in and use of
scandalous in such a necessarily prohibited Drugs; or
Under the third element of Grave Scandal, the

Liability of the Author of Obscene Literature Prostitutes the law invested her with some portion of the
F. CRIMES COMMITTED BY PUBLIC OFFICERS sovereign functions of the government, so that
The author becomes liable if it is published with They are women who, for money or profit, ARTS. 203-245, RPC, TITLE VII the purpose of the government is achieved.
his knowledge. In every case, the editor habitually indulge in sexual intercourse or
publishing it is also liable. lascivious conduct. In this case, the government aimed to enhance
the book publishing industry as it has a
Viewing of Pornographic Materials in Private Sexual intercourse is not a necessary element to CHAPTER 1: PRELIMINARY PROVISIONS significant role in the national development.
constitute prostitution. The act of habitually Hence, the fact that she was appointed from the
If the viewing of pornographic materials is done indulging in lascivious conducts because of WHO ARE PUBLIC OFFICERS public sector and not from the other branches or
privately, there is no violation of Art. 201. What is money or gain would already amount to ART. 203, RPC agencies of the government does not take her
protected is the morality of the public in general. prostitution. position outside the meaning of a public office.
The law is not concerned with the moral of one Q: Who is a public officer? (1999, 2017 BAR) (Javier v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 147026-27, 11
person. Term “Prostitution” is NOT Applicable to a Sept. 2009)
Man A: A public officer is any person who, by direct
Q: The criminal case for violation of Art. 201 provision of the law, popular election or CHAPTER 2: MALFEASANCE AND
of RPC was dismissed because there was no The term is applicable only to a woman who, for appointment by competent authority, shall take MISFEASANCE IN OFFICE
concrete and strong evidence pointing them money or profit, habitually engages in sexual part in the performance of public functions in the
as the direct source of pornographic intercourse or lascivious conduct. A man who Government of the Philippine Islands, or shall Three (3) Forms of Breach of Oath or Duty
materials. Can petitioner now recover the engages in the same conduct is not a prostitute perform in said Government or in any of its
confiscated hard disk containing the but a vagrant. branches public duties as an employee, agent or 1. Misfeasance
pornographic materials? subordinate official, of any rank or class. 2. Malfeasance
His acts may also be punished under
3. Nonfeasance
A: NO. Petitioner had no legitimate expectation of city/municipal ordinances. NOTE: The term “public officers” embraces every
protection of their supposed property rights. P.D. public servant from the highest to the lowest
MISFEASANCE MALFEASANCE NONFEASANCE
969, which amended Art. 201 of the RPC also No Crime of Prostitution by Conspiracy rank. All public servants from the President down
states that “where the criminal case against any to the garbage collector, if employed and paid by Improper
Performance Omission of
violation of this decree results in an acquittal, the One who conspires with a woman in the the government, come within this term. performance
of some act some act
obscene or immoral literature, films, prints, prostitution business like pimps, taxi drivers or of some act
which ought which ought
engravings, sculpture, paintings or other solicitors of clients are guilty of the crime under “Public Officer” defined under R.A. No. 3019 which might
not to be to be
materials and articles involved in the violation Art. 341 of the RPC for white slavery. (EA-PeTe-CU-E) be lawfully
done performed
shall nevertheless be forfeited in favor of the done
government to be destroyed.” In this case, the Art. 202 NOT Applicable to Minors 1. Elective and Appointive officials and
destruction of the hard disks and the software employees; Crimes of Misfeasance (U-N-I-D)
used in the violation of the subject law, addresses Persons below eighteen (18) years of age shall be 2. Permanent or Temporary;
the purpose of minimizing, if not eradicating exempt from prosecution for the crime of 3. Whether in the Classified or Unclassified; or 1. Knowingly rendering Unjust judgment (Art.
pornography. (Nograles v. People, G.R. No. 191080, prostitution under Art. 202 of the RPC, such 4. Exemption service receiving compensation, 204, RPC);
21 Nov. 2011) prosecution being inconsistent with the United even nominal, from the government. 2. Rendering judgment through Negligence
Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child; (Art. 205, RPC);
VAGRANTS AND PROSTITUTES Provided, that said persons shall undergo Q: Javier was charged with malversation of 3. Rendering unjust Interlocutory order (Art.
ART. 202, as amended by R.A. No. 10158 “An appropriate counselling and treatment program. public funds. She was the private sector 206, RPC) (2013 BAR); and
Act Decriminalizing Vagrancy” (Sec. 58, R.A. No. 9344) representative in the National Book 4. Malicious Delay in the administration of
Development Board (NBDB), which was justice. (Art. 207, RPC)
NOTE: R.A. No. 10158, dated March 27, 2012, created by R.A. No. 8047, otherwise known as
decriminalized vagrancy. All pending cases on the “Book Publishing Industry Development Crimes of Malfeasance
vagrancy shall be dismissed and all persons Act.” Is Javier, a private sector representative
serving sentence for vagrancy shall be to the board, a public officer? 1. Direct bribery (Art. 210, RPC); and
immediately released upon effectivity of R.A. No. 2. Indirect bribery. (Art. 211, RPC)
10158. (Reyes, 2017) A: YES. Notwithstanding that Javier came from
the private sector to sit as a member of the NBDB,

Crime of Nonfeasance 3. Bribery. b. An administrative proceeding in the Supreme MALICIOUS DELAY IN THE
Court against the judge precisely for ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE
Dereliction of duty in the prosecution of offenses It must be shown by positive evidence that the promulgating an unjust judgment or order. ART. 207, RPC
(Art. 208, RPC). judgment was rendered by the judge with (De Vera v. Pelayo, G.R. No. 137354, 06 July
conscious and deliberate intent to do an injustice. 2000) Elements (Ju-Pro-De-M)
Sec. 1: Dereliction of Duty
This crime cannot be committed by the Abuse of Discretion or Mere Error of
1. Offender is a Judge;
members/justices of the appellate courts. In Judgment
KNOWINGLY RENDERING UNJUST JUDGMENT 2. There is a Proceeding in his court;
collegiate courts like the CA and SC, not only one 3. He Delays the administration of justice; and
ART. 204, RPC Abuse of discretion or mere error of judgment is
magistrate renders or issues the judgment or 4. The delay is Malicious, that is, the delay is
interlocutory order. Conclusions and resolutions not punishable. A judge can only be held liable for
caused by the judge with deliberate intent to
Elements of Knowingly Rendering Unjust thereof are handed down only after deliberations gross ignorance of the law if it can be shown that
inflict damage on either party in the case.
Judgment (J-R-U-K) among the members, so that it cannot be said that he committed an error so gross and patent as to
there is malice or inexcusable negligence or produce an inference of bad faith. In addition to
NOTE: If the delay is not malicious, but
1. Offender is a Judge; ignorance in the rendering of a judgment or order this, the acts complained of must not only be
committed through gross negligence, the crime
2. He Renders a judgment in a case submitted that is supposedly unjust. contrary to existing law and jurisprudence, but
to him for decision; committed is that under R.A. No. 3019, Sec. 3 (e).
should also be motivated by bad faith, fraud,
3. Judgment is Unjust; and dishonesty, and corruption. (Monticalbo v. Judge
JUDGMENT RENDERED PROSECUTION OF OFFENSES;
4. The judge Knows that his judgment is unjust. Maraya, Jr., A.M. No. RTJ-09-2197, 13 Apr. 2011)
THROUGH NEGLIGENCE NEGLIGENCE AND TOLERANCE
It is a fundamental rule that a judicial officer, UNJUST INTERLOCUTORY ORDER
when required to exercise his judgment or ART. 206, RPC
discretion, is not criminally liable for any error he Elements (J-R-U-NI) Punishable Acts (1991, 1992, 2010 BAR)
commits provided that he acts in good faith and Interlocutory Order
1. Offender is a Judge; 1. Maliciously refraining from instituting
with no malice. (Mendoza v. Villaluz, A.M. No. L-
2. He Renders a judgment in a case submitted prosecution against violators of law.
1797-CCC, 27 Aug. 1981) An order which is issued by the court between the
to him for decision; 2. Maliciously tolerating the commission of
3. Judgment is manifestly Unjust; and commencement and the end of a suit or action,
Judgment offenses.
4. It is due to his inexcusable Negligence or and which decides some point of matter, but
Ignorance. which, however, is not a final decision of the
It is the final consideration and determination of Elements (1991, 1992, 2010 BAR)
matter in issue. (Reyes, 2017)
a court of competent jurisdiction upon the
Manifestly Unjust Judgment 1. Offender is a public officer or officer of the
matters submitted to it, in an action or Elements of Unjust Interlocutory Order
proceeding. It must be: (W-PreS-FaLaw) law who has a duty to cause the prosecution
A judgment which cannot be explained with (J-K-M)
of, or to prosecute, offenses;
reasonable interpretation or is a clear,
1. Written in the official language; 1. Offender is a Judge; and
incontrovertible, and notorious violation of a 2. There is dereliction of the duties of his office,
2. Personally and directly Prepared by the
legal precept. It must be patently contrary to law 2. He performs any of the following acts:
judge and Signed by him; and that is, knowing the commission of the crime,
if rendered due to ignorance or inexcusable a. Knowingly renders an unjust
3. Shall contain clearly and distinctly a he does not cause the prosecution of the
negligence. interlocutory order or decree; or
statement of the Facts and the Law upon criminal, or knowing that a crime is about to
b. Renders a Manifestly unjust
which it is based. be committed, he tolerates its commission;
NOTE: Before a civil or criminal action against a interlocutory order or decree through
and
judge for violations of Arts. 204 and 205 can be inexcusable negligence or ignorance.
Unjust Judgment
entertained, there must be a “final and NOTE: Dereliction of duty caused by poor
authoritative judicial declaration” that the Test in Determining whether an Order or
One which is contrary to law or is not supported judgment or honest mistake is not
decision or order in question is indeed unjust. Judgment is Interlocutory or Final
by the evidence or both. punishable.
The pronouncement may result from either:
If it leaves something to be done in the trial court
Sources of an Unjust Judgment 3. Offender acts with malice and deliberate
a. An action for certiorari or prohibition in a with respect to the merits of the case, it is
intent to favor the violator of the law.
higher court impugning the validity of a interlocutory; if it does not, it is final.
1. Error;
judgment; or
2. Ill-will or revenge; or

Offenders under this Article BETRAYAL OF TRUST BY AN ATTORNEY OR gross betrayal of his fiduciary duty and a Procurador Judicial
SOLICITOR – REVELATION OF SECRET breach of the trust reposed upon him by his
1. Public officer – officers of the prosecution ART. 209, RPC client. His sentiment against his client is not A person who had some practical knowledge of
department, whose duty is to institute a valid reason for him to renege on his law and procedure, but not a lawyer, and was
criminal proceedings for felonies upon being Punishable Acts obligation as a lawyer. The moment he permitted to represent a party in a case before an
informed of their perpetration. agreed to handle the case, he was bound to inferior court.
1. Causing damage to his client, either: give it his utmost attention, skill and
2. Officer of the law – those who are duty- a. By any malicious breach of professional competence. Public interest requires that he NOTE: There is no solicitor or procurador judicial
bound to cause the prosecution and duty; exert his best efforts and all his learning and under the Rules of Court.
punishment of the offenders by reason of the b. By inexcusable negligence or ignorance. ability in defense of his client’s cause. Those
position held by them. who perform that duty with diligence and Sec. 2: Bribery
2. Revealing any of the secrets of his client candor not only safeguard the interests of the
Liability of a Public Officer who, having the learned by him in his professional capacity. client, but also serve the ends of justice. They
DIRECT BRIBERY
Duty of Prosecuting the Offender, Harbored, do honor to the bar and help maintain the
ART. 210, RPC
Concealed, or Assisted in the Escape of the NOTE: Damage is not necessary. The mere community’s respect for the legal profession.
Felon fact that a secret has been revealed is already (Gone v. Atty. Ga, A.C. No. 7771, 06 Apr. 2011)
Commission of Bribery
punishable.
He is a principal in the crime defined and Rule with Regard to Communications Made
penalized in Art. 208. Such public officer is not with Prospective Clients Bribery is committed when a public officer
3. Undertaking the defense of the opposing party receives a gift, present, offer or promise, by
merely an accessory. in the same case, without the consent of his
Under the rules on evidence, communications reason or in connection with the performance of
first client, after having undertaken the
Q: If a police officer tolerates the commission made with prospective clients to a lawyer with a his official duties. Bribery requires the
defense of said first client, or after having concurrence of the will of the corruptor and the
of a crime or otherwise refrains from received confidential information from said view to engaging his professional services are
apprehending the offender, is he liable for already privileged even though client-lawyer public officer, otherwise the crime is not
client.
dereliction of duty? relationship did not eventually materialize consummated. (Boado, 2008)
NOTE: If the client consents to it, there is no because the client cannot afford the fee being
A: NO. Such police officer does not have the duty asked by the lawyer. Bribery exists when:
crime. The consent need not be in writing.
to prosecute or to move the prosecution of the
offender. It is the Chief of police which has the Rule as to Privileged Communications 1. The gift is offered voluntarily by a private
Illustration: The Code of Professional
duty to do so. He can however be prosecuted as person; or
Responsibility mandates lawyers to serve 2. The gift is solicited by a public officer.
follows: their clients with competence and A distinction must be made between confidential
diligence. Rule 18.03 and Rule 18.04 state: communications relating to past crimes already
1. An accessory to the crime committed by the committed, and future crimes intended to be NOTE: Bribery refers to the act of the receiver.
principal in accordance with Art. 19(3); or committed by the client. Statements and The act of the giver is corruption of public official
Rule 18.03. A lawyer shall not neglect a legal
communications regarding the commission of a under Art. 212 of the RPC.
matter entrusted to him, and his negligence
2. He may become a fence if the crime in connection therewith shall render him crime already committed, made by a party who
committed is robbery or theft, in which case committed it, to an attorney, consulted as such, Punishable Acts (1990, 1993, 2001, 2005,
liable;
he violates the Anti-Fencing Law; or are privileged communications. 2009 BAR) (P-G-A)
Rule 18.04. A lawyer shall keep the client

3. He may be held liable for violating the Anti- Contrarily, communications between attorney 1. Agreeing to Perform or performing an act
informed of the status of his case and shall
Graft and Corrupt Practices Act. and client having to do with the client’s pertaining to the duties of the office which
respond within a reasonable time to the
contemplated criminal acts, or in aid or constitutes a crime – If the act or omission
client’s request for information.
NOTE: Officers, agents or employees of the furtherance thereof, are not covered by the cloak amounts to a crime, it is not necessary that
Bureau of Internal Revenue are not covered by of privileges ordinarily existing in reference to the corruptor should deliver the
A lawyer breached these duties when he
this article as well. communications between attorney and client. consideration for the doing of the act. Mere
failed to reconstitute or turn over the records
The existence of an unlawful purpose prevents promise is sufficient. The moment there is a
of the case to his client. His negligence
the privilege from attaching. (People v. meeting of the minds, even without the
manifests lack of competence and diligence
Sandiganbayan, G.R. Nos. 115439-41, 16 July 1997) delivery of the consideration, even without
required of every lawyer. His failure to
the public officer performing the act
comply with the request of his client was a
amounting to a crime, bribery is already

committed on the part of the public officer. accomplished, the crime is consummated. the offender agrees to perform or execute, must Temporary Performance of Public Function
Corruption is already committed on the part be related to or linked with the performance of Sufficient to Constitute a Person a Public
of the supposed giver. Q: X was convicted for the crime of direct his official duties. (Tad-y v. People, G.R. No. Officer
bribery. As defense he reasoned that the 148862, 11 Aug. 2005)
2. Accepting a Gift in consideration of the amount he received was for a drinking For the purpose of punishing bribery, the
execution of an act which does not session with his friends, thus disproving the But if the act agreed to be performed is so foreign temporary performance of public functions is
constitute a crime – If the act or omission third element of the crime which is that such to the duties of the office as to lack even the color sufficient to constitute a person as a public
does not amount to a crime, the gift, present or promise has been given in of authority, there is no bribery. officer.
consideration must be delivered by the consideration of his commission of some
corruptor before a public officer can be crime, or any act not constituting a crime, or Q: Direct bribery is a crime involving moral Q: Supposed a law enforcer extorts money
prosecuted for bribery. Mere agreement is to refrain from doing something which is his turpitude. From which of the elements of from a person, employing intimidation and
not enough to constitute the crime because official duty to do. Is the argument of X direct bribery can moral turpitude be threatening to arrest the latter if he will not
the act to be done in the first place is tenable? inferred? (2011 BAR) come across with money, what crime is
legitimate, or in the performance of the committed?
official duties of the public official. A: YES. The crime of direct bribery as defined in A: Moral turpitude can be inferred from the third
Art. 210 of the RPC consists of the following element: The offender takes a gift with a view of A: If the victim actually committed a crime and
NOTE: The act executed must be unjust. elements: (1) that the accused is a public officer; committing a crime in exchange. the policeman demanded money so he will not be
(Reyes, 2017) (2) that he received directly or through another arrested, the crime is bribery. But if no crime has
some gift or present, offer or promise; (3) that The fact that the offender agrees to accept a been committed and the policeman is falsely
3. Abstaining from the performance of such gift, present or promise has been given in promise or gift, and deliberately commits an charging him of having committed one,
official duties. consideration of his commission of some crime, unjust act or refrains from performing an official threatening to arrest him if he will not come
or any act not constituting a crime, or to refrain duty in exchange for some favors, denotes a across with some consideration, the crime is
Elements of Bribery (1990, 1993, 2001, 2005, from doing something which is his official duty to malicious intent on the part of the offender to robbery. (Sandoval, 2010)
2009 BAR) (P-A-O-C) do; and (4) that the crime or act relates to the renege on the duties which he owes his
exercise of his functions as a public officer. fellowmen and society in general. Also, the fact Direct bribery vs. Prevaricacion
1. Offender is a Public officer within the scope that the offender takes advantage of his office and
of Art. 203; In the case at bar, the third element, was not duly position is a betrayal of the trust reposed on him DIRECT BRIBERY PREVARICACION
proven. The third element of the crime requires by the public. It is a conduct clearly contrary to The officer refrained
2. Offender Accepts an offer or promise or that the gift be given in consideration of the the accepted rules of right and duty, justice, from doing No gift was promised
receives a gift or present by himself or accused's commission of some crime, or any act honesty and good morals. (Magno v. COMELEC, something which was or received in
through another; not constituting a crime, or to refrain from doing G.R. No. 147904, 04 Oct. 2002) his official duty to do consideration for
something which it is his official duty to do. so in consideration of refraining to
3. Such Offer or promise be accepted, or gift or (Carlos Catubao v. Sandiganbayan and the People, Q: Suppose the public official accepted the a gift promised or prosecute offenses.
present received by the public officer: G.R. No. 227371, 02 Oct. 2019, J. Caguioa) consideration and turned it over to his received.
superior as evidence of corruption, what is
a. With a view of committing some crime; The Offer of Gift or Promise must be Accepted the crime committed? INDIRECT BRIBERY
or by the Public Officer ART. 211, RPC
b. In consideration of the execution of an A: The offense is attempted corruption only and
act which does not constitute a crime, In case there is only an offer of gift or promise to not frustrated. The official did not agree to be
Indirect Bribery
but the act must be unjust; or give something, the offer or the promise must be corrupted.
c. To refrain from doing something, which accepted by the officer. Further, the gift or
It is the crime of any public officer who shall
is his official duty to do; and present must have value or be capable of NOTE: Under Art. 212 of the RPC, any person who
accept gifts offered to him by reason of his office.
pecuniary estimation. (Reyes, 2017) shall have made the offers or promises or given
4. That the act which the offender agrees to the gifts is liable for corruption of public officers.
If the public officer does not accept the gift, this
perform or which he executes be Connected Q: When does an act relate to the official
crime is not committed but the offeror is guilty of
with the performance of his official duties. duties of the public officer?
Corruption of Public Officials under Art. 212 of
the RPC.
NOTE: There is no frustrated stage, for the reason A: Official duties include any action which is
that if the corruption of the official is authorized. The acts referred to in the law, which

Elements of Indirect Bribery (BAR 1997, QUALIFIED BRIBERY Q: One Sunday afternoon, Mr. X, President of property funds (Fraud against Public
2005, 2009, 2010) (P-A-O) ART. 211-A, RPC ABC Corp., happened to bump into the Labor Treasury);
Arbiter assigned to the illegal dismissal case
1. Offender is a Public officer; (BAR 2006) Elements of Qualified Bribery (L-R-C) filed by certain employees against his 2. Demanding, directly or indirectly, the
2. He Accepts gifts; and company. During their encounter, Mr. X payment of sums different from or larger
3. Said gifts are offered to him by reason of his 1. Offender is a public officer entrusted with promised the Labor Arbiter a luxury car in than those authorized by law, in the
Office. Law enforcement; exchange for a favorable ruling. The Labor collection of taxes, licenses, fees and other
Arbiter immediately rejected the offer and imposts (Illegal Exaction);
There is no attempted or frustrated indirect 2. He Refrains from arresting or prosecuting an walked away. What crime did Mr. X commit
bribery because it is committed by accepting gifts offender who has committed a crime under the RPC, if any? Explain. (2019 BAR) NOTE: By mere demanding an amount
offered to the public officer by reason of his office. punishable by reclusion perpetua and/or different, whether bigger or smaller, than
If he does not accept the gift, he does not commit death; and A: Mr. X committed the crime of Attempted what should be paid, even if the debtor
the crime. If he accepts the gifts, it is Corruption of a Public Official. He offered to give refuses, illegal exaction is committed.
consummated. (Reyes, 2017) 3. He refrains from arresting or prosecuting the the Labor Arbiter a luxury car in exchange for a
offender in Consideration of any promise, gift favorable ruling on a pending illegal dismissal 3. Failing voluntarily to issue a receipt as
NOTE: The gift is given in anticipation of future or present. (2006 BAR) case. By making such offer, Mr. X already provided by law, for any sum of money
favor from the public officer. P.D. 46 (Making it commenced the performance of material acts of collected by him officially, in the collection of
punishable for public officials and employees to If it is the public officer who asks or demands execution in corrupting the Labor Arbiter. He was taxes, licenses, fees and other imposts (Illegal
receive and for private persons to give, gifts on any such gift or present, he shall suffer the penalty of not able to perform all the material acts of Exaction); and
occasion, including Christmas) is committed in the death. (Art. 211-A, RPC) execution only because the Labor Arbiter refused
same way. (2006 BAR) to accept the offer. (Pozar v. CA, G.R. No. L62439, 4. Collecting or receiving directly or indirectly,
NOTE: The crime involved in qualified bribery is 23 Oct. 1984) by way of payment or otherwise, things or
Clear Intention on the Part of the Public a heinous crime. The public officer need not objects of a nature different from that
Officer to Take the Gift Offered receive a gift or present because a mere offer or Crime Committed when a Public Official provided by law, in the collection of taxes,
promise is sufficient. Actually Accepted a Consideration and licenses, fees and other imposts (Illegal
There must be a clear intention on the part of the Allowed Himself to be Corrupted Exaction).
public officer to take the gift offered and he NOTE: Art. 211-A is an insertion brought about
should consider the property as his own from by R.A. No. 7659 (Heinous Crime Law). The corruptor becomes liable for consummated Elements of Fraud against Public Treasury
that moment. Mere physical receipt corruption of public official. The public officer (P-T-A-D)
unaccompanied by any other sign, circumstance, also becomes equally liable for consummated
CORRUPTION OF PUBLIC OFFICIALS
or act to show such acceptance is not sufficient to bribery. 1. Offender is a Public officer;
ART. 212, RPC
convict the officer.
CHAPTER 3: FRAUDS AND ILLEGAL 2. He should have Taken advantage of his office,
Elements of Corruption of Public Officials
Direct Bribery vs. Indirect Bribery EXACTIONS AND TRANSACTIONS that is, he intervened in the transaction in his
(1993, 2001, 2009 BAR)
official capacity;
DIRECT BRIBERY INDIRECT BRIBERY
1. Offender makes offers, or promise, or gives FRAUDS AGAINST THE PUBLIC TREASURY
Public officer receives gift 3. He entered into an Agreement with any
gifts or presents to a public officer; and AND SIMILAR OFFENSES
There is agreement There is no interested party or speculator or made use of
ART. 213, RPC
between the public agreement between any other scheme with regard to:
2. The offers or promises are made, or the gifts
officer and the the public officer and
or presents are given to a public officer under Punishable Acts
corruptor. the corruptor. a. Furnishing supplies; or
circumstances that will make the public
The public officer is b. The making of contracts; or
officer liable for direct bribery or indirect 1. Entering into an agreement with any
not necessarily called c. The adjustment or settlement of
The public officer is bribery. interested party or speculator, or making use
upon to perform any accounts relating to public property or
called upon to of any other scheme, to defraud the funds; and
official act. It is Crime Committed when a Public Officer
perform or refrain Government, in dealing with any person or
enough that he Refuses to be Corrupted
from performing an with regard to furnishing supplies, the 4. Accused had the intent to Defraud the
accepts the gifts
official act. making of contracts, or the adjustment or Government.
offered to him by The crime committed is attempted corruption of settlement of accounts relating to public
reason of his office. public official only.

NOTE: It is consummated by merely entering into a. Demanding, directly or indirectly, the 4. He becomes interested in the transaction Government or of the party which he represents.
an agreement with any interested party or payment of sums different from or larger during his Incumbency. (U.S. v. Udarbe, G.R. No. 9945, 12 Nov. 1914)
speculator. It is not necessary that the than those authorized by law;
Government is actually defrauded by reason of Actual fraud is not required for violation of Art. Application of this Article to Appointive
the transaction as long as the public officer who b. Voluntarily failing to Issue a receipt as 215. The act being punished is the possibility that Officials
acted in his official capacity had the intent to provided by law, for any sum of money fraud may be committed, or that the officer may
defraud the Government. collected by him officially; or place his own interest above that of the Art. 216 includes not only appointive but also
government. elective public officials. In fact, under the second
Essence of the Crime of Fraud against Public c. Collecting or receiving, directly or paragraph of the said article, even private
Treasury indirectly, by way of payment or The transaction must be one of exchange or individuals can be held liable.
otherwise, things or objects of a nature speculation, such as buying and selling stocks,
The essence of this crime is making the different from that provided by law. commodities, lands, etc., hoping to take Constitutional Provisions Prohibiting
government pay for something not received or advantage of an expected rise and fall in price. Interests
making it pay more than what is due. Essence of the Crime of Illegal Exaction (Reyes, 2017)
1. Sec. 14, Art. VI – Members of Congress
Three Ways of Committing Illegal Exactions The essence of the crime is not the NOTE: Purchasing stock or shares in a company cannot personally appear as counsel; cannot
misappropriation of any of the amounts but the is simply an investment, and is not a violation of be interested financially in any franchise or
1. Demanding, directly or indirectly, the improper making of the collection which would the article; but buying regularly securities for special privilege granted by government;
payment of sums different from or larger prejudice the accounting of collected amounts by resale is speculation. (Reyes, 2017) cannot intervene in any matter before office
than those authorized by law – Mere the government. of Government;
demand will consummate the crime, even if POSSESSION OF PROHIBITED INTEREST
the taxpayer shall refuse to come across with OTHER FRAUDS BY A PUBLIC OFFICER 2. Sec. 13, Art. VII – The President, Vice-
the amount being demanded. ART. 214, RPC ART. 216, RPC President, the Members of the Cabinet and
their deputies or assistant shall not, unless
NOTE: It is not necessary that payment Elements of Other Frauds (P-A-D) Persons Liable under this Article otherwise provided in this Constitution, hold
demanded be larger than the amount due the any other office or employment during their
government; it may be less than the amount 1. Offender is a Public officer; 1. Public officer who, directly or indirectly, tenure. They shall not, during said tenure,
due to the government. 2. He takes Advantage of his official position; became interested in any contract or directly or indirectly, practice any other
and business in which it was his official duty to profession, participate in any business, or be
2. Voluntarily failing to issue a receipt as 3. He commits any of the frauds or Deceits intervene; financially interested in any contract with, or
provided by law, for any sum of money enumerated in Arts. 315-318. in any franchise, or special privilege granted
collected by him officially – The act of NOTE: Intervention must be by virtues of by the Government or any subdivision,
receiving payment due to the government Court of Competent Jurisdiction public office held. agency or instrumentality thereof, including
without issuing a receipt will give rise to GOCCs or their subsidiaries. They shall
illegal exaction even though a provisional The RTC has jurisdiction over the offense 2. Experts, arbitrators, and private accountants strictly avoid conflict of interest in the
receipt has been issued. What the law regardless of the amount or penalty involved, who, in like manner, took part in any contract conduct of their office; and
requires is a receipt in the form prescribed because the principal penalty is disqualification. or transaction connected with the estate or
by law, which means an official receipt. property in the appraisal, distribution or 3. Sec. 2, Art. IX-A – No member of a
PROHIBITED TRANSACTIONS adjudication of which they had acted; or Constitutional Commission shall, during his
3. Collecting or receiving, directly or ART. 215, RPC tenure, hold any office or employment.
indirectly, by way of payment or otherwise, 3. Guardians and executors with respect to the Neither shall he engage in the practice of any
things or objects of a nature different from property belonging to their wards or the profession or in the active management or
Elements of Prohibited Transaction (Ap-I-T-I)
that provided by law. (Boado, 2012) estate. control of any business which in any way may
be affected by the functions of his office, nor
1. Offender is an Appointive public officer;
Elements of Illegal Exaction (Co-D-I-Co) NOTE: The mere violation of the prohibition is shall he be financially interested, directly or
2. He becomes Interested, directly or indirectly,
punished although no actual fraud occurs indirectly, in any contract with, or in any
in any transaction of exchange or
1. The offender is a Collecting officer; therefrom. The act is punished because of the franchise or privilege granted by the
speculation;
2. He committed any of the following acts or possibility that fraud may be, or that the officer government, or any of its subdivisions,
3. Transaction takes place within the territory
omissions: may place his own interest above that of the agencies, or instrumentalities, including
subject to his jurisdiction; and

GOCCs or their subsidiaries. Common Elements to All Acts of Malversation failure of a public officer to have duly account for it, is the factor which determines
forthcoming any public funds with which he is whether or not malversation is committed by the
CHAPTER 4: MALVERSATION OF 1. Offender is a public officer; chargeable upon demand by any duly authorized accused public officer or employee. (Torres v.
PUBLIC FUNDS OR PROPERTY 2. He had the custody or control of funds or officer gives rise to the presumption that he has People, G.R. No. 175074, 31 Aug. 2011)
property by reason of the duties of his office; put such missing funds to personal use.
3. Those funds or property were public funds or Q: When a public officer has no authority to
Crimes called Malversation of Public Funds or
property for which he was accountable; and The Prosecution was unable to satisfactorily receive the money for the Government, and
Property (Ma-Re-L-I-D)
4. He appropriated, took, misappropriated or prove the fourth element. Nowhere was the fact upon receipt of the same, he misappropriated
consented, or through abandonment of demand shown in any of the documentary it, can he be held liable for malversation?
1. Malversation by appropriating,
negligence, permitted another person to take exhibits or testimonies of the witnesses of the
misappropriating or permitting any other
them. Prosecution. Considering that the Prosecution A: NO. If the public officer has no authority to
person to take public funds or property (Art.
never established such material fact, the burden receive the money for the Government, the crime
217);
Q: A and B were charged with Malversation of evidence was never shifted to the Petitioners committed is estafa, not malversation (U.S. v.
2. Failure of an accountable public officer to through Falsification of Public Documents. to prove their innocence, there being no prima Solis, G.R. No. 2828, 14 Dec. 1906), since he cannot
The main issue is the alleged falsification of facie presumption of misappropriation under the be considered an accountable officer in that
Render accounts (Art. 218);
public documents consisting of Time Books facts obtaining. situation.
and Payrolls representing different time
3. Failure of a responsible public officer to
periods. Allegedly, fictitious laborers were Moreover, the mere absence of a name in the Meaning of “Appropriation”
render accounts before Leaving the country
made to appear as laborers in the said Time Book and Payroll does not automatically
(Art. 219);
documents, which enabled the Petitioners to translate to the non-existence of the alleged It does not necessarily mean appropriation to
collect sums of money and misappropriate worker. It is entirely possible that the person one’s personal advantage but rather, every
4. Illegal use of public funds or property (Art.
them for their personal use. Prosecution responsible simply forgot to write down the attempt by one person to dispose of the property
220); and
anchors its case on the fact that there was an name of the payee-laborer even as he secured of another without right. (Tabuena v.
5. Failure to make Delivery of public funds or absence of a name in the Time Book and their signatures. (Zenaida Maamo, et al v. People, Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 103501-03, 17 Feb. 1997)
property. (Art. 221) Payroll, despite having a signature, and the G.R. No. 201917, 01 Dec. 2016, J. Caguioa)
amount indicated therein being released. Will Prima Facie Evidence of Malversation
the case prosper? Actual Misappropriation of Funds is NOT
MALVERSATION OF PUBLIC FUNDS OR
Necessary The failure of a public officer to have duly
PROPERTY – PRESUMPTION OF
A: NO. To be found guilty of Malversation, the forthcoming any public fund or property with
MALVERSATION
Prosecution has the burden to prove the It is not necessary that the offender actually which he is chargeable, upon demand by any duly
ART. 217, RPC
following essential elements: misappropriated the funds. It is enough that he authorized officer, shall be prima facie evidence
has violated the trust reposed on him in that he has put such missing funds or property to
Punishable Acts (1994, 1999, 2001, 2005,
a. The offender is a public officer; connection with the property. personal uses. (Candao v. People, G.R. Nos.
2008 BAR) (A-M-P-G)
186659-710, 19 Oct. 2011)
b. The offender has custody or control of funds NOTE: Malversation is predicated on the
1. Appropriating public funds or property;
or property by reason of the duties of his relationship of the offender to the property or the An accountable public officer may be convicted of
2. Taking or Misappropriating the same;
office; funds involved. His being remiss in the duty of malversation even if there is no direct evidence of
3. Consenting, or through abandonment or
safekeeping public funds violates the trust misappropriation, and the only evidence is that
negligence, Permitting any other person to
c. The funds or property involved are public reposed by reason of the duties of his office. there is shortage in his accounts which he has not
take such public funds or property; and
funds or property for which the offender is been able to explain satisfactorily. (Quizo v.
4. Being otherwise Guilty of the
accountable; and Accountable Public Officer Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 77120, 06 Apr. 1987)
misappropriation or malversation of such
funds or property.
d. The offender has appropriated, taken or An accountable public officer, within the purview Q: Is a written demand required to constitute
misappropriated, or has consented to, or of Art. 217 of the RPC, is one who has custody or a prima facie presumption of malversation?
NOTE: The nature of the duties of the public
through abandonment or negligence, control of public funds or property by reason of
officer and not the name of the office controls.
permitted the taking by another person of, the duties of his office. The nature of the duties of A: NO. The law does NOT require that a written
(People v. Reyes, SB Case No. 26892, 15 Aug. 2006)
such funds or property. the public officer or employee, the fact that as demand be formally made to constitute a prima
part of his duties he received public money for facie presumption of malversation. In U.S. v.
Notably, Art. 217 of the RPC provides that the which he is bound to account and failed to Kalingo (G.R. No. 11504, 02 Feb. 1917), it was held

that the failure of the accused who had custody of Crime of Malversation CAN be Committed by Deceit in Malversation, NOT Necessary extinguish the accused’s criminal liability or
public funds to refund the shortage, upon Negligence relieve the accused from the penalty prescribed
demand by the duly authorized offices, Deceit need not be proved in malversation. by law. At best, such acts of reimbursement may
constitutes prima facie evidence of malversation, Q: Mesina, a Local Treasurer Officer I of Malversation may be committed either through a only affect the offender’s civil liability, and may
notwithstanding the fact that such demand had Caloocan City, collected the City’s collection positive act of misappropriation of public funds be credited in his favor as a mitigating
been merely made verbally. for June 1998 from Baclit at the Mini City Hall. or property, or passively through negligence. To circumstance analogous to voluntary surrender.
Mesina acknowledged the receipt of the said sustain a charge of malversation, there (Venezuela v. People, G.R. No. 205693, 14 Feb.
NOTE: Demand is not indispensable to constitute funds. On the same day, Baclit received must either be criminal intent or criminal 2018)
malversation. It merely raises a prima facie several phone calls, including a call from negligence, and while the prevailing facts of a
presumption that the missing funds have been Coleto saying that the Patubig Collection was case may not show that deceit attended the Instance when the Public Officer Cannot be
put to personal use. (Morong Water District v. not remitted. The other phone call was from commission of the offense, it will not preclude the Held Liable for Malversation
Office of the Deputy Ombudsman, G.R. No. 116754, Mesina saying that he did not receive the reception of evidence to prove the existence of
17 Mar. 2000, citing Nizurtada v. Sandiganbayan) patubig collection. negligence because both are equally punishable When the accountable officer is obliged to go out
under Art. 217 of the RPC. (Torres v. People, G.R. of his office and borrow the sum alleged to be the
Rebuttal of the Presumption The following morning, Mayor Malonzo asked No. 175074, 31 Aug. 2011) shortage and later the missing amount is found in
Mesina about the said funds and Mesina some unaccustomed place in his office, he is not
The presumption could be overcome by denied receiving it. During investigation, Q: When a municipal officer who, in good liable for malversation. (U.S. v. Pascual, G.R. No.
satisfactory evidence of loss or robbery Mesina’s vault was opened for cash count, faith, paid out public funds to persons in 8860, 04 Dec. 1913)
committed by a person other than the accused. thereafter Mesina admitted that he collected accordance with the resolution of the
(U.S. v. Kalingo, G.R. No. 11504, 02 Feb. 1917) the Patubig Collection but kept the money in municipal council but the payments were Commission of Malversation by a Private
his vault. Is Mesina liable for malversation? turned out to be in violation of the law, is Person
Q: A revenue collection agent of BIR admitted there criminal liability?
his cash shortage on his collections to get even A: YES. Mesina is liable for malversation. A private person may also commit malversation
with the BIR which failed to promote him. A Malversation is committed either intentionally or A: NONE. When an accountable public officer, in under the following situations:
special arrangement was made between the by negligence. All that is necessary for a good faith, makes a wrong payment through
BIR and the agent wherein the BIR would conviction is sufficient proof that the accused honest mistake as to the law or to the facts 1. A private person conspiring with an
withhold the salary of the latter and apply the accountable officer had received the public funds concerning his duties, he is not liable for accountable public officer in committing
same to the shortage incurred until full or property, and did not have them in his malversation. He is only civilly liable. (U.S. v. malversation (People v. Sendaydiego, G.R. No.
payment was made. Is the collection agent possession when demand therefor was made Elviña, G.R. No. L-7280, 13 Feb. 1913) L-33253-54, 20 Jan. 1978);
guilty of the crime of malversation of funds? without any satisfactory explanation of his failure
to have them upon demand. Required Proof in order to Convict an Accused 2. When he has become an accomplice or
A: YES. An accountable public officer may be of Malversation accessory to a public officer who commits
convicted of malversation even if there is no In the case at bar, Mesina feigned ignorance of malversation;
direct evidence of misappropriation and the only having received the patubig collection when he All that is necessary to prove is that the defendant
evidence is that there is a shortage in his accounts phoned Baclit to tell her that he did not receive received in his possession public funds, that he 3. When the private person is made the
which he has not been able to satisfactorily the collection. (Mesina v. People, G.R. No. 162489, could not account for them and did not have them custodian in whatever capacity of public
explain. 17 June 2015) in his possession and that he could not give a funds or property, whether belonging to
reasonable excuse for the disappearance of the national or local government, and
In the present case, considering that the shortage Damage to the Government is NOT Necessary same. (De Guzman v. People, G.R. No. L-54288, 15 misappropriates the same; (2017 BAR) or
was duly proven, retaliation against the BIR for to Constitute Malversation Dec. 1982)
not promoting him does not constitute a 4. When he is constituted as the depositary or
satisfactory or reasonable explanation of his It is not necessary that there is damage to the Payment or Reimbursement, NOT a Defense administrator of funds or property seized or
failure to account for the missing amount. (Cua v. government; it is not an element of the offense. in Malversation attached by public authority even though
People, G.R. No. 166847, 16 Nov. 2011) The penalty for malversation is based on the said funds or property belong to a private
amount involved, not on the amount of the Payment or reimbursement is not a defense in individual.
damage caused to the Government. (Reyes, 2008) malversation. The payment, indemnification, or
reimbursement of, or compromise on the Q: A private property was attached or levied
amounts or funds malversed or misappropriated by the sheriff; can it be a subject of the crime
after the commission of the crime, does not of malversation?

A: YES. Though the property belonged to a 2. He must be an Accountable officer for public ILLEGAL USE OF PUBLIC FUNDS Technical Malversation is Malum Prohibitum;
private person, the levy or attachment of the funds or property; OR PROPERTY Criminal Intent is NOT an Element
property impressed it with the character of being ART. 220, RPC
part of the public property it being in custodia 3. He is required by law or regulation to Render The law punishes the act of diverting public
legis. accounts to the Commission on Audit, or to a NOTE: Illegal use of public funds or property is property earmarked by law or ordinance for
provincial auditor; and also known as technical malversation. particular public purpose to another public
Q: If falsification of documents was resorted purpose. The offense is malum prohibitum,
to for the purpose of concealing malversation, 4. He Fails to do so for a period of two (2) Elements of Technical Malversation (1996 meaning that the prohibited act is not inherently
is a complex crime committed? months after such accounts should be BAR) (P-F-A-O) immoral but becomes a criminal offense because
rendered. positive law forbids its commission based on
A: NO. For complex crimes require that one crime 1. Offender is a Public officer; consideration of public policy, order, and
is used to commit another. If the falsification is NOTE: The article does not require that there be 2. There is public Fund or property under his convenience. It is the commission of an act as
resorted to for the purpose of hiding the a demand that the public officer should render an administration; defined by the law, and not the character or effect
malversation, the falsification and malversation account. It is sufficient that there is a law or 3. Such public fund or property has been thereof, which determines whether or not the
shall be separate offenses. (People v. Sendaydiego, regulation requiring him to render account. Appropriated by law or ordinance; and provision has been violated. Hence, malice or
G.R. No. L-33253-54, 20 Jan. 1978) (Reyes, 2008) 4. He applies the same to a public use Other criminal intent is completely irrelevant. (Ysidoro
than that for which such fund or property has v. People, G.R. No. 192330, 14 Nov. 2012)
Malversation vs. Estafa (1999 BAR) Q: Does the accused need to commit been appropriated by law or ordinance.
misappropriation to be liable under this Q: X appropriated the salary differentials of
MALVERSATION ESTAFA Article? Technical Malversation secondary school teachers of the Sulu State
As to Persons Liable College contrary to the authorization issued
Committed by a A: NO. It is not essential that there be In technical malversation, the public officer by the DBM. Can X be held liable for technical
Committed by an private person or misappropriation. If there is misappropriation, applies public funds under his administration not malversation?
accountable public even a public officer he would also be liable for malversation under for his or another’s personal use, but to a public
officer. who acts in a private Art. 217. (Reyes, 2008) use other than that for which the fund was A: NO. The third element is lacking. The
capacity. appropriated by law or ordinance. Technical authorization given by DBM is not an ordinance
As to Property Involved FAILURE OF A RESPONSIBLE PUBLIC OFFICER malversation is, therefore, not included in nor or law contemplated in Art. 220. (Abdulla v.
TO RENDER ACCOUNTS BEFORE does it necessarily include the crime of People, G.R. No. 150129, 06 Apr. 2005)
Deals with public Deals with private
LEAVING THE COUNTRY malversation of public funds charged in the
funds or property. property.
ART. 219, RPC information. Thus, if the acts constituting the Q: Suppose the application made proved to be
As to its Commission more beneficial to the public than the original
crime of technical malversation were not alleged
May be committed Elements (P-A-L) in the information, the person accused cannot be purpose for which the amount or property is
without personal convicted of malversation. (Parungao v. appropriated, is there technical
misappropriation, as Committed by 1. Offender is a Public officer; Sandiganbayan, G.R. 96025, 15 May 1991) malversation?
when the accountable personal misappro- 2. He must be an Accountable officer for public
officer allows another priation only. funds or property; and How Technical Malversation is Committed A: YES. Damage is not an essential element of
to misappropriate the 3. He must have unlawfully Left (or be on point technical malversation.
same. of leaving) the Philippines without securing Instead of applying it to the public purpose for
from the Commission on Audit a certificate which the fund or property was already Q: Suppose the funds had been appropriated
FAILURE OF ACCOUNTABLE OFFICER showing that his accounts have been finally appropriated by law, the public officer applied it for a particular public purpose, but the same
TO RENDER ACCOUNTS settled. to another purpose. (2015 BAR) was applied to private purpose, what is the
ART. 218, RPC crime committed?
Q: If the act of leaving the country is NOTE: In the absence of a law or ordinance
Elements of Failure of Accountable Public authorized by law, can the public officer be appropriating the public fund allegedly A: The crime committed is simple malversation
Officer to Render Accounts (P-A-R-F) convicted under this Article? technically malversed, the use thereof for another only.
public purpose will not make the accused guilty
1. Offender is a Public officer, whether in the A: NO. The act of leaving the Philippines must not of violation of Art. 220 of the RPC. (Abdulla v.
service or separated therefrom; be authorized or permitted by law to be liable People, G.R. No. 150129, 06 Apr. 2005)
under this Article. (Reyes, 2008)

Technical Malversation vs. Malversation 3. That he Maliciously fails to perform the 1. Take part in the performance of public A: NO. There is real and actual evasion of service
obligation. functions in the government, or in of sentence when the custodian permits the
TECHNICAL performing in said government or in any of prisoner to obtain relaxation of his imprisonment
MALVERSATION NOTE: The fine shall be graduated in such case by its branches public duties as an employee, and to escape the punishment of being deprived
MALVERSATION
the value of the thing: Provided, that it shall not be agent or subordinate official, or any rank or of his liberty, thus making the penalty ineffectual,
Offenders are accountable public officers
less than P10,000. class; and although the convict may not have fled (U.S. v.
in both crimes.
Bandino, supra). (1997 BAR)
Offender derives no Generally, the
OFFICERS INCLUDED IN THE 2. That his authority to take part in the
personal gain or offender derives
PRECEDING PROVISIONS performance of public functions or to Q. Does releasing a prisoner for failure to
benefit. personal benefit.
ART. 222, RPC perform public duties must be by: comply within the time provided by Art. 125
Public fund or
exculpate liability under this Article?
property is diverted Conversion is for the
Private Individuals who May be Liable under a. Direct provision of the law, or
to another public use personal interest of
Arts. 217-221 (P-A-C-AA) b. Popular election, or A. YES. Where the chief of police released the
other than that the offender or of
c. Appointment by competent authority. detention prisoners because he could not file a
provided for in the another person.
1. Private individual who in any capacity (Azarcon v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. complaint against them within the time fixed by
law.
whatever, have charge of any national, 116033, 26 Feb. 1997) Art. 125 due to the absence of the justice of the
provincial or municipal funds, revenue or peace, he is not guilty of infidelity in the custody
FAILURE TO MAKE DELIVERY OF of prisoners. (People v. Lancanan, G.R. No. L-6805,
property; CHAPTER 5: INFIDELITY OF
PUBLIC FUNDS OR PROPERTY 30 June 1954)
PUBLIC OFFICERS
ART. 221, RPC
2. Administrator, depository of funds or
property attached, seized or deposited by EVASION THROUGH NEGLIGENCE
Punishable Acts Sec. 1: Infidelity in the Custody of Prisoners
public authority even if such property ART. 224, RPC
belongs to a private individual;
1. Failing to make payment by a public officer CONNIVING WITH OR
Elements of Evasion through Negligence
who is under obligation to make such CONSENTING TO EVASION
3. Those who acted in Conspiracy in (P-Co-N)
payment from Government funds in his ART. 223, RPC
malversation; and
possession; and
1. Offender is a Public officer;
4. Accomplice and Accessories to malversation. Elements (BAR 1996, 2009) (P-C-E-Co) 2. He is charged with the Conveyance or
2. Refusing to make delivery by a public officer
custody of a prisoner, either detention
who has been ordered by competent 1. Offender is a Public officer;
NOTE: The word administrator used does not prisoner or prisoner by final judgment; and
authority to deliver any property in his 2. He has in his Custody or charge a prisoner,
include judicial administrator appointed to 3. Such prisoner escapes through his
custody or under his administration. either detention prisoner or prisoner by final
administer the estate of a deceased person Negligence.
because he is not in charge of any property judgment;
NOTE: The refusal to make delivery must be 3. Such prisoner Escaped from his custody;
attached, impounded or placed in deposit by The fact that the public officer recaptured the
malicious. Where an official stenographer 4. That he was in Connivance with the prisoner
public authority. Conversion of effects in his trust prisoner who escaped from his custody does not
retained some stenographic notes and failed to in the latter’s escape. (U.S. v. Bandino, G.R. No.
makes him liable for estafa. afford complete exculpation.
turn over the same upon demand as he was still L-9964, 11 Feb. 1915)
going to transcribe the same, he was held not to
Q: AA was designated custodian of the Gravamen
have violated this article. (People v. Jubila, 38 O.G. Classes of Prisoners Involved
distrained property of RR by the BIR. He
1796)
assumed the specific undertakings which It is the positive carelessness that is short of
included the promise that he will preserve the 1. Fugitive sentenced by final judgment to any deliberate non-performance of his duties as
Elements of Failure to Make Delivery of Public penalty; and
equipment. Subsequently, he reported to the guard. (People v. Reyes et al., 36 O.G. 316)
Funds or Property (F-O-Mal) 2. Fugitive held only as detention prisoner for
BIR that RR surreptitiously took the
distrained property. Did AA become a public any crime or violation of law or municipal Q: Is an order to the prisoner to keep close to
1. That the public officer has government Funds ordinance. (Reyes, 2017)
officer by virtue of his designation as the police officer while the latter was
in his possession;
custodian of distrained property by the BIR? answering the telephone call sufficient
2. That he is under Obligation to make Q: Is there a need that the convict has actually precaution?
payments from such funds or to deliver any fled for the public officer to be liable under
A: NO. To be a public officer, one must:
property in his custody or under his this Article? A: NO. The adequate precaution which should
administration; and

have been taken up by him was to lock up the entrusted and he connived with the prisoner (Art. NOTE: The document must be complete and one However, if the act is committed by destroying or
prisoner before answering the telephone call. 223, RPC) or through his negligence (Art. 224, by which a right can be established or an concealing documents, proof of illicit purpose is
(Remocal v. People, G.R. No. 47521, 08 Apr. 1941) RPC) the prisoner was allowed to escape. obligation could be extinguished. not required. The reason is that while in removal,
the accused may have a lawful or commendable
Q: A policeman permitted a prisoner to If the escape was with consideration, bribery is Document motive, in destroying or concealing, the offender
answer a call of nature in a hidden shed also deemed committed because he was could not have a good motive. (Reyes, 2008)
outside the building. The policeman remained performing a public function, hence is, at that Any written statement by which a right is
near the prisoner by the door. The prisoner instance, deemed to be a public officer. (Boado, established or an obligation extinguished. When Removal is Considered to be for an
escaped through the back of the bath. Is the 2008) Illicit Purpose
policeman liable under Art 224? NOTE: Books, pamphlets or periodicals sent
Sec. 2: Infidelity in the Custody of Documents through the mail for commercial purposes are not Removal is for an illicit purpose when the
A: NO. Not every little mistake or distraction of a considered as documents for the purpose of this intention of the offender is to:
guard leading to prisoner’s taking advantage of a article. (People v. Agnis, G.R. No. L-19676, 07 Feb.
REMOVAL, CONCEALMENT OR
dilapidated building is negligence. He can, 1923) 1. Tamper with it;
DESTRUCTION OF DOCUMENTS
however, be held administratively liable. Damage Contemplated under this Article 2. Profit by it; or
ART. 226, RPC
3. Commit an act constituting a breach of trust
Liability of the Escaping Prisoner This crime is also called infidelity in the custody The damage in this article may consist in mere in the official care thereof.
of documents. alarm to the public to the alienation of its
1. If the fugitive is serving his sentence by confidence in any branch of the government Consummation of this Crime
reason of final judgment – he is liable for Commission of the Crime of Infidelity in the service. (Kataniag v. People, G.R. No. L-48398, 28
evasion of the service of sentence under Art. Custody of Documents Nov. 1942) The crime of removal of public document in
157; breach of official trust is consummated upon its
1. Removal – presupposes appropriation of the Persons Liable under this Article removal or secreting away from its usual place in
2. If the fugitive is only a detention prisoner – official documents. It does not require that the office and after the offender had gone out and
he does not incur any criminal liability. the record be brought out of the premises Only public officers who have been officially locked the door, it being immaterial whether he
where it is kept. It is enough that the record entrusted with the documents or papers may be has or has not actually accomplished the illicit
be removed from the place where it should held liable under Art. 226. purpose for which he removed said document.
ESCAPE OF PRISONER UNDER THE CUSTODY
be transferred. (Kataniag v. People, G.R. No. L-48398, 28 Nov.
OF A PERSON NOT A PUBLIC OFFICER
ART. 225, RPC Q: Suppose, in the case for bribery or 1942)
2. Destruction – is equivalent to rendering corruption, the monetary consideration
useless or the obliteration of said documents; marked as exhibits were spent by the Q: If the postmaster fails to deliver the mail
Elements (Pri-C-E-Co)
the complete destruction thereof is not custodian, what is the crime committed? and instead retained them, can he be held
necessary. liable under this Article?
1. Offender is a Private person;
2. Conveyance or custody of prisoner or person A: The crime committed is infidelity in the
3. Concealment – means that the documents custody of documents because the money A: YES. The simple act of retaining the mail
under arrest is confided to him;
are not forwarded to their destination and it adduced as exhibits partake the nature of a without forwarding the letters to their
3. Prisoner or person under arrest Escapes; and is not necessary that they are secreted away
4. Offender Consents to the escape of the document and not as money. destination, even though without opening them
in a place where they could not be found. or taking the moneys they contained, already
prisoner or person under arrest or that the
escape takes place through his negligence. Q: Is there a need for criminal intent to be held constitutes infidelity on the part of the post office
Elements (2005, 2015 BAR) (P-AbDeC-ED) liable under this Article? official. (U.S. V. Peña, G.R. No. L-4451, 29 Dec.
NOTE: This article is not applicable if a private 1908)
1. The offender is a Public officer; A: To warrant a finding of guilt for the crime of
person was the one who made the arrest and he 2. He Abstracts, Destroys, or Conceals
consented to the escape of the person he infidelity in the custody of documents, the act of
documents or papers; removal, as a mode of committing the offense,
arrested. (Reyes, 2008) 3. Said documents or papers should have been should be coupled with criminal intent or illicit
Entrusted to such public officer by reason of purpose. (Manzanaris v. People, G.R. No. 19676, 07
Infidelity Committed by Private Person
his office; and Feb. 1923)
4. Damage, whether serious or not, to a third
Under Art. 225, infidelity can also be committed
party or to the public interest should have
by a private person to whom the prisoner was
been caused.

OFFICER BREAKING SEAL closed papers, documents or objects; and b. He has Charge of papers; justifiable reason.
ART. 227, RPC 4. He does Not have proper authority. c. Those papers should not be Published;
He delivers those papers or copies NOTE: The revelation will not amount to a
Elements of Officer Breaking Seal Under Art. 228, the closed documents must be thereof to a third person; crime under this article if the secrets are
(Pu-Cha-Se-B) entrusted to the custody of the accused by reason d. The delivery is Wrongful; and contrary to public interest or to the
of his office. (People v. Lineses, C.A. 40 O.G., Supp. e. Damage is caused to public interest. administration of justice. Revelation to any
1. Offender is a Public officer; 14, 4773) one person is necessary and sufficient; public
2. He is Charged with the custody of papers or This article punishes minor official betrayals, revelation is not required (Reyes, 2008).
property; Art. 228 does not require that there be damage or infidelities of little consequences affecting Damage to private individuals is not
3. These papers or property are Sealed by intent to cause damage. (Reyes, 2008) usually the administration of justice, executive or necessary. (Reyes, 2012)
proper authority; and official duties or the general interest of the public
4. He Breaks the seals or permits them to be Sec. 3: Revelation of Secrets order. If the public officer is merely entrusted The Offender must NOT be the Person
broken. with the papers but not with the custody of the Contemplated under Art. 209 of the RPC
papers, he is not liable under this provision.
REVELATION OF SECRETS BY AN OFFICER
It is the breaking of the seals and not the opening Furthermore, military secrets or those affecting When the offender is an attorney-at-law and he
ART. 229, RPC
of a closed envelope which is punished. (Reyes, national interest are covered by the crime of reveals the secrets of his client learned by him in
2008) espionage and not by the crime of revelation of his professional capacity, he is not liable under
Punishable Acts secrets. this article, but under Art. 209.
It is sufficient that the seal is broken, even if the 1. Revealing any secret known to the offending
contents are not tampered with. This article does Revelation of Secrets by an Officer v. Infidelity The reason for this provision is to uphold faith
public officer by reason of his official in the Custody of Document/Papers by and trust in public service. (Reyes, 2017)
not require that there be damage caused or that
capacity. Removing the Same
there be intent to cause damage. (Reyes, 2008) Elements: (P-K-R-D)
The mere breaking of the seal or the mere CHAPTER 6: OTHER OFFENSES OR
a. Offender is a Public officer; INFIDELITY IN THE
opening of the document would already bring IRREGULARITIES BY PUBLIC OFFICERS
b. He Knows of a secret by reason of his
about infidelity even though no damage has been CUSTODY OF
official capacity; REVELATION OF
suffered by anyone or by the public at large. DOCUMENTS/
c. He Reveals such secret without SECRETS BY AN Sec. 1: Disobedience, Refusal of Assistance, and
PAPERS BY
authority or justifiable reasons; and OFFICER Maltreatment of Prisoners
Rationale for Penalizing the Act of Breaking REMOVING THE
d. Damage, great or small, is caused to the SAME
the Seal
public interest. OPEN DISOBEDIENCE
The papers contain
secrets and therefore ART. 231, RPC
The act is being punished because the public
NOTE: If the secret revealed does not affect
officer, in breaking the seal or opening the should not be
public interest, the revelation would constitute The papers do not
envelope, violates the confidence or trust published and the Elements of Open Disobedience (J-J-Sco-R)
no crime at all. (Albert as cited in Reyes, 2017) contain secrets but
reposed on him. public officer having
their removal is for an
charge thereof 1. Offender is a Judicial or executive officer;
Secrets illicit purpose.
NOTE: The public officer liable under this article removes and delivers
must be one who breaks seals without authority them wrongfully to a 2. There is Judgment, decision or order of a
The secrets referred to in this article are those superior authority;
to do so. (Reyes, 2008) third person.
which have an official or public character, the
revelation of which may prejudice public interest.
PUBLIC OFFICER REVEALING SECRETS 3. Such judgment, decision or order was made
OPENING OF CLOSED DOCUMENTS They refer to secrets relative to the
OF PRIVATE INDIVIDUAL within the Scope of the jurisdiction of the
ART. 228, RPC administration of the government and not to
ART. 230, RPC superior authority and issued with all the
secrets of private individuals.
legal formalities; and
Elements of Opening Closed Documents
(P-C-OPe-N) 2. Wrongfully Delivering papers or copies of Elements of Art. 230 (P-K-R)
4. Offender without any legal justification
papers of which he may have charge and openly Refuses to execute the said judgment,
1. Offender is a Public officer; which should not be published. 1. Offender is a Public officer;
2. He Knows of the secrets of private individual decision or order, which he is duty bound to
2. Any Closed papers, documents or objects are
by reason of his office; and obey.
entrusted to his custody; Elements: (O-Cha-P-W-D)
3. He Opens or Permits to be opened said a. Offender is a public Officer; 3. He Reveals such secrets without authority or

NOTE: The refusal must be clear, manifest and For this reason, it entitles a subordinate to NOTE: Discharge of duties becomes a matter of placed to prevent flooding in the prison
decisive or a repeated and obstinate suspend in such cases the order issued, to submit duty and not a right. compound is authorized by law and does not
disobedience in the fulfillment of an order. his reason to his superior in order that the latter violate this article; but if the public officer would
may give them proper wight, if they are entitled The refusal must be without legal motive. (Reyes, order the prisoner to do so from morning up to
How Open Disobedience is Committed to say. (Reyes, 2017) 2017) late evening without any food, then this article is
involved, as he inflicted such authorized
Open disobedience is committed when judicial or REFUSAL OF ASSISTANCE MALTREATMENT OF PRISONERS punishment in a cruel and humiliating manner.
executive officer shall openly refuse to execute ART. 233, RPC ART. 235, RPC
the judgment, decision, or order of any superior Qualifying Circumstance
authority. (Reyes, 2008) Elements of Refusal of Assistance (P-D-F) Elements of Maltreatment of Officers
(P-U-Mal) If the maltreatment was done in order to extort
DISOBEDIENCE TO ORDER OF SUPERIOR 1. Offender is a Public officer; confession, the penalty is qualified to the next
OFFICER, WHEN SAID ORDER WAS 2. Competent authority Demands from the 1. Offender is a Public officer or employee; higher degree.
SUSPENDED BY INFERIOR OFFICER offender that he lends his cooperation
ART. 232, RPC towards the administration of justice or 2. He has Under his charge a prisoner or Rule when a Person is Maltreated by a Public
other public service; and detention prisoner; and Officer who has Actual Charge of Prisoners
Elements (P-O-S-D-D) 3. Offender Fails to do so maliciously.
3. He Maltreats such prisoner either of the Two crimes are committed, namely –
1. Offender is a Public officer; Any refusal by a public officer to render following manners: maltreatment under Art. 235 and physical
2. An Order is issued by his superior for assistance when demanded by competent public injuries. Maltreatment and physical injuries may
execution; authority, as long as the assistance requested a. By overdoing himself in the correction or not be complexed because the law specified that
from him is within his duty to render and that handling of a prisoner or detention the penalty for maltreatment shall be in addition
NOTE: The order of the superior must be assistance is needed for public service, prisoner under his charge either: to his liability for the physical injuries or damage
legal or issued within his authority, constitutes refusal of assistance. i. By the imposition of punishments caused.
otherwise, this article does not apply. If the not authorized by the regulations; or
order of the superior is illegal, the Investigators and medico-legal officers who ii. By inflicting such punishments Maltreatment refers not only to physical
subordinate has a legal right to refuse to refuse to appear to testify in court after having (those authorized) in a cruel or maltreatment but also moral, psychological, and
execute such order, for under the law, been subpoenaed may also be held liable under humiliating manner. other kinds of maltreatment because of the
obedience to an order which is illegal is not this article. phrase “physical injuries or damage caused” and
justified and the subordinate who obeys such b. By maltreating such prisoner to extort a “cruel or humiliating manner.” (Boado, 2008)
order can be held criminally liable under Art. Q: Is damage to the public interest or to third confession or to obtain some
11(6). parties necessary to consummate the crime? information from the prisoner. (1999 Rule in Cases wherein the Person Maltreated
BAR) is NOT a Convict or a Detention Prisoner
3. He has for any reason Suspended the A: YES. There must be damage to the public
execution of such order; interest or to a third party. If the damage is NOTE: The maltreatment should not be due to The crime committed would either be:
4. His superior Disapproves the suspension of serious, the penalty is higher. (Reyes, 2012) personal grudge, otherwise, offender is liable for
the execution of the order; and physical injuries only. 1. Coercion – If the person not yet confined in
5. Offender Disobeys his superior despite the jail is maltreated to extort a confession, or
REFUSAL TO DISCHARGE ELECTIVE OFFICE
disapproval of the suspension. ART. 234, RPC Who is a Prisoner
2. Physical injuries – If the person maltreated
The disobedience must be open and repeated. To be considered a detention prisoner, the has already been arrested but is not yet
Elements (E-R-N)
What is punished by the law is insubordination of person arrested must be placed in jail even for booked in the office of the police and put in
the act or defying the authority which is just a short time. jail.
1. Offender is Elected by popular election to a
detrimental to public interest. public office;
Illustration: Hitting a prisoner by a latigo, even Illustration: If a Barangay Captain maltreats a
2. He Refuses to be sworn in or to discharge the
The law has taken into account that a superior if the purpose is to instill discipline, is not person after the latter’s arrest but before
duties of said office; and
officer may sometimes err, and that orders issued authorized by law and constitutes violation of confinement, the offense is not maltreatment but
3. There is No legal motive for such refusal to be
by him may proceed from a mistaken judgment. this article. On the other hand, requiring physical injuries. The victim must actually be
sworn in or to discharge the duties of said
prisoners to dig a canal where culverts shall be confined either as a convict or a detention
office.

prisoner. (People v. Baring, 37 O.G. 1366) NOTE: The final or conclusive act of a punishment of USURPATION OF JUDICIAL FUNCTIONS
resignation’s acceptance is the notice of violations of law. ART. 241, RPC
Sec. 2: Anticipation, Prolongation, and acceptance. (Light Rail Transit Authority v.
Abandonment of the Duties and Salvaña, G.R. No. 192074, 10 June 2014) Elements: (Ex-AO)
Powers of Public Office
3. That his resignation has Not yet been The public officer does
1. That the offender is holding an office under
accepted; and not abandon his office
ANTICIPATION OF DUTIES OF The public officer the Executive Branch of the Government; and
4. That he Abandons his office to the detriment but he fails to prosecute
A PUBLIC OFFICE abandons his office 2. That he:
of the public service. an offense by
ART. 236, RPC to evade the a. Assumes the power exclusively vested in
dereliction of duty or by
discharge of his the Judiciary; or
Circumstances Qualifying the Offense malicious tolerance of
duty. b. Obstructs the execution of any order or
Elements (E-Sw-A-N) the commission of
decision given by a judge within his
The offense is qualified when the real motive of offenses.
1. That the offender is Entitled to hold a public jurisdiction.
resignation is to evade the discharge of duties of
office or employment either by election or preventing, prosecuting or punishing any crime Sec. 3: Usurpation of Powers and Penalty
appointment; Title One, and Chapter One of Title Three of Book Unlawful Appointments
2. The law requires that he should first be Two of the RPC. Arresto mayor in its medium period to
Sworn in and/or should first give a bond;
USURPATION OF LEGISLATIVE POWERS in its minimum period.
3. He Assumes the performance of the duties Title One, and Chapter One of Title Three of
and powers of such office; and ART. 239, RPC
Book Two of the RPC refer to the crimes of: Arts. 239-241 punish the usurpation of powers of
4. He has Not taken his oath of office and/or
Elements (E-J-MAS) the three branches of the Government in order to
given the bond required by law. 1. Treason; uphold the separation and independence of the
2. Conspiracy and proposal to commit treason; three equal branches.
PROLONGING PERFORMANCE OF 1. That the offender is an Executive or Judicial
3. Misprision of treason;
DUTIES AND POWERS officer; and
4. Espionage;
ART. 237, RPC 2. That he: DISOBEYING REQUEST OF
5. Inciting to war or giving motives for reprisal;
a. Makes general rules and regulations DISQUALIFICATION
6. Violation of neutrality;
beyond the scope of his authority; ART. 242, RPC
Elements (H-Ex-Con) Correspondence with hostile country;
b. Attempts to repeal a law; or
7. Flight to enemy country;
c. Suspends the execution thereof. Elements (Pu-P-Q-R-C)
1. That the offender is Holding a public office; 8. Piracy and mutiny;
2. That the period allowed by law for him to 9. Rebellion;
USURPATION OF EXECUTIVE FUNCTIONS 1. That the offender is a Public officer;
exercise such function and duties has already 10. Coup d’etat;
Expired; and ART. 240, RPC 2. That a Proceeding is pending before such
11. Conspiracy and proposal to commit coup
public officer;
3. That the offender Continues to exercise such d’etat;
Elements (J-A-O) 3. There is a Question brought before the
function and duties. 12. Disloyalty of public officers;
proper authority regarding his jurisdiction,
13. Inciting to rebellion;
1. That the offender is a Judge; and which is yet to be decided;
The officers contemplated by this article are 14. Sedition;
2. That the offender: 4. He has been lawfully required to Refrain
those who have been suspended, separated, 15. Conspiracy to commit sedition; and
declared overaged, or dismissed. a. Assumes the power exclusively vested to from continuing the proceeding; and
16. Inciting to sedition.
executive authorities of the Government; 5. He Continues the proceeding.
Abandonment of Office vs. Dereliction of Duty or
ABANDONMENT OF OFFICE OR POSITION
b. Obstructs executive authorities from the NOTE: The offender is still liable even if the
ART. 238, RPC
ABANDONMENT DERELICTION lawful performance of their functions. question of jurisdiction has been resolved in his
OF OFFICE OF DUTY favor later on.
Elements (Hol-Res-N-Ab)
ART. 238 ART. 208
1. That the offender is Holding a public office; Committed only by
2. That he formally Resigns from his office; Committed by any public officers who have
public officer. the duty to institute
prosecution of the

ORDERS OR REQUESTS BY EXECUTIVE Sec. 4: Abuses against Chastity 1. A woman interested in matters pending
OFFICERS TO ANY JUDICIAL AUTHORITY before the offending officer for decision, or
ART. 243, RPC with respect to which he is required to
ABUSES AGAINST CHASTITY
submit a report to or consult with a superior
ART. 245, RPC
Elements (Ex-Add-Ju) officer;
Elements of Abuses against Chastity (P-SI-W- 2. A woman under the offender’s custody;
1. That the offender is an Executive officer; Pe-Cu-R)
2. That the offender Addresses any order or
suggestion to any judicial authority; and 3. The wife, daughter, sister or relative within
1. That the offender is a Public officer; the same degree by affinity of any person in
3. That the order or suggestion relates to any
case or business within the exclusive the custody of the offending warden or
2. That he Solicits or makes any Indecent or officer.
Jurisdiction of the courts of justice.
immoral advances to a woman; and
NOTE: The crime can be committed by mere
The purpose of this article is to maintain the
3. That the offended party is a Woman who is: proposal, and it is not necessary for the woman
independence of the judiciary.
solicited to yield to the proposal of the offender.
a. Interested in matters Pending before the Proof of solicitation is not necessary when there
UNLAWFUL APPOINTMENTS public officer for his decision or where is sexual intercourse.
ART. 244, RPC the public officer is required to submit a
report or to consult with a superior
Elements of Unlawful Appointments (Pu-No- officer;
La-K)
b. Under the Custody of the offender, who
1. Offender is a Public officer; is a warden or other public officer
2. He Nominates or appoints a person to a directly charged with the care and
public office; custody of prisoners or persons under
arrest; or
NOTE: “Nominate” is different from
“recommend.” While nomination constitutes c. The wife, daughter, sister or any Relative
a crime, mere recommendation does not. falling within the same degree by affinity
of the person under the custody and
3. Such person Lacks the legal qualification charge of the offender.
thereof; and
4. Offender Knows that his nominee or The mother of a person under the custody of any
appointee lacks the qualifications at the time public officer is not included as a possible
he made the nomination or appointment. offended party but the offender may be
prosecuted under Sec. 28 of R.A. No. 3019. (Anti-
NOTE: There must be a law providing for the Graft and Corrupt Practices Act)
qualifications of a person to be nominated or
appointed to a public office. (Reyes, 2017) Essence of the Crime Abuses against Chastity
The essence of the crime is the mere making of

immoral or indecent solicitation or advances.
Ways of Committing Abuses against Chastity
Soliciting or making immoral or indecent

advances to:

Criminal Law Crimes under the RPC – Book 2
This must be alleged and proved. If not alleged, it time of the killing, and such fact should be alleged of one is the act of all does not apply here because
G. CRIMES AGAINST PERSONS can only be considered as an ordinary in the Information. of the personal relationship of the offender to the
ARTS. 246-267-D, RPC, TITLE VIII aggravating circumstance. offended party. It is immaterial that he knew of
Q: Elias killed Susana. He was charged with the relationship of the accused and the deceased.
Q: While Joanne was eating, she noticed that parricide. During the trial, no marriage
her father, Abenir, seemed restless while he contract was presented. Is the non- Q: Suppose a husband, who wanted to kill his
CHAPTER 1: DESTRUCTION OF LIFE was preparing for work. Meanwhile, Jessica, presentation of the marriage contract fatal to sick wife, hired a killer. The hired killer shot
Abegail, and Delia were watching television, the prosecution of the accused for parricide? the wife. What are the crimes committed?
Sec. 1: Parricide, Murder, Homicide with Delia seated on the floor near the toilet.
A: NO. There is a presumption that persons living A: The husband is liable for parricide as principal
Suddenly, Joanne saw Abenir hit Delia on the together as husband and wife are married to each by inducement. The hired killer is liable for
PARRICIDE
head with a maso. A second blow hit the other. The mere fact that no record of the murder. The personal relationship of the
ART. 246, RPC
cement wall. Joanne yelled and tried to pacify marriage exists in the registry of marriage does husband to wife cannot be transferred to a
Abenir, asking why he did it. Abenir told her not invalidate said marriage, as long as in the stranger.
Elements of Parricide (1994, 1997, 1999,
that she caught Delia with a man in their celebration thereof and all the requisites for its
2003, 2015 BAR) (K-A-FMCADS)
bathroom. validity are present. (People v. Borromeo, 133 Q: Suppose A, an adopted child of B, killed the
SCRA 106, 31 Oct. 1984) latter's parents. Will A be liable for parricide?
1. That a person is Killed;
However, Joanne saw no one. Delia was
2. That the deceased is killed by the Accused;
rushed to the hospital but she passed away The maxim semper praesumitur matrimonio and A: NO. An adopted child is considered as a
and
shortly after. Is Abenir liable for the crime of the presumption “that a man and woman legitimate child BUT since the relationship is
3. That the deceased is the:
Parricide? deporting themselves as husband and wife have exclusive between the adopter and the adopted,
a. Legitimate/Illegitimate Father;
entered into a lawful contract of marriage” killing the parents of the adopter is not
b. Legitimate/Illegitimate Mother;
A: YES. All the elements of the crime of parricide applies pursuant to Sec. 3(aa), Rule 131, Rules of considered as parricide of other legitimate
c. Legitimate/Illegitimate Child;
were sufficiently proved by the prosecution. Court. (Peope v. Aling, G.R. No. L-38833, 12 Mar. ascendants.
d. Other legitimate Ascendant;
There was no dispute as to the relationship 1980)
e. Other legitimate Descendant; or
between the accused-appellant and the victim. Age of the Child
f. Legitimate Spouse.
With respect to the killing by the accused of his Q: If a person killed another not knowing that
wife, their daughter Joanne clearly testified that the latter was his son, will he be guilty of The child killed by his parent must be at least
The relationship, except the spouse, must be in
she suddenly saw her father hit the head of her parricide? (1996 BAR) three (3) days old. If the child is less than three
the direct line and not in the collateral line.
mother with a small mallet. Joanne's (3) days old, the crime is infanticide, which is
straightforward and candid narration of the A: YES. The law does not require knowledge of punishable under Art. 255.
Q: X killed his brother, Y. What crime is
incident is regarded as positive and credible relationship between them.
committed?
evidence, sufficient to convict the accused. Parricide vs. Infanticide
Q: If a person wanted to kill another but by
A: Homicide or Murder, as the case may be
Well settled is the rule that it is unnatural for a mistake killed his own father will he be guilty PARRICIDE INFANTICIDE
because brothers are not part of those
relative, in this case the accused's own child, who of parricide? What is the penalty imposable? As to Basis
enumerated under Art. 246. Their relation is in
is interested in vindicating the crime, to accuse Its basis is the
the collateral line and not as ascendants or
somebody else other than the real culprit. For her A: YES. The law does not require knowledge of relationship between The basis is the age
descendants of each other.
to do so is to let the guilty go free. Where there is relationship between them, but Art. 49 will apply the offender and the of the child-victim.
nothing to indicate that witnesses were actuated with regard the proper penalty to be imposed, victim.
Essential Element of Parricide
by improper motives on the witness stand, their which is the penalty for the lesser offense in its As to Commission
positive declarations made under solemn oath maximum period. Infanticide may be
The relationship of the offender with the victim
deserve full faith and credence. (People v. Brusola, It can be committed committed by any
must be:
G.R. No. 210615, 26 July 2017) Criminal Liability of Stranger Conspiring in only by the relatives person whether
the Commission of the Crime of Parricide enumerated. relative or not of the
1. Legitimate, except in the case of parent and
Proof that Must be Established to Constitute victim.
child;
Parricide of a Spouse The stranger is liable for homicide or murder, as As to Application of Conspiracy
2. In the direct line; and
the case may be, because of the absence of Conspirary cannot be Conspiracy is
3. By blood, except in the case of a legitimate
There must be a valid subsisting marriage at the relationship. The rule on conspiracy that the act applied because the applicable because
spouse.

relationship of the the circumstance of being raised as a defense. 32 Phil. 381; U.S. v. Feliciano, 36 Phil. 753) discover, escape, pursuit and killing of C form
offender and the victim age pertains to the one continuous act. (U.S. v. Vargas, G.R. No.
is an esssential victim; only one Q: Pedro, a policeman, had slight fever and Q: The accused was shocked to discover his 1053, 07 May 1903)
element. A separate information shall be decided to go home early. However, he was wife and their driver sleeping in the master’s
information must be prepared for all the shocked and enraged when, after opening the bedroom. Outraged, the accused got his gun 2. NO. A is not liable for the serious physical
filed for the parricide conspirators. door of his bedroom, he saw his brother, and killed both. Can the accused claim that he injuries he inflicted on his wife because the
and the murder or Julius completely naked, having sexual killed the two under exceptional act falls under the same exceptional
homicide on the part of intercourse with his wife, Cleopatra. Pedro circumstances? (1991, 2001, 2005, 2007, circumstances in Art. 247 of the RPC.
the non-relative shot and killed Julius. Cleopatra fled from the 2011 BAR)
conspirator. bedroom but Pedro ran after her and shot and Q: Rafa caught his wife, Rachel, in the act of
killed her. Is Pedro criminally liable for the A: NO. The accused did not catch them while having sexual intercourse with Rocco in the
Cases of Parricide NOT Punishable by death of Julius and Cleopatra? having sexual intercourse. maid’s room of their own house. Rafa shot
Reclusion Perpetua to Death both lovers in the chest, but they survived.
A: NO. It falls under Art. 247 of the RPC. Q: A and B are husband and wife. One night, A, Rafa charged Rachel and Rocco with adultery,
1. Parricide through negligence (Art. 365); a security guard, felt sick and cold, hence, he while Rachel and Rocco charged Rafa with
2. Parricide by mistake (Art. 249); and Stages contemplated under Art. 247 decided to go home around midnight after frustrated parricide and frustrated homicide.
3. Parricide under exceptional circumstances. getting permission from his duty officer.
(Art. 247) 1. When the offender surprised the other Approaching the master bedroom, he was In the frustrated parricide and frustrated
spouse with a paramour or mistress in the act surprised to hear sighs and giggles inside. He homicide cases, Rafa raised the defense that,
DEATH OR PHYSICAL INJURIES INFLICTED of committing sexual intercourse. opened the door very carefully and peeped having caught them in flagrante delicto, he
UNDER EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES inside where he saw his wife B having sexual has no criminal liability. Assuming that all
ART. 247, RPC Surprise means to come upon suddenly or intercourse with their neighbor C. defenses have been proven: Will the actions
unexpectedly. for frustrated parricide and frustrated
A rushed inside and grabbed C but the latter homicide prosper? (2018 BAR)
Requisites of Death or Physical Injuries
2. When the offender kills or inflicts serious managed to wrest himself free and jumped
Inflicted under Exceptional Circumstances
physical injury upon the other spouse and out of the window. A followed suit and A: NO, the actions for frustrated parricide and
paramour while in the act of intercourse, or managed to catch C again and after a furious frustrated homicide will not prosper because
1. A legally married person or a parent
immediately thereafter, that is, after struggle, managed also to strangle him to Rafa is entitled to the benefit of Art. 247 of the
surprises his spouse or daughter, the latter
surprising. death. A then rushed back to their bedroom RPC.
under 18 years of age and living with him, in
where his wife B was cowering under the bed
the act of committing sexual intercourse;
“Immediately thereafter” means that the covers. Still enraged, A hit B with fist blows Art. 247 of the RPC states that any legally married
discovery, escape, pursuit and the killing and rendered her unconscious. person who having surprised his spouse in the act
2. He or she kills any or both of them or inflicts
must all form part of one continuous act. The of committing sexual intercourse with another
upon any or both of them any serious
act done must be a direct result of the The police arrived after being summoned by person, shall kill any of them or both of them in
physical injury in the act or immediately
outrage of the cuckolded spouse. (Reyes, their neighbors and arrested A who was the act or immediately thereafter, or shall inflict
thereafter; and
2012) (1991 BAR) detained, inquested and charged for the death upon them any serious physical injury, shall
of C and serious physical injuries of B. suffer the penalty of destierro. If he shall inflict
3. He has not promoted or facilitated the
It is Enough that the Circumstances Show upon them physical injuries of any other kind, he
prostitution of his wife or daughter, or that
Reasonably that the Carnal Act is Being 1. Is A liable for C’s death? Why? shall be exempt from punishment.
he or she has not consented to the infidelity
Committed or has Just Been Committed 2. Is A liable for B’s injuries? Why? (1991,
of the other spouse.
2001, 2005, 2007 BAR) The action will prosper to allow the court to
For a husband to be justified, it is not necessary receive evidence. However, Rafa can be held
There is no criminal liability when less serious or
that he sees the carnal act being committed by his A: liable only for destierro based on Art. 247 of the
slight physical injuries are inflicted. The presence
wife with his own eyes. It is enough that he 1. NO. A is not liable for C’s death but under the RPC. The act committed by Rafa amounts to at
of the requisites enumerated above is an
surprises them under such circumstances as to exceptional circumstances in Art. 247 of the least, serious physical injuries, so the penalty of
absolutory cause.
show reasonably that the carnal act is being RPC, an absolutory cause. Art. 247 governs destierro will be imposed. If the court finds that
committed or has just been committed. (Reyes, since A surprised his wife B in the act of the act amounts to less than serious physical
Art. 247 does not define any crime; thus, it cannot
2017, citing the concurring opinion of Moran in having sexual intercourse with C, and the injuries, Rafa will not have any criminal liability.
be alleged in an Information. Murder, homicide or
People v. Gonzales, 69 Phil. 66, citing U.S. v. Alano, killing of C was immediately thereafter as the
parricide needs to be filed first, with Art. 247

Parent Need Not be Legitimate 2. That the Accused killed him; testimonies, the latex print on the condom, the of an earthquake, eruption of volcano,
3. That the killing was attended by any of the results of physical examinations both on destructive cyclone, epidemic, or other
The law does not distinguish. It is not necessary Qualifying circumstances mentioned in Art. Pemberton and Jennifer lead to no other public calamity.
that the parent be legitimate. 248; and conclusion that Pemberton was the perpetrator
4. That the killing is Not Parricide or of the crime. Aside from that, the result of the The offender must take advantage of the
Non-applicability of this Article if the Infanticide. physical examination conducted on Jennifer’s calamity to qualify the crime to murder.
Daughter is Married cadaver demonstrates that treachery, a
Murder (1999, 2001, 2008, 2009, 2010 BAR) qualifying circumstance, is present. 5. With evident premeditation.
This article applies only when the daughter is
single because while under 18 years old and Murder is the unlawful killing of any person Pemberton points out the lack of any direct 6. With cruelty, by deliberately and inhumanly
single, she is under parental authority. If she is which is not parricide or infanticide, provided evidence linking him to the crime. It has been the augmenting the suffering of the victim, or
married, her husband alone can claim the that any of the following circumstances is consistent pronouncement of the Supreme Court outraging or scoffing at his person or corpse.
benefits of Art. 247. present: that in such cases, the prosecution may resort to
circumstantial evidence. If direct evidence is Outraging means any physical act to commit
Inapplicability of Mitigating and Aggravating 1. With treachery, taking advantage of superior insisted upon under all circumstances, the guilt of an extremely vicious or deeply insulting act
circumstances strength, with the aid of armed men, or vicious felons who committed heinous crimes in while scoffing is any verbal act implying a
employing means to weaken the defense, or secret will be hard, if not impossible to prove. showing of irreverence.
It shall likewise be noted that inflicting death of means or persons to insure or afford (Joseph Scott Pemberton v. De Lima, G.R. No.
under exceptional circumstances, not being a impunity. (1995, 2000, 2006, 2008, 2015 217508, 18 Apr. 2016) Outraging or scoffing at the person or corpse
punishable act, cannot be qualified by either BAR) of the victim is the only instance that does not
aggravating or mitigating or other qualifying 2. In consideration of a price, reward or fall under Art. 14 of the RPC on aggravating
circumstances. (People v. Abarca, G.R. No. 74433, If committed “by a band”, it is still murder promise. circumstances in general.
14 Sept. 1987) because of the circumstance of “with the aid
of armed men.” If this aggravating circumstance is present in NOTE: Outraging or scoffing at the victim’s
Q: When third persons are injured in the the commission of the crime, it affects not person or corpse is the only qualifying
course of the firing at the paramour – Q: One night, Jennifer was found dead. CCTV only the person who received the money or circumstance under Art. 248 that is not
footage shows Jennifer and Pemberton reward but also the person who gave it. enumerated under Art. 14 of the RPC.
a. Will the offending spouse be free from leaving a club together. An unequivocal
criminal liability? testimony identified Pemberton as the last 3. By means of inundation, fire, poison, Dwelling/Nocturnity are NOT Qualifying
b. What crime is committed? person who was seen with Jennifer on the explosion, shipwreck, stranding of a vessel, Circumstances
night she died. The results of a general derailment or assault upon a railroad, fall of
A: physical examination conducted on an airship, by motor vehicles, or with the use Dwelling and nocturnity are not included in the
a. NO. Inflicting death or physical injuries Pemberton show abrasions and light of any other means involving great waste and enumeration of qualifying circumstances. But
under exceptional circumstances is not scratches on different parts on his body, and ruin. (1997, 2005 BAR) nocturnity or nighttime can be a method or form
murder. It does not mean, however, that the Pemberton’s latex print was shown on one of of treachery. In such case, it is treachery, not
offender is totally free from any the condoms found at the crime scene. a. If the primordial criminal intent is to nighttime that qualifies the killing to murder.
responsibility. Physical examinations on Jennifer’s cadaver kill, and fire was only used as a means
reveal that she was strangled from behind. to do so, it is murder. Number of Circumstances Necessary to
b. The offender can be held liable for serious b. If the primordial intent is to destroy the Qualify Homicide to Murder
physical injuries through simple imprudence Jennifer’s mother filed a complaint for property through fire and incidentally
or negligence. (People v. Abarca, G.R. No. Murder against Pemberton. Pemberton somebody died, it is arson. Only one. If there is a second circumstance, it will
74433, 14 Sept. 1987) opposed, stating that there is no probable operate as a generic aggravating which will not
cause for murder. Is Pemberton correct? Treachery and evident premeditation are affect the penalty because the maximum penalty
MURDER inherent in murder by poison and, as such, of death has been abolished by R.A. No. 9346.
ART. 248, RPC A: NO. There is ample evidence submitted to cannot be considered as aggravating
establish probable cause that Pemberton circumstance.
Elements of Murder (K-A-Q-NPI) murdered Jennifer. First, the killing of Jennifer
has been indubitably confirmed. Second, the 4. On occasion of any of the calamities
1. That a person was Killed; pieces of evidence such as the CCTV footage, the enumerated in the preceding paragraph, or

Rules for the Application of the Circumstances treachery. The qualifying circumstance may still A: NO. The accused should only be convicted of 3. A Sufficient lapse of time between the
which Qualify the Killing to Murder be appreciated if the attack was so sudden and so the crime of homicide and not murder. The decision and execution, allowing the accused
unexpected that the deceased had no time to prosecution failed to establish by clear and to reflect upon the consequences of his act.
1. That murder will exist with any of the prepare for his or her defense. (People v. Perez, convincing evidence that treachery attended the (People v. Grabador, G.R. No. 227504, 13 June
circumstances. G.R. No. 134756, 13 Feb. 2001) commission of the crime. Treachery is never 2018)
presumed. It is required that the manner of attack
2. Where there are more than one qualifying Q: H and W hailed a jeepney where a drunk must be shown to have been attended by Q: A killed B by stabbing B in the heart which
circumstance present, only one will qualify Glino sat beside W. Glino’s head fell on W’s treachery as conclusively as the crime itself. It has resulted to B’s death. The witness is the wife
the killing, with the rest to be considered as shoulder. H told Glino to sit properly. The been consistently held by the Court that chance of the victim, who said that a day prior to the
generic aggravating circumstances. latter arrogantly retorted, “Anong pakialam encounters, impulse killing or crimes committed killing, A threatened B. Based on the
mo?” and cursed H. Glino then provokingly at the spur of the moment or that were preceded testimony of the wife, A was prosecuted for
3. That when the other circumstances are asked H, “Anong gusto mo?” H replied, “Wala by heated altercations are generally not attended murder due to evident premeditation. Is the
absorbed or included in one qualifying akong sinabing masama.” After the heated by treachery for lack of opportunity of the charge correct?
circumstance, they cannot be considered as verbal tussle, Glino appeared to have calmed accused to deliberately employ a treacherous
generic aggravating. down. He told the driver to stop because he mode of attack. A: NO. The crime committed is homicide only. A
would alight. mere threat is not sufficient to constitute evident
4. That any of the qualifying circumstances To qualify an offense, the following conditions premeditation.
enumerated must be alleged in the As the jeepney ground to a halt, Glino drew a must exist: (1) the assailant employed means,
information. 29-inch balisong and stabbed H. H failed to methods or forms in the execution of the criminal HOMICIDE
offer any form of resistance and thereafter, act which give the person attacked no ART. 249, RPC
When Treachery is Present died. Glino contended that he is only liable for opportunity to defend himself or to retaliate; and
homicide since there was no treachery as the (2) said means, methods or forms of execution Homicide
The offender commits any of the crimes against victim was forewarned of the danger. Is the were deliberately or consciously adopted by the
persons, employing means, methods or forms in contention of Glino legally tenable? assailant. That for treachery to be appreciated, The unlawful killing of any person, which is
its execution which tend directly and especially to both elements must be present. It is not enough neither parricide, murder, nor infanticide.
ensure its execution, without risk to himself or A: NO. The rule is well-settled in this jurisdiction that the attack was sudden, unexpected, and
herself arising from any defense which the that treachery may still be appreciated even without any warning or provocation. Elements of Homicide (K-W-I-Q)
offended party might make. (People v. Torres, Sr., though the victim was forewarned of the danger
G.R. No. 190317, 22 Aug. 2011) to his person. What is decisive is that the attack In the instant case, the Court finds that the second 1. That a person was Killed;
was executed in a manner that the victim was requisite for treachery. The means of execution 2. That the accused killed him Without any
When Treachery Exists in the Crime of Murder rendered defenseless and unable to retaliate. used by the accused cannot be said to be justifying circumstance;
(People v. Glino, G.R. No. 173793, 04 Dec. 4, 2007) deliberately or consciously adopted since it was 3. The accused had Intention to kill which is
1. The malefactor employed such means, more of a result of a sudden impulse due to his presumed; and
method or manner of execution to ensure his A killing done at the spur of the moment is not previous heated altercation with the victim than 4. The killing was not attended by any of the
or her safety from the defensive or treacherous. (People v. Nitcha, G.R. No. 113517, 19 a planned and deliberate action. Similarly, in Qualifying circumstances of murder, or by
retaliatory acts of the victim; Jan. 1995) another case, the Court held, "there is no that of parricide or infanticide. (Reyes, 2017)
treachery when the assault is preceded by a
2. At the time of the attack, the victim was not Q: Tom and Gina were about to leave the heated exchange of words between the accused Evidence to Show Intent to Kill is Important
in a position to defend himself; and Christmas party when they saw Rolly push and the victim; or when the victim is aware of the Only in Attempted or Frustrated Homicide
Gina who mistook her as the girl who left him hostility of the assailant towards the former.
3. The accused consciously and deliberately on the dance floor. A heated argument then (People v. Edgardo Menil., G.R. No. 233205, 26 June This is because if death resulted, intent to kill is
adopted the particular means, methods, or ensued. As Tom and Gina were walking on the 2019, J. Caguioa) conclusively presumed. It is generally shown by
forms of attack employed by him. (People v. sidewalk of the Sing-Sing Garden, Rolly the kind of weapon used, the parts of the victim's
Lagman, G.R. No. 197807, 16 Apr. 2012) suddenly came from behind and shot Tom. Requisites of Evident Premeditation (T-A-S) body at which it was aimed, and by the wounds
Lito was leaving the party and witnessed Rolly inflicted. The element of intent to kill is
NOTE: Killing of a child of tender age is murder shot Tom and ran away after. Tom was 1. Time when the accused decided to commit incompatible with imprudence or negligence.
qualified by treachery. (Reyes, 2017) brought to the hospital but died on the same the crime;
day. Is Rolly liable for murder? 2. Overt Act manifestly indicating that he clung
A frontal attack does not necessarily rule out to the determination; and

Proving Intent to Kill acting independently of each other. Who is carrying a bladed weapon. What crime was member of his family, any member of his cabinet
liable for the death of C? committed by Juan? or members of the latter's family is punishable by
Evidence to prove intent to kill in crimes against death. (P.D. 1110-A)
persons may consist, inter alia, of: A: Since either wound could cause the death of C, A: Homicide and not murder. Even if the stab
both are liable and each one of them is guilty of wounds were found on the back of Pedro, it is not DEATH CAUSED IN A TUMULTUOUS AFFRAY
1. The means used by the malefactors; homicide. The burden of proof is on each of the conclusive of the presence of the qualifying ART. 251, RPC
2. The nature, location and number of wounds defendants to show that the wound inflicted by circumstance of treachery. Further, the witness
sustained by the victim; him did not cause the death. The one who merely saw Juan running. He must have seen the Tumultuous Affray (1997, 2010 BAR)
3. The conduct of the malefactors before, at the inflicted a wound that contributed to the death of infliction of the wound.
time of, or immediately after the killing of the the victim is equally liable. (U.S. v. Abiog, G.R. No. A commotion in a tumultuous and confused
victim; L-12747, 13 Nov. 1917) NOTE: For treachery to be appreciated, it must be manner, to such an extent that it would not be
4. The circumstances under which the crime present and seen by the witness right at the possible to identify who the killer is if death
was committed; This ruling is applicable only when there is no inception of the attack. (People v. Concillado, G.R. results, or who inflicted the serious physical
5. The motive of the accused; (People v. Lanuza, conspiracy between or among the accused. When No. 181204, 28 Nov. 2011) injuries, but the person or persons who used
G.R. No. 188562, 17 Aug. 2011) and there is conspiracy, it is not necessary to apply violence are known.
6. Words uttered at the time of inflicting the this ruling because in such case, the act of one is Corpus Delicti in Crimes against Persons
injuries on the victim may also be considered. the act of all. Tumultuous affray exists when at least four (4)
(De Guzman v. People, 742 SCRA 501, 26 Nov. Corpus delicti is defined as the body, foundation persons took part therein.
2014) Use of Unlicensed Firearms in Committing or substance upon which a crime has been
Murder or Homicide committed. (People v. Quimzon, GR. No. 133541, Elements of Death Caused in a Tumultuous
Illustration: If A would shoot B at one of his feet, 14 Apr. 2004) Affray (4-D-Q-K-A-I)
at a distance of one eter, there is no intent to kill. In view of the amendments introduced by R.A. No.
If B is hit, the crimeis only physical injuries. If B is 8294 and R.A. No. 10591, separate prosecutions It may be proven by the credible testimony of a 1. There be several or at least four (4) persons;
not hit, the offense is Discharge of Firearms under for homicide and illegal possession of firearms sole witness, not necessarily by physical evidence
Art. 254. are no longer in order. Instead, illegal possession such as the physical body of the deceased or to 2. That they Did not compose groups organized
of firearms is merely taken as an aggravating the ashes of a burned building but by the fact of for the common purpose of assaulting and
Q: X, a pharmacist, compounded and prepared circumstance in the crime of murder. (People v. the commission of the crime. (Rimorin v. People, attacking each other reciprocally, otherwise,
the medicine on prescription by a doctor. X Gaborne, G.R. No. 210710, 27 July 2016) G.R. No. 146481, 30 Apr. 2003) they may be held liable as co-
erroneously used a highly poisonous conspirators;
substance. When taken by the patient, the DID NOT USE THE USED THE In all crimes against persons in which the death
latter nearly died. The accused was charged UNLICENSED UNLICENSED of the victim is an element of the offense, there 3. That these several persons Quarreled and
with frustrated homicide through reckless FIREARM IN THE FIREARM IN THE must be satisfactory evidence of (1) the fact of assaulted one another in a confused and
imprudence. Is the charge correct? COMMISSION OF COMMISSION OF death and (2) the identity of the victim. tumultuous manner;
THE CRIME THE CRIME
A: NO. It is an error to convict the accused of Separate Illegal possession of PENALTY FOR FRUSTRATED PARRICIDE, 4. Someone was Killed in the course of the
frustrated homicide through reckless prosecutions for firearm is merely MURDER OR HOMICIDE affray;
imprudence. He is guilty of physical injuries homicide or murder taken as an ART. 250, RPC
through reckless imprudence. The element of and illegal possession aggravating NOTE: The person killed in the course of the
intent to kill in frustrated homicide is of firearms. circumstance. Penalties affray need not be one of the participants in
incompatible with negligence or imprudence. the affray. He could be a mere passerby.
Intent in felonies by means of dolo is replaced Accidental Homicide 1. For Frustrated Parricide, Murder or
with lack of foresight or skill in felonies by culpa. Homicide – penalty two degrees lower. 5. It cannot be Ascertained who actually killed
It is the death of a person brought about by a the deceased; and
Q: A shot C with a pistol. Almost immediately lawful act performed with proper care and skill, 2. For Attempted Parricide, Murder or
after A had shot C, B also shot C with B’s gun. and without homicidal intent. (Reyes, 2017) Homicide – penalty three degrees lower. NOTE: if the one who inflicted the fatal
Both wounds inflicted by A and B were mortal. wound is known, the crime is not tumultuous
C was still alive when B shot him. C died as a Q: Supposing Pedro was found on the street NOTE: This provision is permissive, not affray. It is a case of homicide.
result of the wounds received from A and B, dead with thirty (30) stab wounds at the back. mandatory. However, an attempt on, or a
A witness said that he saw Juan running away conspiracy against, the life of the Chief Executive, 6. The person or persons who inflicted serious

physical injuries or who used violence can be pieces of wood. R, who was petrified, could PHYSICAL INJURIES INFLICTED IN GIVING ASSISTANCE TO SUICIDE
Identified. only watch helplessly as M was being mauled TUMULTUOUS AFFRAY ART. 253, RPC
and overpowered by his assailants. M fell to ART. 252, RPC
This article does not apply if there is concerted the ground and died before he could be given Punishable Acts
fight between two organized groups. any medical assistance. What crime is Elements of Physical Injuries Inflicted in a
committed in the given case? Tumultuous Affray (T-P-Ca-K) 1. Assisting another to commit suicide, whether
What Brings About the Crime of Tumultuous the suicide is consummated or not; (2008
Affray A: The crime committed is Murder and not Death 1. There is a Tumultuous affray as referred to in BAR) and
Caused in Tumultuous Affray. A tumultuous the preceding article;
The crime of tumultuous affray is brought about affray takes place when a quarrel occurs between 2. A participant or some participants thereof 2. Lending assistance to another to commit
by the inability to ascertain the actual several persons who engage in a confused and suffer serious Physical injuries or physical suicide to the extent of doing the killing
perpetrator, not the tumultuous affray itself that tumultuous manner, in the course of which a injuries of a less serious nature only; himself.
brings about the crime. It is necessary that the person is killed or wounded and the author 3. Person responsible thereof Cannot be
very person who caused the death cannot be thereof cannot be ascertained. The quarrel in the identified; and Art. 253 does not distinguish and does not make
ascertained or identified. instant case is between a distinct group of 4. All those who appear to have used violence any reference to the relation of the offender with
individuals, one of whom was sufficiently upon the person of the offended party are the person committing suicide. Hence, the
Crime Committed if the Person who Caused identified as the principal author of the killing, as Known. penalty would be the same even if the offender is
the Death is Known but Cannot be Identified against a common, particular victim. (People v. the father, mother or the child of the one
Unlagada, G.R. No. 141080, 17 Sept. 2002) NOTE: This article will not apply when a person committing suicide. (Reyes, 2017)
If he is known but only his identity is not known, is killed.
he will be charged for the crime of homicide or Q: A, B and C are members of SFC Fraternity. Criminal Liability of a Person who Attempts to
murder under a fictitious name, not death in a While eating in a seaside restaurant, they Kind of Injury contemplated in the Crime of Commit Suicide
tumultuous affray. were attacked by X, Y and Z members of a rival Physical Injuries in a Tumultuous Affray
fraternity. A rumble ensued in which the A person who attempts to commit suicide does
Persons Liable for Death in a Tumultuous above-named members of the two fraternities The physical injury should be serious or less NOT incur any criminal liability because society
Affray assaulted each other in confused and serious and resulting from a tumultuous affray. If has always considered a person who attempts to
tumultuous manner resulting in the death of the physical injury sustained is only slight, this is kill himself as an unfortunate being, a wretched
1. The person or persons who inflicted the A. As it cannot be ascertained who actually considered as inherent in a tumultuous affray. person more deserving of pity rather than of
serious physical injuries are liable; or killed A, the members of the two fraternities penalty. However, he may be held liable for the
took part in the rumble and were charged for Unlike in Art. 251, the injured party on the crime crime of disturbance of public order if indeed
2. If it is not known who inflicted the serious death caused in a tumultuous affray. Will the of physical injuries inflicted in a tumultuous serious disturbance of public peace occurred due
physical injuries on the deceased, all the charge prosper? (2010 BAR) affray must be one or some of the participants in to his attempt to commit suicide.
persons who used violence upon the person the affray. (Reyes, 2017)
of the victim are liable, but with lesser A: NO. The charge of death caused in a Euthanasia NOT Giving Assistance to Suicide
liability. tumultuous affray will not prosper. In death Persons Liable for this Crime
caused by tumultuous affray under Art. 251 of the Euthanasia is the practice of painlessly putting to
Q: M left his house together with R, to attend a RPC, it is essential that the persons involved did Only those who used violence are punished, death a person suffering from some incurable
public dance. Two hours later, they decided to not compose groups organized for the common because if the one who caused the physical disease. Euthanasia is not lending assistance to
have a drink. Not long after, M left to look for purpose of assaulting and attacking each other injuries is known, he will be liable for the physical suicide. The person killed does not want to die. A
a place to relieve himself. According to R, he reciprocally. In this case, there is no tumultuous injuries actually committed, and not under this doctor who resorts to euthanasia of his patient
was only about three meters from M who was affray since the participants in the rumble belong article. may be liable for murder.
relieving himself when a short man walked to organized fraternity.
past him, approached M and stabbed him at PHYSICAL INJURIES DISCHARGE OF FIREARM
the side. M retaliated by striking his assailant DEATH CAUSED IN A
INFLICTED IN A ART. 254, RPC
with a half-filled bottle of beer. TUMULTUOUS
TUMULTUOUS
AFFRAY
AFFRAY Elements of Discharge of Firearm (D-N)
Almost simultaneously, a group of seven men,
Victim need NOT be a Victim is a
ganged up on M and hit him with assorted
participant. participant. 1. Offender Discharges a firearm against
weapons, i.e., bamboo poles, stones and
another person; and

2. Offender has No intention to kill the person. Sec. 2: Infanticide and Abortion Effect if the Crime is Committed for INTENTIONAL ABORTION
Concealing the Dishonor as an Exculpatory ART. 256, RPC
NOTE: There must be no intent to kill. The Circumstance
INFANTICIDE
purpose of the offender is only to intimidate Abortion (1994 BAR)
ART. 255, RPC
or frighten the offended party. This does not Concealment of dishonor is not an exculpatory
apply to police officers in the performance of circumstance in the crime of infanticide. It merely It is the willful killing of the fetus in the uterus, or
their duties. Infanticide (2006 BAR) lowers the penalty to: the violent expulsion of the fetus from the
maternal womb that results in the death of the
Imprudence in Illegal Discharge It is the killing of any child less than three (3) days a. Prision mayor – if committed by the mother fetus. (Guevara as cited in Reyes, 2017)
old or seventy-two (72) hours of age, whether the b. Reclusion temporal – if committed by the
The crime of illegal discharge cannot be killer is the parent or grandparent, any relative of grandparents NOTE: The basis of this article is Sec. 12, Art. II, of
committed through imprudence because it the child, or a stranger.
the 1987 Constitution, which states that “The
requires that the discharge must be directed at Only the mother and maternal grandparents of State shall equally protect the life of the mother
another. NOTE: Art. 255 does not provide a penalty for the child are entitled to the mitigating and the life of the unborn from conception.”
infanticide. If the killer is the mother, or father, or circumstance of concealing dishonor. The mother
NOTE: The crime is discharge of firearm even if a legitimate grandparent, although the crime is who claims concealing dishonor must be of good
still infanticide, the penalty, is that of parricide. Intentional Abortion is Committed in Three
the gun was not pointed at the offended party reputation. (3) Ways
when it was fired as long as it was initially aimed
by the accused at or against the offended party. If the offender is not so related to the child, Infanticide vs. Parricide, if the Offender is the
although the crime is still infanticide, the penalty 1. By using any violence upon the person of the
Blood Relative, e.g., parent of the child pregnant woman;
Discharge Towards the House of the Victim corresponding to murder shall be imposed.
2. By administering drugs or beverages upon
INFANTICIDE PARRICIDE such pregnant woman without her consent;
The discharge towards the house of the victim is Regardless, the penalty for murder and parricide
As to Age of Victims or
not a discharge of firearm. Firing a gun at the is the same.
The age of the victim 3. By administering drugs or beverages with
The victim is at least
house of the offended party, not knowing in what is less than three days the consent of the pregnant woman.
Elements of Infanticide (C-L-K) three days old.
part of the house the people were, is only alarms old.
and scandals under Art. 155 of the RPC. As to Liability in Conspiracy Elements of Intentional Abortion (P-V-D-A)
1. A Child was killed;
If done in conspiracy The co-conspirator is
Discharge of Firearm Resulting to the Death of with a stranger, both liable for murder 1. There is a Pregnant woman;
a Victim NOTE: The child must be born alive and fully
the parent and the co- because of the
developed, that is, it can sustain an
conspirator are liable absence of 2. Violence is exerted, or drugs or beverages
If the offender discharges the firearm at a person independent life.
for infanticide. relationship. administered, or that the accused otherwise
to intimidate a person only, however, the bullet Concealment as Mitigating Circumstances acts upon such pregnant woman;
hit the vital organ of the victim that resulted to his 2. Deceased child was Less than three (3) days
Concealment of
death, the crime committed is either homicide or old or less than seventy-two (72) hours of
Concealment of dishonor in killing the 3. As a result of the use of violence or drugs or
murder. The moment the victim dies, intent to kill age; and
dishonor in killing the child is not a beverages upon her, or any other act of the
is presumed. child is mitigating. mitigating accused, the fetus Dies, either in the womb or
3. Accused Killed the said child.
circumstance. after having been expelled therefrom; and
NOTE: Unless the facts of the case are such that
the act can be held to constitute frustrated or When Infanticide is NOT Committed
NOTE: In both crimes, there is intent to kill the 4. Abortion is intended.
attempted parricide, murder, homicide or any child.
other crime for which a higher penalty is If the child is born dead, or if the child is already
dead, infanticide is not committed. NOTE: In intentional abortion, the offender
prescribed by any of the articles of this Code. Q: Suppose the child is abandoned without should know that the woman is pregnant
Although the child is born alive, if it could not any intent to kill and death results as a because the very intention is to cause an
There is a complex crime of discharge of firearm consequence, what crime is committed? abortion.
with physical injuries when the injuries sustained sustain an independent life when it was killed,
by the offended party are serious or less serious. there is no infanticide.
A: The crime committed is abandonment under
(Reyes, 2017) Art. 276 (Abandoning a Minor) of the RPC and not
infanticide.

Persons Liable for Intentional Abortion A: The crime is complex crime of murder or The force or violence must come from another. culpa lies not in the aspect of abortion but on the
physical injuries with abortion. Mere intimidation is not enough unless the violence inflicted on the pregnant woman. Thus,
1. The person who actually caused the abortion degree of intimidation already approximates there can be a crime of Reckless Imprudence
under Art. 256; and Q: If despite the employment of sufficient and violence. resulting in Unintentional Abortion.
2. The pregnant woman if she consented under adequate means to effect abortion, the fetus
Art. 258. that is expelled from the maternal womb is Q: Is the crime of unintentional abortion ABORTION PRACTICED BY THE WOMAN
viable but unable to sustain life outside the committed if the pregnant woman aborted HERSELF OR BY HER PARENTS
Abortion is not a crime against the woman but maternal womb, what crime is committed? because of intimidation? ART. 258, RPC
against the fetus. The offender must know of the
pregnancy because the particular criminal A: The crime is frustrated abortion because A: NO. The crime committed is not unintentional Elements (P-A-C-HOP)
intention is to cause an abortion. As long as the abortion is consummated only if the fetus dies abortion because there is no violence. The crime
fetus dies as a result of the violence used or drugs inside the womb. committed is light threats. 1. There is a Pregnant woman who has suffered
administered, the crime of abortion exists, even if abortion;
the fetus is over or less is in full term. (Viada as NOTE: But if the expelled fetus could sustain life NOTE: If violence was employed on the pregnant 2. Abortion is intended; and
cited in Reyes, 2008) outside the mother’s womb, the crime is already woman by a third person, and as a result, the 3. Abortion is Caused by:
Abortion vs. Infanticide infanticide. woman and the fetus died, there is complex crime a. The pregnant woman Herself;
of homicide with unintentional abortion. b. Any Other person, with her consent; or
ABORTION INFANTICIDE Q: If the abortive drug used is a prohibited or c. Any of her Parents, with her consent for
As to the Victim regulated drug under the Dangerous Drugs Q: Suppose the pregnant woman employed the purpose of concealing her dishonor.
The victim is already Act, what are the crimes committed? violence to herself specifically calculated to
a person less than 3 bring about abortion, what crime is NOTE: Under (a) and (c) above, the woman is
The victim is not days old or 72 hours A: The crimes committed are intentional abortion committed? liable under Art. 258 while the third person
viable but remains to and is viable or and violation of R.A. No. 9165 or the Dangerous under b is liable under Art. 256.
be a fetus. capable of living Drugs Act. A: The woman is liable for intentional abortion
separately from the under Art. 258. Mitigation of Liability when the Purpose of
mother’s womb. UNINTENTIONAL ABORTION Abortion is to Conceal Dishonor
As to Entitlement to Mitigating ART. 257, RPC Q: What is the criminal liability, if any, of a
Circumstances pregnant woman who tried to commit suicide The liability of the pregnant woman is mitigated
Both the mother and Elements of Unintentional Abortion (P-V-I-D) by poison, but she did not die and the fetus if the purpose for abortion is to conceal her
maternal in her womb was expelled instead? (1994, dishonor. However, if it is the parents who
Only the pregnant 2012 BAR)
grandparents of the 1. There is a Pregnant woman; caused the abortion for the purpose of concealing
woman is entitled to
child are entitled to 2. Violence is used upon such pregnant woman their daughter’s dishonor, there is no mitigation,
mitigation if the A: The woman who tried to commit suicide incurs
the mitigating without intending an abortion; unlike in infanticide.
purpose is to conceal no criminal liability for the result not intended. In
circumstance of 3. Violence is Intentionally exerted; and
dishonor. order to incur criminal liability for the result not
concealing the 4. As a result of the violence exerted, the fetus ABORTION PRACTICED BY PHYSICIAN OR
dishonor. Dies either in the womb or after having been intended, one must be committing a felony, and
MIDWIFE AND DISPENSING OF ABORTIVES
expelled therefrom. (2015 BAR) suicide is not a felony. Unintentional abortion is
ART. 259, RPC
Even if the child was expelled prematurely and not committed since it is punishable only when
was deliberately alive at birth, the offense is Illustration: Unintentional abortion requires caused by violence and not by poison. There is
Elements of this Crime as to the Physician or
abortion due to the fact that a fetus with an physical violence inflicted deliberately and also no intentional abortion since the intention of
Midwife
intrauterine life of 6 months is not viable. (People voluntarily by a third person upon the person of the woman was to commit suicide and not to
v. Paycana, 551 SCRA 657, 16 Apr. 2008, citing U.S. the pregnant woman. Hence, if A pointed a gun at abort the fetus.
1. There is a pregnant woman who has suffered
v. Vedra, G.R. No. L-4779, 20 Nov. 1908) a pregnant lady, who became so frightened, abortion;
causing her abortion, he is not liable for Q: Can unintentional abortion be committed
2. Abortion is intended;
Q: Suppose the mother as a consequence of unintentional abortion, as there was no violence through negligence?
abortion suffers death or physical injuries, exerted. If he intended the abortion however, the NOTE: If abortion was not intended or was a
what crime is committed? crime committed is intentional abortion. A: YES. Unintentional abortion is a felony
result of a mistake, no crime is committed. If
committed by dolo or deliberate intent. But it can
the woman is not really pregnant, an
be committed by means of culpa. However, the
impossible crime is committed.

3. The offender must be a physician or midwife two or more seconds of lawful age on each side, unlawful aggression, hence self-defense can be Kinds of Mutilation
who causes or assists in causing the abortion; who make the selection of arms and fix all the claimed.
and other conditions of the fight to settle some 1. Intentionally mutilating another by
4. Said physician or midwife takes advantage of antecedent quarrels. CHALLENGING TO A DUEL depriving him, either totally or partially, of
his or her scientific knowledge or skill. ART. 261, RPC some essential organ for reproduction.
Punishable Acts
Therapeutic Abortion Punishable Acts Elements:
1. Killing one’s adversary in a duel; 1. Challenging another to a duel; a. There must be a castration, which is
It is an abortion caused by a physician to save the 2. Inflicting upon such adversary physical 2. Inciting another to give or accept a challenge mutilation of organs necessary for
life of a mother. The physician is not criminally injuries; and to a duel; and generation, such as the penis or
liable. (Estrada, 2011) 3. Making a combat although no physical 3. Scoffing at or decrying another publicly for ovarium; and
injuries have been inflicted. having refused to accept a challenge to fight
Elements of this Crime as to the Pharmacists a duel. b. The mutilation is caused purposely and
Duel is Different from an Agreement to Fight deliberately, which is to deprive the
1. Offender is a pharmacist; NOTE: The punishable act is to challenge to a offended party of some essential organ
2. There is no proper prescription from a A mere fight as a result of an agreement is not duel, not challenge to a fight, because if it is the for reproduction.
physician; and necessarily a duel because a duel implies an latter, the crime would be light threats under Art.
3. Offender dispenses an abortive. agreement to fight under determined conditions 285(2). 2. Intentionally depriving the victim of the
and with the participation and intervention of reproductive organ does not mean
As to the pharmacist, the crime is consummated seconds who fixed the conditions. Q: Suppose one challenges another to a duel necessarily the cutting off of the organ or
by dispensing an abortive without proper by shouting "Come down, Olympia, let us any part thereof. It suffices that it is
prescription from a physician. It is not necessary Illustration: If the accused and the deceased, measure your prowess. We will see whose rendered useless.
that the abortive is actually used. after a verbal heated argument in the bar, left the intestines will come out. You are a coward if
place at the same time and pursuant to their 3. Intentionally making other mutilation, that
you do not come down," is the crime of
If the pharmacist knew that the abortive would agreement, went to the plaza to fight each other is, by lopping or clipping off any part of the
challenging to a duel committed?
be used to cause an abortion and abortion to death with knives which they bought on the body of the offended party, other than the
resulted from the use thereof, the pharmacist way, there is no crime of duel because there was essential organ for reproduction, to deprive
A: NO. What is committed is the crime of light
would be an accomplice in the crime of abortion. no seconds who fixed the conditions of the fight him of that part of his body.
threats under Art. 285. (People v. Tacomoy, G.R.
(Reyes, 2017) in a more or less formal manner. If one is killed, No. L-4798, 16 July 1951)
the crime committed is homicide. In the first kind of mutilation, the castration must
Q: Suppose the abortion was performed by a be made purposely. Otherwise, it will be
Persons Liable in this Crime
physician without medical necessity to Persons Liable considered as mutilation of the second kind.
warrant such abortion and the woman or her The challenger and the instigators.
husband had consented. Is the physician 1. The person who killed or inflicted physical Intention in Mutilation; No Mutilation
liable for abortion under Art. 259? injuries upon his adversary, or both through Negligence
CHAPTER 2: PHYSICAL INJURIES
combatants will be liable as principals.
A: YES. The consent of the woman or her husband 2. Seconds will be liable as accomplices. Mutilation must always be intentional. Thus, it
is not enough to justify abortion. MUTILATION cannot be committed through criminal
Seconds ART. 262, RPC negligence.
Sec. 3: Duel
Those persons who make the selection of the Mutilation There must be no intent to kill otherwise; the
arms and fix the other conditions of the fight. offense is attempted or frustrated homicide or
RESPONSIBILITY OF murder, as the case may be.
It is the lopping or the clipping off of some parts
PARTICIPANTS IN A DUEL
Applicability of Self-Defense of the body which are not susceptible to growth
ART. 260, RPC Q: Suppose there is no intent to deprive the
again.
Self-defense cannot be invoked if there was a pre- victim of the particular part of the body, what
Duel concerted agreement to fight, but if the attack is the crime committed?
was made by the accused against his opponent
It is a formal or regular combat previously before the appointed place and time, there is an A: The crime is only serious physical injuries.
consented between two parties in the presence of

NOTE: Cruelty, as understood in Art. 14 (21), is 3. When the injured: Requisites of Deformity Qualifying Circumstances of Serious Physical
inherent in mutilation, and in fact, that is the only a. Becomes deformed; Injuries
felony where said circumstance is an integral part b. Loses any other member of his body; 1. Physical ugliness;
and is absorbed therein. If the victim dies, the c. Loses the use thereof; or 2. Permanent and definite abnormality; and 1. If it is committed by any of the persons
crime is murder qualified by cruelty, but the d. Becomes ill or incapacitated for the 3. Conspicuous and visible. referred to in the crime of parricide; or
offender may still claim and prove that he had no performance of the work in which he 2. If any of the circumstances qualifying murder
intention to commit so grave a wrong. was habitually engaged in for more than NOTE: Once physical injuries resulted to attended its commission.
90 days, as a consequence of the deformity, it is classified as serious physical
SERIOUS PHYSICAL INJURIES physical injuries inflicted. injuries. Illustration: A father who inflicts serious
ART. 263, RPC physical injuries upon his son will be liable for
NOTE: In par. 2 and 3, the offended party Q: X threw acid on the face of Y and, were it not qualified serious physical injuries.
How the Crime of Serious Physical Injuries is must have a vocation or work at the time of for the timely medical attention, a deformity
Committed: (1992, 1993, 1995 BAR) injury. would have been produced on the face of Y. NOTE: The qualified penalties are not applicable
After the plastic surgery, Y became more to parents who inflict serious physical injuries
1. Wounding; 4. When the injured person becomes ill or handsome than before the injury. What crime upon their children by excessive chastisement.
2. Beating; incapacitated for labor for more than 30 days was committed? In what stage was it
3. Assaulting; or (but must not be more than 90 days), as a committed? Physical Injuries vs. Mutilation
4. Administering injurious substance. result of the physical injuries inflicted.
A: The crime is serious physical injuries because Mutilation must have been caused purposely and
Instances Considered as the Crime of Serious When the category of the offense of serious the problem itself states that the injury would deliberately to lop or clip off some part of the
Physical Injuries physical injuries depends on the period of the have produced a deformity. The fact that the body so as to deprive the offended party of such
illness or incapacity for labor, there must be plastic surgery removed the deformity is part of the body. This intention is absent in other
1. When the injured person becomes insane, evidence of the length of that period. immaterial because what is considered is not the kinds of physical injuries.
imbecile, impotent, or blind in consequence Otherwise, the offense will be considered as artificial treatment but the natural healing
of the physical injuries inflicted. slight physical injuries. process. PHYSICAL INJURIES MUTILATION
Nature of Physical Injuries Q: AA punched BB that resulted to latter to No special intention There is special
Impotence includes inability to copulate and to clip off some part intention to clip off
sterility. suffer fractured tooth which has been
The crime of physical injuries is a formal crime repaired by “modern dental technological of the body so as to some part of the body
because it is penalized on the basis of the gravity procedure.” BB filed a case for serious deprive the offended so as to deprive him of
Blindness requires loss of vision of both eyes. party of such part. such part.
Mere weakness in vision is not contemplated. of the injury sustained. What is punished is the physical injuries. Will it prosper ?
consequence and not the stage of execution.
Hence, it is always consummated. It cannot be A: NO. In determining whether or not the loss of Physical Injuries vs. Attempted or Frustrated
2. When the injured person:
committed in the attempted and frustrated stage. a tooth could be considered a serious physical Homicide
a. Loses the use of speech or the power to
hear or to smell, or loses an eye, a hand, injury under Art. 263, there must first be a factual
Q: If the offender repeatedly uttered “I will kill determination during trial that the loss of the ATTEMPTED OR
a foot, an arm or a leg; or
you” but he only keeps on boxing the offended tooth resulted in a visible deformity. Where PHYSICAL INJURIES FRUSTRATED
b. Loses the use of any such member; or
party and injuries resulted, what is the crime deformity is not apparent at trial, whether as a HOMICIDE
c. Becomes incapacitated for the work in
committed? result of a lesser injurious act or through medical Attempted
which he was habitually engaged in as a
intervention, a lesser penalty should be imposed. homicide may be
consequence of the physical injuries The offender inflicts
A: The crime is only physical injuries not It is observed that BB’s tooth had "already [been] committed even if
inflicted. physical injuries.
attempted or frustrated homicide. repaired by means of a modern dental no physical injuries
technological procedure that has not been are inflicted.
Loss of hearing must involve both ears.
Otherwise, it will be considered as serious Determination of Intent to Kill revealed in the evidence." In other words, BB's Offender has no The offender has
physical injuries under par. 3. Loss of the face had no visible disfigurement that would intention to kill the intent to kill the
power to hear in the right ear is merely Intent to kill must be manifested by overt acts. It warrant AA’s conviction of serious physical offended party. offended party.
considered as loss of use of some other part cannot be manifested by oral threats. injuries under Art. 263 (3) of the RPC. (Elpidio
of the body. Ruego v. People and Anthony Calubiran, G.R. No.
226745, 03 May 2021)

ADMINISTERING INJURIOUS period of actual medical attendance. injuries. attendance. 2. When there is no evidence to establish the
SUBSTANCES OR BEVERAGES gravity or duration of actual injury or to
ART. 264, RPC 2. Physical injuries must not be those described SLIGHT PHYSICAL INJURIES AND show the causal relationship to death, the
in the preceding articles. MALTREATMENT offense is slight physical injuries.
Elements of Art. 264, RPC ART. 266
If a wound required medical attendance for Q: Suppose the charge contained in the
1. The offender inflicted serious physical only two (2) days, yet the injured was information filed was for slight physical
Kinds of Slight Physical Injuries and
injuries upon another; prevented from attending to his ordinary injuries because it was believed that the
Maltreatment (1990, 1994, 2003 BAR)
labor for a period of twenty-nine (29) days, wound suffered would require medical
2. It was done by knowingly administering to the physical injuries are denominated as less attendance for eight (8) days only, but during
1. Physical injuries which incapacitated the
him any injurious substances or beverages or serious. (U.S. v. Trinidad, G.R. No. 1851, 23 Jan. preliminary investigation it was found out
offended party for labor from one (1) to nine
by taking advantage of his weakness of mind 1905) that the healing would require more than
(9) days, or required medical attendance
or credulity; and thirty (30) days. Should an amendment of the
during the same period;
Qualifying Circumstances of Less Serious charge be allowed?
To administer an injurious substance or Physical Injuries
2. Physical injuries which did not prevent the
beverage means to direct or cause said A: YES. The supervening event can still be the
offended party from engaging in his habitual
substance or beverage to be taken orally by 1. When there is manifest intent to insult or work or which did not require medical subject of amendment or of a new charge without
the injured person, who suffered serious offend the injured person; placing the accused in double jeopardy. (People v.
attendance; or
physical injuries as a result. 2. When there are circumstances adding Manolong, G.R. No. L-2288, 30 Mar. 1950)
ignominy to the offense; 3. Ill-treatment of another by deed without
If the accused did not know of the injurious 3. When the victim is the offender’s parents, CHAPTER 3: RAPE
causing any injury.
nature of the substances he administered, he ascendants, guardians, curators, or teachers;
Slapping the offended party is a form of ill-
is not liable under this article. (Reyes, 2017) or treatment which is a form of slight physical RAPE
4. When the victim is a person of rank or person
injuries. ARTS. 266-A, 266-B, 266-C
3. He had no intent to kill. in authority, provided the crime is not direct
AND 266-D, RPC and R.A. No. 8353
assault. Q: A disagreement ensued between Cindy and
LESS SERIOUS PHYSICAL INJURIES Carina which led to a slapping incident. Cindy Kinds of Rape under R.A. No. 8353
NOTE: Provided, that in case of persons in gave twin slaps on Carina’s beautiful face.
ART. 265, RPC
authority, it does not constitute the crime of
What is the crime committed by Cindy? 1. Traditional concept under Art. 335 – carnal
assault upon such persons.
Elements of Less Serious Physical Injuries knowledge with a woman against her will.
(1994, 1998, 2009 BAR) A: The offended party is always a woman and
Serious Physical Injury vs. Less Serious
a. Slander by deed – if the slapping was done the offender is always a man.
Physical Injury to cast dishonor to the person slapped.
1. Offended party is incapacitated for labor for
ten (10) days or more (but not more than 2. Sexual assault – committed with an
SERIOUS PHYSICAL LESS SERIOUS b. Slight physical injuries by ill-treatment –
thirty (30) days), or shall require medical instrument or an object or use of the penis
INJURIES PHYSICAL INJURIES if the slapping was done without the
attendance for the same period of time; and with penetration of the mouth or anal orifice.
As to Capacity of Injured Party intention of casting dishonor, or to The offended party or offender can either be
The offended party is humiliate or embarrass the offended party
NOTE: The disjunctive “or” above means that a man or a woman, that is, if the woman or a
The injured person incapacitated for out of a quarrel or anger.
it is either incapacity for work for ten (10) man uses an instrument in the anal orifice of
becomes ill or labor for 10 days or
days or more or the necessity of medical a male, she or he can be liable for rape.
incapacitated for more but not more Presumptions in Art. 266
attendance for an equal period which will
labor for more than than 30 days, or
make the crime of less serious physical A violation of the body orifices by the fingers is
30 days but not more needs medical 1. In the absence of proof as to the period of the
injuries. within the expanded definition of rape under R.A.
than 90 days. attendance for the offended party's incapacity for labor or of the No. 8353. Insertion of the finger into the female
same period. required medical attendance, the crime
In the absence of proof as to the period of the genital is rape through sexual assault. (People v.
Importance of Medical Assistance committed is presumed as slight physical
offended party’s incapacity for labor or Campuhan, G.R. No. 129433, 30 Mar. 2000)
Medical attendance is There must be a proof injuries.
required medical attendance, the offense
not important in to the period of the
committed is only slight physical injuries. However, there should be evidence of at least the
serious physical required medical
The phrase “shall require” refers to the slightest penetration of the sexual organ and not

merely a brush or graze of its surface. (People v. shows, Caga raped an unconscious and extremely lasciviousness. (People v. Bon, G.R. No. 166401, 30 Old Anti-Rape Law vs. R.A. No. 8353
Dela Cruz, G.R. No. 180501, 24 Dec. 2008) intoxicated woman - a fact that was duly alleged Oct. 2006)
in the Information and duly established by the OLD ANTI-RAPE
R.A. No. 8353
Elements of Rape by Carnal Knowledge (MCA- prosecution's evidence during the trial. (People v. When the offender in rape has an ascendancy or LAW
FDM12) Caga, G.R. No. 206878, 22 Aug. 2016) influence on the offended party, it is not Crime against
Crime against persons
necessary that the latter put up a determined chastity
1. Offender is a Man; Q: If the slightest penetration of the female resistance. Under the 2nd type,
2. Offender had Carnal knowledge of the genitalia consummates rape by carnal May be committed sexual assault may be
woman; and knowledge, how does the accused commit Q: AAA is a minor who has been issued a by a man against a committed by any
3. Such act is Accomplished under any of the attempted rape by carnal knowledge? (2017 medical certificate for mental retardation. woman only person against any
following circumstances: BAR) While she was picking banana blossoms, B, person
carrying a bolo, suddenly pulled down her Complaint must be
a. Through Force, threat or intimidation; A: To be held liable for attempted rape by carnal pants. AAA asked him to let her go, but B filed by the woman May be prosecuted even
(1992 BAR) knowledge the acts must be committed with clear threatened to hack her with his bolo. or her parents, if the woman does not
b. When the offended party is Deprived of intention to have sexual intercourse, but the Thereafter, he inserted his penis inside AAA's grandparents or file a complaint
reason or is otherwise unconscious; penis of the accused must not touch the labia of vagina. B was charged with rape. However, guardian if the
c. By means of fraudulent Machination or the pudendum of the victim. Intent to have sexual during trial, the prosecution failed to adduce woman was a minor
grave abuse of authority; or intercourse is present if is shown that the erectile evidence to prove AAA’s age and mental or incapacitated
d. When the offended party is under twelve penis of the accused is in the position to penetrate retardation. Therefore, he was convicted of
Private crime Public crime
(12) years of age or is demented, even or the accused actually commenced to force his simple rape.
though none of the above circumstances penis into the victim's sexual organ. Marriage extinguishes
Marriage of the
mentioned above be present. (1995 B, as a defense, questioned AAA’s credibility the penal action only as
victim with one of
BAR) Elements of Rape by Sexual Assault (2005 and faults AAA’s behavior after the rape. to the principal (the
the offenders
BAR) (SPI-FDM12) However, the RTC and CA found AAA’s person who married the
benefits not only the
Q: While still intoxicated and asleep, "AAA" testimony to be positive and categorical. Is the victim), and cannot be
principal but also
felt someone kissing her vagina. At first, she 1. Offender commits an act of Sexual assault; conviction of B proper? extended to co-
the accomplices and
thought it was her boyfriend Randy who did it. principals in case of
accessories.
She tried to push him away but failed to stop 2. The act of sexual assault is committed by any A: YES. For a charge of rape under the Art. 266-A multiple rape.
him. Indeed, in no time at all Caga succeeded of the following means: of the RPC to prosper, the prosecution must Marital rape not Marital rape recognized
in mounting her and in penetrating her prove that (1) a man had carnal knowledge with recognized (1995 BAR)
private parts with his penis. a. By inserting his Penis into another a woman; and (2) he accompanied such act by
person’s mouth or anal orifice; or force, threat or intimidation. In this case, carnal Q: Geronimo, a teacher, was tried and
Caga argues that while the Information b. By inserting any Instrument or object knowledge through threat or intimidation was convicted for twelve (12) counts of rape for
alleged that force, violence, and intimidation into the genital or anal orifice of another established beyond reasonable doubt by the lone the sexual assault, he, on several occasions,
were employed to consummate the alleged person. testimony of the victim herself. Furthermore, committed on one of his male students by
rape, the prosecution's evidence failed to Dandito failed to point any significant fact or inserting his penis in the victim’s mouth. On
establish the existence thereof. He claims that 3. The act of sexual assault is accomplished circumstance which would justify the reversal of appeal, Geronimo contends that the acts
"AAA" did not offer any resistance against his under any of the following circumstances: the findings on AAA’s credibility. complained of do not fall within the definition
sexual advances, "because she thought that it of rape as defined in the RPC, particularly that
was her boyfriend (Randy) who was then a. By using Force or intimidation; Regarding B’s defense that AAA’s behavior after rape is a crime committed by a man against a
making love with her." Is Caga liable for rape? b. When the woman is Deprived of reason the rape was irregular, it has been established woman. Is Geronimo’s contention correct?
or otherwise unconscious; that there is no singular reaction to rape. It has
A: YES. Caga’s contention has no merit because c. By means of fraudulent Machination or likewise been settled that delay in reporting an A: NO. Rape may be committed notwithstanding
the case falls under the second paragraph of rape: grave abuse of authority; or incident of rape is not an indication of fabrication the fact that persons involved are both males. R.A.
"when the offended party is deprived of reason or d. When the woman is under twelve (12) as the victim may have chosen only to keep quiet No. 8353 provides that an act of sexual assault
is otherwise unconscious." It is altogether years of age or demented. rather than to expose her to public scrutiny. can be committed by any person who inserts his
immaterial that the prosecution's evidence failed (People v. Dandito Lastrollo, G.R. No. 212631, 07 penis into the mouth or anal orifice, or any
to establish the presence of physical force, threat, Rape by sexual assault is not necessarily included Nov. 2016, J. Caguioa) instrument or object into the genital or anal
or intimidation because, as the evidence at bar in rape through sexual intercourse unlike acts of orifice of another person. The law, unlike rape
under Art. 266-A, has not made any distinction on

the sex of either the offender or the victim. only be considered as attempted rape, if not acts which extinguished criminal liability only if evidence showing that he had carnal
Neither must the courts make such distinction. of lasciviousness. (People v. Campuhan, G.R. No. granted before the institution of the criminal knowledge of the victim. Is his defense
(Ordinario v. People, G.R. No. 155415, 20 May 129433, 30 Mar. 2000) case in court; or tenable?
2004)
“Touching” in Rape 2. Similarly, the legal husband may be A: NO. Proof of hymenal laceration is not an
Q: A was convicted for the crime of rape. pardoned by forgiveness of the wife provided element of rape. An intact hymen does not negate
However, he insists that for the second In People v. Campuhan, it was held that that the marriage is not void ab initio. (Art. a finding that the victim was raped. Penetration
element of the crime, “that such act was touching when applied to rape cases does not 266-C) of the penis by entry into the lips of the vagina,
accomplished through the use of force or simply mean mere epidermal contact, stroking or even without laceration of the hymen, is enough
intimidation,” the victim did not resist, and grazing of organs, a slight brush or a scrape of the Effect of Affidavit of Desistance in the Crime of to constitute rape, and even the briefest of
hence the element of force or intimidation penis on the external layer of the victim’s vagina, Rape contact is deemed rape. (People v. Crisostomo, G.R.
was not established. Is the argument of A or the mons pubis. There must be sufficient and No. 183090, 14 Nov. 2011)
tenable? convincing proof that the penis indeed touched Rape is no longer a crime against chastity for it is
the labias or slid into the female organ, and not now classified as a crime against persons. In Q: One of Butiong’s contentions is that having
A: NO. It is important to stress that "the merely stroked the external surface thereof, for effect, rape may now be prosecuted de oficio; a sexual intercourse with AAA, a mental
gravamen of the crime of rape under Art. 266-A an accused to be convicted of consummated rape. complaint for rape commenced by the offended retardate, did not amount to rape, because it
(1) is sexual intercourse with a woman against Thus, a grazing of the surface of the female organ party is no longer necessary for its could not be considered as carnal knowledge
her will or without her consent." or touching the mons pubis of the pudendum is prosecution. Consequently, rape is no longer of a woman deprived of reason or of a female
not sufficient to constitute consummated rape. considered a private crime which cannot be under twelve (12) years of age as provided
The failure of the victim to shout for help or resist Absent any showing of the slightest penetration prosecuted, except upon a complaint filed by the under Art. 266-A of the RPC, as amended. Is he
the sexual advances of the rapist is not of the female organ, i.e., touching of aggrieved party. Hence, pardon by the offended correct?
tantamount to consent. Physical resistance need either labia of the pudendum by the penis, there party of the offender in the crime of rape will not A: NO. Rape is essentially a crime committed
not be established in rape when threats and can be no consummated rape; at most, it can only extinguish the offender’s criminal liability. through force or intimidation, that is, against the
intimidation are employed and the victim be attempted rape, if not acts of Moreover, an Affidavit of Desistance even when will of the female. It is also committed without
submits herself to her attackers of because of lasciviousness. (People v. Butiong, G.R. No. construed as a pardon in the erstwhile “private force or intimidation when carnal knowledge of a
fear. Besides, physical resistance is not the sole 168932, 19 Oct. 2011) crime” of rape is not a ground for the dismissal of female is alleged and shown to be without her
test to determine whether a woman voluntarily the criminal cases, since the actions have already consent. It should no longer be debatable that
succumbed to the lust of an accused. Rape victims Effects of the Reclassification of Rape into a been instituted. To justify the dismissal of the rape of a mental retardate falls under paragraph
show no uniform reaction. Some may offer strong Crime against Person (1991, 1993 BAR) complaints, the pardon should have been made 1(b), of Art. 266-A, because the provision refers
resistance while others may be too intimidated to prior to the institution of the criminal actions. to a rape of a female “deprived of reason,” a
offer any resistance at all. (People v. Allan Nievera, 1. The procedural requirement of consent of (People v. Bonaagua, G.R. No. 188897, 06 June phrase that refers to mental abnormality,
G.R. No. 242830. 28 Aug. 2019, J. Caguioa) the offended party to file the case is no longer 2011; People v. Borce, G.R. No. 189579, 12 Sept. deficiency or retardation. (People v. Butiong, G.R.
needed because this is now a public crime, 2011) No. 168932, 19 Oct. 2011)
Amount of Force Necessary to Consummate unlike when it was still classified as a crime
the Crime of Rape against chastity; and Absence of Spermatozoa does NOT Negate the Instances to Consider the Crime as Qualified
Commission of Rape Rape
Jurisprudence firmly holds that the force or 2. There is now an impossible crime of rape
violence required in rape cases is relative; it does because impossible crimes can only be The basic element of rape is carnal knowledge or 1. When by reason or on occasion of the rape, a
not need to be overpowering or irresistible; it is committed against persons or property. sexual intercourse, not ejaculation. Carnal homicide is committed. (1998, 2009 BAR)
present when it allows the offender to knowledge is defined as “the act of a man having
consummate his purpose. (People v. Funesto, G.R. Effects of Pardon on the Criminal Liability of sexual bodily connections with a woman.” This 2. When the victim is under 18 years of age and
No. 182237, 03 Aug. 2011) the Accused Charged with Rape (2002 BAR) explains why the slightest penetration of the the offender is a parent, ascendant, step-
female genitalia consummates the rape. (People v. parent, guardian, relative by consanguinity
No Crime of Frustrated Rape 1. The offended woman may pardon the Butiong, G.R. No. 168932, 19 Oct. 2011) or affinity within the third civil degree, or the
offender through a subsequent valid common law spouse of the victim.
The slightest penetration of the penis into the marriage, the effect of which would be the Q: Accused was charged and convicted of the
labia of the female organ consummates the crime extinction of the offender’s liability. In such crime of rape of a minor. He claims that his Q: AAA was raped by his father, Pablo, on two
of rape. However, mere touching alone of the case, it is the marriage that extinguishes the guilt was not proven because there was no (2) separate occasions. During these
genitals and mons pubis or the pudendum can offender’s liability, not because of the pardon hymenal laceration, therefore there was no instances, AAA was not able to defend herself

due to the strength and moral ascendancy of cannot elevate the crime to qualified rape NOTE: The foregoing circumstances are in the having carnal knowledge of her. After
her father, and due to the act of Pablo of because they are not related either by blood or nature of QUALIFYING AGGRAVATING Alejandro was done, he switched places with
placing a lagting, a bolo used for cutting affinity. The enumeration is exclusive. Hence, the CIRCUMSTANCES which must be specifically Angeles and the latter took his turn ravishing
sugarcanes, near AAA’s head threatening the common law husband of the victim’s pleaded or alleged with certainty in the AAA. Are the accused liable for simple rape?
latter that anyone who subsequently be grandmother is not included. Information.
knowledgeable of his acts would be killed. A: NO. Alejandro and Angeles are liable for the
3. When the victim is under the custody of the KNOWLEDGE of Mental Disability as a crime of Qualified Rape. Court deems it proper to
Pablo was charged with two (2) counts of police or military authorities or any law Qualifying Circumstance; NOT Mental upgrade the conviction in said case from Simple
rape, but the State failed to include the enforcement or penal institution. Disability per se Rape to Qualified Rape. Art. 335 of the RPC states
phrase, “being the father of the victim.” Is that if the rape is committed under certain
Pablo guilty of the crime charged, and not of 4. When rape is committed in full view of the Q: AAA was a 14-year-old girl with a mental circumstances, such as when it was committed by
Qualified Rape? husband, parent, any of the children or other age of only 5 years old. Sometime in 2002, AAA two (2) or more persons, the crime will be
relatives within the third civil degree of informed her sister that she was not having Qualified Rape, as in this instance. (People v.
A: YES. AAA's testimonies established that she consanguinity. her period. They later found out that she was Alejandro and Angeles, G.R. No. 225608, 13 Mar.
was sexually abused by her father. She pregnant. AAA’s aunt revealed that Allan 2017)
categorically and positively identified accused- 5. When the victim is engaged in a legitimate Corpuz raped AAA. A neuropsychiatric
appellant as the perpetrator of the crime. She religious vocation or calling and is personally examination was conducted and revealed that Q: At around 2:00 p.m., AAA was sleeping
adequately recounted the details that took place, known to be such by the offender before or her intelligence level was equivalent to inside their house with her two-year-old
the dates of the incidents, how her father after the commission of the crime. Moderate Mental Retardation. sister and three-year-old brother. Rubio,
committed carnal knowledge against her, and his AAA’s father, approached AAA and removed
threats to wield the lagting if the crimes were 6. When the victim is a child below 7 years old. When AAA testified, she positively identified her shorts and panty. AAA tried to push him
revealed to others. Pablo had carnal knowledge of Allan as the father of her child and that when away but he was too strong, and he succeeded
AAA twice, through force and intimidation. His 7. When the offender knows that he is inflicted she was 13 years old, Allan had sex with her in inserting his penis inside her vagina. AAA
moral ascendancy also intimidated her into with HIV/AIDS or any other sexually on four (4) occasions, each of which he gave continued resisting despite being afraid that
submission. This ascendancy or influence is transmissible disease and the virus or her money. Is the qualifying circumstance of Rubio would hurt her. After some time, Rubio
grounded on his parental authority over his child, disease is transferred to the victim. Rape under Art. 266-B (10) present in this ejaculated outside her vagina. Is Rubio guilty
which is recognized by our Constitution and laws, case? of qualified rape?
as well as on the respect and reverence that 8. When committed by any member of the AFP
Filipino children generally accord to their or paramilitary units thereof or the PNP or A: NO. Rape is qualified "when the offender A: YES. The case falls under Art. 266-B (2). Being
parents. any law enforcement agency or penal knew of the mental disability, emotional disorder AAA’s father, Rubio is presumed to have
institution, when the offender took and/or physical handicap of the offended party at employed force and/or intimidation. The fear
Pablo cannot be convicted of qualified rape under advantage of his position to facilitate the the time of the commission of the crime." This towards her father was more than enough to
Art. 266-B (1). The said crime consists of the twin commission of the crime. qualifying circumstance should be particularly intimidate her to submit to his lewd advances
circumstances of the victim's minority and her alleged in the Information. A mere assertion of without shouting for help. (People v. Rubio, G.R.
relationship to the perpetrator, both of which 9. When by reason or on occasion of the rape, the victim's mental deficiency is not enough. No. 195239, 07 Mar. 2012)
must concur and must be alleged in the the victim has suffered permanent physical Allan can only be convicted of four (4) counts of
information. It is immaterial whether the mutilation or disability. rape under Art. 266-A 1(d) of the RPC because Q: AAA, a 67-year-old woman, was fast asleep
relationship was proven during trial if that was the prosecution failed to allege the qualifying when Bill covered her mouth, threatened her
not specifically pleaded for in the information. In 10. When the offender knew of the pregnancy of circumstance in the Information. (People v. with a knife and told her not to scream
this case, relationship with AAA was not duly the offended party at the time of the Corpuz, G.R. No. 208013, 03 July 2017) because he will have sexual intercourse with
alleged in the information. Thus, his relationship commission of the rape. her. Thereafter, he removed AAA’s
with the victim cannot qualify the crimes of rape. Q: AAA awoke to the sound of BBB's pleas for underwear.
Ruling otherwise would deprive him of his 11. When the offender knew of the mental mercy. Aided by the kerosene lamp placed on
constitutional right to be informed of the nature disability, emotional disorder, and/or the floor, AAA saw BBB being mauled and However, his penis was not yet erected so he
and cause of accusation against him. (People v. physical handicap of the offended party at stabbed to death by Alejandro and Angeles. toyed with AAA’s sexual organ by licking it. He
Armodia, G.R. No. 210654, 07 June 2017) the time of the commission of the crime. (Art. then made his way up and tried to suck AAA’s
266-B, RPC) Thereafter, Angeles approached AAA and tongue. Once done, Bill held his penis and
NOTE: A step-brother or step-sister relationship restrained her arms, while Alejandro pulled inserted it to AAA’s vagina. In his defense, Bill
between the offender and the offended party AAA's pants and underwear down and started argued that during the entire alleged incident,

AAA never reacted at all. Is Bill guilty of rape? A: NO. In any event, the impregnation of a woman Incestuous Rape NOTE: When the woman is under 12 years of age
is not an element of rape. XXX’s pregnancy, or is demented, sexual intercourse with her is
A: YES. Bill is guilty of rape. The force, violence, therefore, is totally immaterial in this case. For It refers to rape committed by an ascendant of the always rape, even if the sexual intercourse was
or intimidation in rape is a relative term, the conviction of an accused, it is sufficient that offended woman. In incestuous rape of a minor, with her consent. This is because the law
depending not only on the age, size, and strength the prosecution establishes beyond reasonable proof of force and violence exerted by the presumes that the victim, on account of her
of the parties but also on their relationship with doubt that he had carnal knowledge of the offender is not essential. Moral ascendancy or tender age, does not and cannot have a will of her
each other. AAA was already 67 years of age when offended party and that he had committed such parental authority of the accused over the own.
she was raped in the dark by Bill who was armed act under any of the circumstances under Art. offended party takes the place of violence.
with a knife. A woman of such advanced age could 266-A of the RPC. (People v. Abat, G.R. No. 202704, NOTE: Art. 266-A of the RPC, the provision on
only recoil in fear and succumb into submission. 02 Apr. 2014) Q: XXX, a 13-year-old girl, testified that her Statutory Rape, has been further amended by R.A.
In any case, with such shocking and horrifying father, De Chavez, raped her. Her sister, YYY No. 11648 which was signed into law on March 4,
experience, it would not be reasonable to impose Marital Rape saw what happened and testified as well. Dr. 2022. Art. 266-A of the RPC now reads:
upon AAA any standard form of reaction. Roy Camarillo, the Medico-Legal Officer who
Different people react differently to a given Q: Can rape be committed by a husband? conducted laboratory examination on XXX, “Art. 266-A. Rape; When and How Committed. –
situation involving a startling occurrence. (People found the presence of deep healed lacerations Rape is Committed:
v. Jastiva, G.R. No. 199268, 12 Feb. 2014) A: YES. Under the new law, the husband may be on XXX’s organ. De Chavez contends that the
liable for marital rape, if his wife does not want to prosecution was not able to prove the “1) By a person who shall have carnal knowledge
NOTE: Impregnation of a woman is NOT an have sex with him. It is enough that there is accusations against him beyond reasonable of another person under any of the following
element of rape. indication of any amount of resistance as to make doubt. Is his contention correct? circumstances:
it rape. (People v. Jumawan, G.R. No. 187495, 21
Q: On Sept. 22, 2001, XXX, a 16-year old girl, Apr. 2014) A: NO. His contention is not correct. There is “x x x
and her uncle, Abat, went to poblacion to buy sufficient basis to conclude the existence of carnal
medicine, with permission of XXX’s parents. Marital rape is recognized in Art. 266-C of the RPC knowledge when the testimony of a rape victim is “d) When the offended party is under sixteen
Instead of proceeding to the poblacion, Abat which provides that in case it is the legal husband corroborated by the medical findings of the (16) years of age or is demented, even though
drove to another barangay. who is the offender, the subsequent forgiveness examining physician as "lacerations, whether none of the circumstances mentioned above be
by the wife as the offended party shall extinguish healed or fresh, are the best physical evidence of present: Provided, That there shall be no
Upon reaching the barangay, Abat dragged the criminal action or penalty. forcible defloration." In this case, the victim's criminal liability on the part of a person having
XXX inside a deserted nipa hut. Abat testimony is corroborated not only by her sister carnal knowledge of another person under
undressed himself then laid XXX down on a Q: Paolo and Marga are husband and wife. but also by the medical findings of the examining sixteen (16) years of age when the age
bamboo bed. Abat inserted his penis into Marga refuses to have sexual intercourse with physician, who testified that the presence of deep difference between the parties is not more than
XXX’s vagina. XXX tried to push Abat away but her husband so the latter used force and healed lacerations on the victim's genitalia, is three (3) years, and the sexual act in question
the latter threatened to kill her and her family intimidation against her. Paolo was able to consistent with the dates the alleged sexual acts is proven to be consensual, non-abusive, and
if she would tell anybody about the “act”. Abat penetrate his penis inside Marga’s vagina. Is were committed. (People v. De Chavez, GR. No. non-exploitative: Provided, further, That if the
made a push and pull movement, after which Paolo guilty of rape? 218427, 31 Jan. 2018) victim is under thirteen (13) years of age, this
he ejaculated. exception shall not apply.” (Disclaimer: This
A: YES. A woman is no longer the chattel- Statutory Rape law is not covered by the 2022 Bar Syllabus
The following day, Abat brought XXX home. antiquated practices labeled her to be. A husband in Criminal Law)
XXX told her parents about the incident. Abat who has sexual intercourse with his wife is not Sexual intercourse with a girl below 12 years old
was charged with rape. On April 24, 2002, XXX merely using a property, he is fulfilling a marital is statutory rape. (People v. Espina, G.R. No. Q: Suppose a 13-year old retarded woman
gave birth to a baby girl. Abat contends that if consortium with a fellow human being with 183564, June 29, 2011) with mental capacity of a 5-year old had
it were true that he raped XXX in September dignity equal to that he accords himself. He sexual intercourse with a man, what is the
2001, then the baby girl XXX gave birth to in cannot be permitted to violate this dignity by Elements of Statutory Rape crime committed?
April 2002 would have been born coercing her to engage in a sexual act without her
prematurely; since the baby appeared to be full and free consent. (People v. Jumawan, G.R. No. 1. That the offender had carnal knowledge of A: Statutory rape. Her mental and not only her
healthy, she could not have been the result of 187495, 21 Apr. 2014) the victim; chronological age are considered. (People v.
the alleged rape in September 2001. Is Abat’s 2. That the victim is below twelve (12) years Manlapaz, G.R. No. L-41819, 28 Feb. 1978)
contention correct? old; (People v. Apattad, G.R. No. 193188, Aug.
10, 2011), and

Generally, to State the Exact, or at least the A: YES. XXX cannot be convicted through his brought to a hospital where she was against or without the consent of the victim. It
Approximate Date the Purported Rape was admission that he had sexual intercourse with examined. operates on the theory that the sexual act was
Committed is Not Necessary AAA in 2007. This is because the Information filed consensual. It requires proof that the accused and
in this case accused XXX of having sexual An Information was filed against Gutierez the victim were lovers and that she consented to
GR: Time is not an essential element of the crime intercourse with AAA "sometime in July 2003." charging him of statutory rape under Art. 266- the sexual relations. For purposes of sexual
of rape. What is important is that the information While it is true, as the RTC and the CA held, that A of the RPC. During trial, AAA disclosed that intercourse and lascivious conduct in child abuse
alleges that the victim was a minor under twelve the exact place and time of the commission of the Gutierez had done the same thing to her about cases under R.A. No. 7610, the sweetheart
(12) years of age and that the accused had carnal crime is not an element of the crime of Rape, XXX ten (10) times on separate occasions. After defense is unacceptable. A child exploited in
knowledge of her, even if the accused did not use still could not be convicted of the crime for to do each act, he would give her ten or five pesos. prostitution or subjected to other sexual abuse
force or intimidation on her or deprived her of so would be to offend the basic tenets of due Gutierez denied that AAA went to his house on cannot validly give consent to sexual intercourse
reason. process in criminal prosecutions. XXX can only be the day of the incident and claimed he was with another person. (People v. Udang, G.R. No.
convicted of the crime of Acts of Lasciviousness already at work at 1:30 p.m. Is Gutierez guilty 210161, 10 Jan. 2018)
XPN: The date of the commission of the rape for what transpired in 2003. (People v. XXX, G.R. of statutory rape beyond reasonable doubt?
becomes relevant only when the accuracy and No. 226467, 17 Oct. 2018, J. Caguioa) Q: Three (3) separate Informations were filed
truthfulness of the complainant’s narration A: YES. In statutory rape, force, intimidation and in the RTC, charging Ruben with two (2)
practically hinge on the date of the commission of Q: Romeo was convicted of rape through physical evidence of injury are not relevant counts of Rape and one (1) count of Acts of
the crime. (People v. Dion, G.R. No. 181035, 04 July sexual assault. He claims that he should be considerations; the only subject of inquiry is the Lasciviousness. Pleading his innocence,
2011) acquitted as the prosecution was not able to age of the woman and whether carnal knowledge Ruben denied the accusations against him on
prove the accusations against him beyond took place. The child's consent is immaterial the claim that he and AAA were live-in
NOTE: The date of the commission of rape is not reasonable doubt. He likewise puts in issue because of her presumed incapacity to discern partners and that their sexual encounters
an essential element thereof, for the gravamen of the fact that there was no in-court good from evil. were consensual. No other evidence was
the offense is carnal knowledge of a woman. The identification. presented to prove the fact of their
discrepancies in the actual dates the rapes took In this case, the defense did not dispute the fact relationship. Will Ruben’s defense prosper?
place are not serious errors warranting a reversal A: Jurisprudence consistently holds that that AAA was ten (10) years old at the time of the
of the appellant’s conviction. What is decisive in a testimonies of minor victims are generally given incident. AAA was able to narrate in a clear and A: NO. Ruben's flimsy defense of consensual
rape charge is the victim’s positive identification full weight and credence as the court considers categorical manner the ordeal that was done to sexual congress pales in comparison to the
of the accused as the malefactor. (People v. their youth and immaturity as badges of truth and her. It is well-settled that when a woman, more so testimony of AAA, which was delivered in a clear
Mercado, G.R. No. 189847, 30 May 2011) sincerity. Also, the fact that there was no in-court when she is a minor, says she has been raped, she and straightforward manner. At the outset, it
identification was of no moment. In-court says in effect all that is required to prove the should be emphasized that the Court has
Q: An information was filed against XXX for identification of the offender is essential only ravishment. The accused may thus be convicted consistently disfavored the "sweetheart theory"
the rape of his daughter AAA, who was 10 when there is a question or doubt on whether the solely on her testimony-provided it is credible, defense for being self-serving in nature. Being an
years old at the time, in 2003. During trial, one alleged to have committed the crime is the natural, convincing and consistent with human affirmative defense, the allegation of a love affair
AAA testified that in 2003, XXX forced her to same person who is charged in the information nature and the normal course of things. (People v. must be substantiated by the accused with
touch his private parts. After that, the act was and subject of the trial. (People v. Garin, GR. No. Gutierez, G.R. No. 208007, 02 Apr. 2014) convincing proof. It bears noting that Ruben's
cut short since her mother timely arrived. She 222654, 21 Feb. 2018) defense was corroborated only by his daughter,
added that in 2007, XXX again tried to rape Sweetheart Theory in Rape Ruby Ann, which effectively weakened the
her and succeeded in doing so. XXX admitted Q: AAA, 10 years old, went home from school defense, being supported by a mere relative of the
that he engaged in sexual intercourse with at around 12:00 noon to have lunch. On the As held in People v. Cabanilla, the sweetheart accused. In People v. Nogpo, Jr., the Court held that
AAA in 2007, but claimed that it was way home, she met Gutierez at his house. He defense is an affirmative defense that must be where nothing supports the sweetheart theory
consensual. brought her to his room, laid her down on the supported by convincing proof. Having an illicit except the testimony of a relative, such defense
bed and had carnal knowledge of her. He then affair does not rule out rape as it does not deserves scant consideration. (People v. Ruben
The RTC convicted XXX of rape despite the gave her P5.00 before she went back to school. necessarily mean that consent was present. A "Robin" Bongbonga, G.R. No. 2147710, 09 Aug.
discrepancy of the dates, ruling that the exact AAA went back to school at about 2:10 p.m. love affair does not justify rape for a man does not 2017, J. Caguioa)
date or time of the commission is not an Her adviser asked her where she came from have an unbridled license to subject his beloved
element of the offense. The CA affirmed the because she was tardy. AAA admitted she to his carnal desires against her will. (People v. Q: An Information was filed against Fruelda
conviction. On appeal, XXX argues that he came from "Uncle Rod." AAA then was brought Cias, G.R. No. 194379, 01 June 2011) for the crime of rape. The private complainant
could not be convicted for a crime that to the comfort room where another teacher testified that she oversees the storeroom
happened in 2007, since the information inspected her panties. She was eventually The sweetheart theory applies in acts of where bars of soaps, coffee and other items
charged him for rape in 2003. Is XXX correct? lasciviousness and rape, felonies committed used to generate funds for the congregation

were stored. Clara Doctrine” posits that, it is a well-known fact AAA on the lips down to her neck while exacting test of moral certainty that the law
that women, especially Filipinos, would not admit unbuttoning her blouse. He proceeded by demands to satisfy the burden of overcoming the
At around eight o'clock in the morning of 28 that they have been abused unless that abuse had taking off her sando and bra. Uncontented, he appellant's presumption of innocence. (People v.
April 2014, she was charging her cellphone actually happened. This is due to their natural pulled down her panties and mashed her Arpon, G.R. No. 183563, 14 Dec. 2011)
inside the church premises when the accused instinct to protect their honor. (People v. Taño, breasts.
arrived and asked her where the storeroom 109 Phil. 912, GR No. L-11991, 31 Oct. 1960) Reputation in the Prosecution of Rape,
was. After being pointed to where the When a teacher passed by, CICL XXX ran away, Immaterial
storeroom was located, the Accused asked Sexual Abuse Shield Rule in Child Sexual giving AAA the chance to escape. This was
private complainant to retrieve bar soaps for Abuse Cases reported to the Women's Desk of the Batasan It is immaterial in rape, there being absolutely no
him to which she obliged. Hills Police Station. RTC found CICL XXX guilty nexus between it and the odious deed committed.
The following evidence is not admissible in any beyond reasonable doubt, as affirmed by the A woman of loose morals could still be a victim of
The Accused suddenly grabbed her breasts. criminal proceeding involving alleged child sexual CA. CICL XXX contends that the RTC rape, the essence thereof being carnal knowledge
Out of shock, private complainant shouted. abuse under the “sexual abuse shield” rule: essentially applied the Maria Clara doctrine in of a woman without her consent. (People v.
Although the Accused released her breasts, giving credence to AAA's testimony, which he Navarro, G. R. No. 137597, 24 Oct. 2003)
he, however, immediately grabbed the front 1. Evidence to prove that the alleged victim argues has been abandoned in People v.
of private complainant's pants directly over engaged in other sexual behavior; and Amarela. Should the women’s honor doctrine Evidence which May be Accepted in the
her private part. The accused, to escape one's apply in this case? Prosecution of Rape
liability, presented the idea that he has a 2. Evidence offered to prove the sexual
prohibited love affair with the complainant. Is predisposition of the alleged victim (Sec. 30, A: NO. At the onset, the Court clarifies that it did 1. Any physical overt act manifesting resistance
the defense of the accused tenable? Rule on Examination of a Child Witness [A.M. not completely abandon the women's honor against the act of rape in any degree from the
No. 004-07-SC]) doctrine in the case of People v. Amarela, but has offended party; or
A: No. In rape, the 'sweetheart' defense must be tempered the application of the doctrine
proven by compelling evidence: first, that the Under this rule, the accused is not allowed to according to the times. The Court in People v. 2. Where the offended party is so situated as to
accused and the victim were lovers; and, second, prove the bad moral character of the offended Nocido explained that the doctrine of women’s render him/her incapable of giving consent.
that she consented to the alleged sexual relations. party. However, evidence of any of the above is honor recognizes the "well-known fact that (Art. 266-D, RPC)
The second is as important as the first, because admissible to prove that a person other than the women, especially Filipinos, would not admit that
this Court has held often enough that love is not a accused was the source of semen, injury or other they have been abused unless that abuse had Distinction between violation of Sec. 5 (b) of
license for lust. physical evidence. (Riano, 2019) actually happened, because it is their natural R.A. No. 7610 and Rape under the RPC as
instinct to protect their honor." discussed in the case of Malto v. People (2007)
For the Court to even consider giving credence to The Maria Clara stereotype However, as discussed in People v. Amarela, the Clarified
such a defense, it must be proven by compelling opinion enshrined under the Women's Honor
evidence. The defense cannot just present The Supreme Court in People v. Amarela and doctrine borders on the fallacy of non-sequitur, Victim is under 12 years of age or is
testimonial evidence in support of the theory, as Racho (G.R. No. 225642-43, 17 Jan. 2018), through that while the factual setting back then would demented:
in the instant case. Independent proof is required Justice Martires, enunciated that courts must not have been appropriate to say it is natural for a
— such as tokens, mementos, and photographs. rely solely on the Maria Clara stereotype of a woman to be reluctant in disclosing a sexual Sexual intercourse with a victim who is under 12
No such proof was presented by the defense in demure and reserved Filipino woman. Rather, assault; today we simply cannot be stuck to the years of age or is demented is always statutory
this case. (People v. Fruelda, G.R. No. 242690, 03 courts should stay away from such mindset and Maria Clara stereotype of a demure and reserved rape, as Sec. 5(b) of R.A. No. 7610 expressly states
Sept. 2020, J. Caguioa) accept the realities of a woman’s dynamic role in Filipino woman. We should stay away from such that the perpetrator will be prosecuted under Art.
society today; she who has over the years mindset and accept the realities of a woman's 266-A, par. 1(d) of the RPC as amended by R.A.
Rape Shield Rule transformed into a strong and confidently dynamic role in society today. (CICL XXX v. People, No. 8353.
intelligent and beautiful person willing to fight G.R. No. 246146, 18 Mar. 2021)
The character of the woman is immaterial in rape. for her rights. Even if the girl who is below 12 years old or is
It is no defense that the woman is of unchaste Necessity to Prove Every Count of Rape in demented consents to the sexual intercourse, it is
character, provided the illicit relations were Q: In the evening of Aug. 30, 2012, private Cases of Multiple Rape always a crime of statutory rape under the RPC,
committed with force and violence. complainant AAA was walking inside a and the offender should no longer be held liable
campus. Then suddenly, CICL XXX grabbed It is settled that each and every charge of rape is under R.A. No. 7610. Even if the girl consented or
"Women’s honor” Doctrine and pulled her towards a comer. He poked an a separate and distinct crime that the law is demented, the law presumes that she is
icepick on the right side of her body and requires to be proven beyond reasonable doubt. incapable of giving a rational consent.
Women’s honor doctrine or the so-called “Maria uttered: "Wag ka sisigaw." CICL XXX kissed The prosecution's evidence must pass the

The same reason holds true with respect to acts then there is no crime committed, except in those In the former provision, "child abuse" refers to “(b) Those who commit the act of sexual
of lasciviousness or lascivious conduct when the cases where "force, threat or intimidation" as an the maltreatment, whether habitual or not, of the intercourse or lascivious conduct with a child
offended party is less than 12 years old or is element of rape is substituted by "moral child which includes sexual abuse, among other exploited in prostitution or subjected to other
demented. Even if such party consents to the ascendancy or moral authority," like in the cases matters. sexual abuse: Provided, That when the victim is
lascivious conduct, the crime is always statutory of incestuous rape, and unless it is punished under sixteen (16) years of age, the perpetrators
acts of lasciviousness. The offender will be under the RPC as qualified seduction under Art. In the latter provision, "sexual abuse" includes shall be prosecuted under Article 335, paragraph
prosecuted under Art. 336 of the RPC, but the 337 or simple seduction under Art. 338. (People the employment, use, persuasion, inducement, 2, for rape and Article 336 of Act No. 3815, as
penalty is provided for under Sec. 5(b) of R.A. No. v. Tulagan, G.R. No. 227363, 12 March 2019) enticement or coercion of a child to engage in, or amended, otherwise known as "The Revised
7610. Therefore, there is no conflict between assist another person to engage in, sexual Penal Code", for rape, or lascivious conduct, as
rape and acts of lasciviousness under the RPC, “Children exploited in prostitution” under intercourse or lascivious conduct or the the case may be: Provided, That the penalty for
and sexual intercourse and lascivious conduct R.A. No. 7610 molestation, prostitution, or incest with children. lascivious conduct when the victim is under
under R.A. No. 7610. sixteen (16) years of age shall be reclusion
The phrase "children exploited in Thus, the term "other sexual abuse" is broad perpetua in its medium period;” (Disclaimer:
If sexual intercourse is committed with a child prostitution" contemplates four (4) scenarios: enough to include all other acts of sexual abuse This law is not covered under the 2022 Bar
under 12 years of age, who is deemed to be other than prostitution. Accordingly, a single Syllabus for Criminal Law)
"exploited in prostitution and other sexual 1. a child, whether male or female, who for act of lascivious conduct is punished under Sec.
abuse," then those who engage in or promote, money, profit or any other consideration, 5(b), Art. III, when the victim is 12 years old and Applicable Laws and Penalty for the Crimes of
facilitate or induce child prostitution under Sec. indulges in lascivious conduct below 18, or 18 or older under special Rape, Acts of Lasciviousness, and Violation of
5(a) of R.A. No. 7610 shall be liable as principal by 2. a female child, who for money, profit or any circumstances. In contrast, when the victim is R.A. No. 7610 depending on the Age of the
force or inducement under Art. 17 of the RPC in other consideration, indulges in sexual under 12 years old, the proviso of Sec. 5(b) states Victim
the crime of statutory rape under Art. 266-A(1) of intercourse; that the perpetrator should be prosecuted under
the RPC; whereas those who derive profit or 3. a child, whether male or female, who due to Art. 336 of the RPC for acts of lasciviousness, In sum, the following are the applicable laws and
advantage therefrom under Sec. 5(c) of R.A. No. the coercion or influence of any adult, whereby the lascivious conduct itself is the sole penalty for the crimes of acts of lasciviousness or
7610 shall be liable as principal by indispensable syndicate or group, indulges in lascivious element of the said crime. This is because in lascivious conduct and rape by carnal knowledge
cooperation under Art. 17 of the RPC. conduct; and statutory acts of lasciviousness, as in statutory or sexual assault, depending on the age of the
4. a female, due to the coercion or influence of rape, the minor is presumed incapable of giving victim, in view of the provisions of pars. 1 and 2
Victim is 12 years old or less than 18: any adult, syndicate or group, indulge in consent; hence, the other circumstances of Art. 266-A and Art. 336 of the RPC, as amended
sexual intercourse. pertaining to rape – force, threat, intimidation, by R.A. No. 8353, and Sec. 5(b) of R.A. No. 7610:
If the victim who is 12 years old or less than 18 etc. – are immaterial. (People v. Tulagan, supra) (People v. Tulagan, supra)
and is deemed to be a child "exploited in NOTE: The element of "exploited in prostitution"
prostitution and other sexual abuse" because she does not cover a male child, who for money, profit NOTE: Sec. 5(b) of R.A. No. 7610 has been NOTE: The following table was lifted from the
agreed to indulge in sexual intercourse "for or any other consideration, or due to coercion or amended by R.A. No. 11648 which was signed case of People v. Tulagan, supra.
money, profit or any other consideration or due influence of any adult, syndicate, or group, into law on March 4, 2022. Sec. 3, R.A. No. 11648
to coercion or influence of any adult, syndicate or indulges in sexual intercourse. It is only when the provides:
group," then the crime could not be rape under victim or the child who was abused is a male that
the RPC, because this no longer falls under the the offender would be prosecuted under Sec. 5(b)
concept of statutory rape, and there was consent. R.A. No. 7610 because the crime of rape does not
That is why the offender will now be penalized cover child abuse of males. (People v. Tulagan,
under Sec. 5(b), R.A. No. 7610, and not under Art. supra)
266-A.
“Other sexual abuse” under R.A. 7610
But if the said victim does not give her consent to
sexual intercourse in the sense that the sexual The term "other sexual abuse," on the other
intercourse was committed through force, threat hand, should be construed in relation to the
or intimidation, the crime is rape under par. 1, definitions of "child abuse" under Sec. 3, Art. I of
Art. 266-A of the RPC. R.A. No. 7610 and "sexual abuse" under Sec. 2(g)
of the Rules and Regulations on the Reporting and
However, if the same victim gave her consent to Investigation of Child Abuse Cases.
the sexual intercourse, and no money, profit,
consideration, coercion or influence is involved,

Sec. 5 of R.A. 7610 Penalizes Not Only Child old BBB, and (3) 9-year old CCC.
Designation of the Crime and Imposable Penalty Prostitution, the Essence of which is Profit,
but also Other Forms of Sexual Abuse of The RTC found Baya guilty beyond reasonable
Age of the Victim 12 years old or below 18, Children (People v. Tulagan, supra) doubt of one (1) count of acts of
Under 12 years old or 18 years old and
or 18 under special lasciviousness against AAA, two (2) counts of
demented above
Crime Committed circumstances SEC. 5 (A) SEC. 5 (B) rape against BBB, and one (1) count of acts of
Acts of Acts of Lasciviousness OF R.A. 7610 OF R.A. 7610 lasciviousness against CCC. On appeal, the CA
Lascivious conduct under
Lasciviousness under Art. 336 of the RPC Punishes sexual affirmed with modification the RTC Decision.
Sec. 5(b) of R.A. 7610:
committed against in relation to Sec. 5(b) of intercourse or In the acts of lasciviousness case against AAA,
reclusion temporal in its Not applicable
children exploited in R.A. 7610: reclusion lascivious conduct the CA acquitted Baya because AAA did not
medium period to
prostitution or other temporal in its medium committed on a child testify to prove the commission of the crime.
reclusion perpetua
sexual abuse period subjected to other
Sexual Assault Sexual assault under Art. Lascivious conduct under Punishes acts sexual abuse. It Is Baya guilty beyond reasonable doubt of:
committed against 266-A (2) of the RPC in Sec. 5(b) of R.A. 7610: pertaining to or covers not only a
children exploited in relation to Sec. 5(b) of R.A. reclusion temporal in its Not applicable connected with child situation where a a. Acts of lasciviousness against AAA?
prostitution or other 7610: reclusion temporal medium period to prostitution wherein child is abused for
sexual abuse in its medium period reclusion perpetua the child is abused profit but also one in A: NO. With AAA's non-presentation in court and
Rape under Art. 266-A (1) primarily for profit. which a child, through the uncertainty of BBB and CCC's testimonies on
Sexual Intercourse Sexual abuse under Sec. AAA's presence during the incident, Baya's guilt
of the RPC: reclusion coercion,
committed against 5(b) of R.A. 7610: reclusion was not established beyond reasonable doubt.
perpetua, except when the intimidation or
children exploited in temporal in its medium Not applicable The Court sustains the CA's ruling of acquittal on
victim is below 7 years old influence, engages in
prostitution or other period to reclusion acts of lasciviousness against AAA.
in which death penalty sexual intercourse or
sexual abuse perpetua
shall be imposed lascivious conduct.
Rape under Art. 266-A in b. Rape against BBB?
relation to Art. 266-B of Q: BBB testified that in the afternoon of Sept.
Rape under Art. 266-A in A: YES. The Court observed that the Information
the RPC: reclusion Rape under Art. 26, 2006, Baya’s sister (Joy) asked her, AAA
Rape by Carnal relation to Art. 266-B of charging Baya of rape against BBB in relation to
perpetua, except when the 266-A of the RPC: and CCC to fold her clothes in her house. The
Knowledge the RPC: reclusion R.A. 7610 did not include Art. 266-A of the RPC,
victim is below 7 years old reclusion perpetua victims AAA, BBB, and CCC were watching the
perpetua as amended by R.A. 8353 or the Anti-rape Law.
in which case death television while folding the clothes at the
Sec. 5(b), Art. III of R.A. 7610 states that if the
penalty shall be imposed second floor. Baya was inside the room while
victim is below 12 years old, the offender shall be
Sexual assault under Art. Lascivious conduct under the victims were doing their chores.
Sexual assault prosecuted under the RPC.
266-A (2) of the RPC in Sec. 5(b) of R.A. 7610:
Rape by Sexual under Art. 266-A of
relation to Sec. 5(b) of R.A. reclusion temporal in its When Joy went out of the house, Baya asked
Assault the RPC: prision The provision above referred to the old article on
7610: reclusion temporal medium period to the victims to lie down together. He removed
mayor rape and acts of lasciviousness of the RPC,
in its medium period reclusion perpetua BBB's shorts and panty, positioned himself on
because R.A. 7610 was approved on June 17,
top of her, and, inserted his penis into her
1992, prior to the enactment of R.A. 8353 on Sept.
vagina. After abusing her, AAA and CCC were
30, 1997. R.A. 8353 repealed Art. 335 of the RPC,
next. BBB saw that Baya also violated AAA and
and formed new provisions as found in Arts. 266-
CCC because they were all lying side by side.
A to 266-D under Crimes against Persons. With
When Baya was done, he gave them money.
this legal development, Sec. 5(b), Art. III of R.A.
CCC narrated that there were five other
7610 should be amended to replace Art. 335 with
similar incidents, but she could no longer
Art. 266-A of the RPC. Thus, even if the
recall the dates.
Information did not include the relevant
provision of the RPC, Baya was still prosecuted
Baya was charged with five (5) counts of rape
and convicted under the RPC because R.A. 7610
and four (4) counts of acts of lasciviousness
mandated it.
under Art. 336 of the RPC in relation to Sec.
5(b), Art. III, R.A. 7610 for sexually abusing
The circumstance applicable in this case is Par.
three minors: (1) 7-year old AAA, (2) 9-year
(d) of Art. 266-A of the RPC, which provides that

the offended party is under twelve (12) years of the genitalia, anus, groin, breast, inner thigh, or judgment at the time of the commission of the contention correct thereby absolving him
age or is demented, even though none of the other buttocks, or the introduction of any object into crime. As already settled in jurisprudence, not all from criminal liability?
circumstances mentioned are present, the genitalia, anus or mouth, of any person, victims react the same way. Moreover, resistance
considering that BBB was nine years old at the whether of the same or opposite sex, with an is not an element of rape. A rape victim has no A: NO. Different people have varying reactions
time of the incident as proven by her birth intent to abuse, humiliate, harass, degrade, or burden to prove that she did all within her power during moments of trauma; more so, a 6-year-old
certificate. The fact of carnal knowledge was arouse or gratify the sexual desire of any to resist the force or intimidation employed upon child being attacked by people whom she
established through BBB and CCC's positive person, bestiality, masturbation, lascivious her. As long as the force or intimidation is believed to be her protectors. It must be
identification of Baya as their abuser. BBB exhibition of the genitals or pubic area of a present, whether it was more or less irresistible emphasized that a 6-year-old child cannot be
testified he removed her shorts and panty, person.” is beside the point. (People v. Baldo, G.R. No. expected to react similarly as an adult, given her
positioned himself on top of her, and inserted his 175238, 24 Feb. 2009) limited understanding of the evils of this world
penis into her vagina. BBB's Initial Medico-Legal Here, CCC testified that Baya raised her shorts and the desires of men who have no bounds. It is
Report showed "clear evidence of blunt force or and pressed his penis into her vagina. However, Physical resistance need not be established in for the same reason that this Court cannot
penetrating trauma." With the prosecution since the shorts were tight, his penis did not rape when intimidation is exercised upon the subscribe to the defense's assertion that private
sufficiently establishing all the elements of rape penetrate her. BBB corroborated CCC's victim who submits against her will to the rapist’s complainant's testimony should not be given
applicable in this case, Baya's guilt was proved testimonies. Clearly, the act complained of lust because of fear for her life or personal safety. weight. It is unfathomable that a 6-year-old child
beyond reasonable doubt. Therefore, the Court constitutes as lascivious conduct under the IRR of (People v. Tuazon, G.R. No. 168650, 26 Oct. 2007) would be able to describe in such detail how she
sustains the CA's conviction on rape. R.A. 7610. (People v. Baya, G.R. No. 242512, 14 was ravaged by men she considered protectors
Aug. 2019) Physical Resistance Need NOT be Established unless her statements were true. Her candid,
c. Acts of lasciviousness against CCC? to Prove the Commission of Rape straightforward, and consistent testimony must
Circumstantial Evidence prevail over the self-serving allegations of the
A: YES. In the criminal case for acts of It has long been established that a victim's failure defense. Even when she was intimidated by the
lasciviousness against CCC, Baya was charged of In the case of People v. ZZZ, the Supreme Court to struggle or resist an attack on his or her person defense attorney, private complainant, who was
violating Art. 336 of the RPC, in relation to Sec. ruled that the commission of the crime of rape does not, in any way, deteriorate his or her then eight (8) years old, did not falter, proving the
5(b), Art. III of the R.A. 7610. may be proven not only by direct evidence, but credibility. Physical resistance need not be attorney's attempt to disparage her futile. (People
also by circumstantial evidence. Circumstantial established to prove the commission of a rape or v. Sumayod, supra)
In People v. Ladra, the Court held that "before an evidence are "proof of collateral facts and sexual assault, as the very nature of the crime
accused can be held criminally liable for circumstances from which the existence of the entails the use of intimidation and fear that may A Medico-legal Finding in the Prosecution of
lascivious conduct under Sec. 5(b) of R.A. 7610, main fact may be inferred according to reason paralyze a victim and force him or her to submit Rape Cases, NOT Indispensable
the requisites of the crime of [a]cts of and common experience." In the absence of direct to the assailant. (People v. Sumayod, G.R. No.
[l]asciviousness as penalized under Art. 336 of evidence, a resort to circumstantial evidence is 230626, 09 Mar. 2020) The medico-legal findings are “merely
the RPC x x x must be met." usually necessary in proving the commission of corroborative in character and is not an element
rape. This is because rape "is generally Q: AAA was six (6) years old when she was of rape”. The prime consideration in the
On the other hand, Sec. 5(b), Art. III of R.A. 7610 unwitnessed and very often only the victim is left raped by Eliseo multiple times. AAA revealed prosecution of rape is the victim's testimony, not
provides that: to testify for [him or] herself. It becomes even this to BBB, her grandmother. Subsequently, necessarily the medical findings; a medical
“Sec. 5. Child Prostitution and Other Sexual more difficult when the complex crime of rape Eliseo was charged with rape and rape by examination of the victim is not indispensable in
Abuse. — Children, whether male or female, with homicide is committed because the victim sexual assault. The RTC found Eliseo guilty of a prosecution for rape. The victim's testimony
who for money, profit, or any other consideration could no longer testify. (G.R. No. 228828, 24 July the crime charged. On appeal, the CA affirmed alone, if credible, is sufficient to convict an
or due to the coercion or influence of any 2019) the ruling of the trial court. accused. (People v. Perez, G.R. No. 191265, 14 Sept.
adult, syndicate or group, indulge in sexual 2011)
intercourse or lascivious conduct, are deemed Absence of Signs of External Physical Injuries
to be children exploited in prostitution and does Not Signify Lack of Resistance on the Part In his brief, Eliseo put private complainant Q: 11-year old "AAA" went to the Pasig public
other sexual abuse.” (Emphasis supplied) of the Rape Victim AAA's credibility in question, contending that market to buy a pair of slippers. However,
the RTC erred in basing their conviction on "AAA" was not able to buy her pair of slippers
Sec. 2(h) of the Rules and Regulations on the Resistance from the victim need not be carried to her testimony given that her allegations were because appellant suddenly grabbed her left
Reporting and Investigation of Child Abuse Cases the point of inviting death or sustaining physical contrary to common experience. He asserted arm and pulled her towards the nearby Mega
or the IRR of R.A. 7610 defines lascivious conduct injuries at the hands of the rapist. that private complainant's lack of struggle, Parking Plaza.
as: resistance, or the fact that she did not cry
NOTE: In rape, the force and intimidation must be during the rapes was unnatural. Is Eliseo’s Upon reaching the fourth floor of Mega
“h) "Lascivious conduct" means the intentional viewed in light of the victim’s perception and Parking Plaza, appellant pulled "AAA’s"
touching, either directly or through clothing, of

shorts and panty down to her knees. When Ricalde returned to the sofa, XXX ran at once. BBB asked ZZZ if he raped AAA, which of age, are merely acts of lasciviousness and not
Appellant then sat on the stairs, placed "AAA" toward his mother’s room to tell her what he denied. He was around 12 meters away attempted rape because intent to have sexual
on his lap, inserted his penis into her vagina happened. He also told his mother that from AAA, holding a hammer on the window. intercourse is not clearly shown. (People v.
and performed push and pull movements. Ricalde played with his sexual organ. XXX’s ZZZ claimed that BBB was influenced by her Banzuela, G.R. No. 202060, 11 Dec. 2013)
"AAA" felt pain in her vagina. Immediately mother armed herself with a knife for self- cousins to accuse him. The cousins were
upon seeing the sexual molestations, Boca, defense when she confronted Ricalde about allegedly mad at him and wanted BBB and him To be held liable of attempted rape, it must be
the security guard, grabbed appellant’s arm, the incident, but he remained silent. She to separate since he was "not a useful person." shown that the erectile penis is in the position to
handcuffed him and brought him to the asked him to leave. Is Ricalde guilty of the Is ZZZ guilty of the crime of rape beyond penetrate (Cruz v. People, G.R. No. 166441, 08 Oct.
barangay hall. Is the appellant guilty of the crime of rape? reasonable doubt? 2014) or the offender actually commenced to
crime of rape? force his penis into the victim’s sexual organ.
A: YES. All the elements of rape is present in the A: YES. AAA’s recollection on how ZZZ committed (People v. Banzuela, supra)
A: YES. Appellant is guilty of the crime of rape. case at bar. Rape under the second paragraph of the crime was detailed; her testimony, consistent.
Testimonies of child-victims are normally given Art. 266-A is also known as "instrument or object Likewise, the absence of hymenal laceration fails Principles in Reviewing Rape Cases
full weight and credit, since when a girl, rape," "gender-free rape," or "homosexual rape." to exonerate ZZZ. This Court has consistently held
particularly if she is a minor, says that she has that an intact hymen does not negate the In reviewing rape cases, the Court is guided by
been raped, she says in effect all that is necessary Any person who, under any of the circumstances commission of rape. The absence of external three (3) settled principles:
to show that rape has in fact been committed. mentioned in the first paragraph hereof shall signs or physical injuries on the complainant's
When the offended party is of tender age and commit an act of sexual assault by inserting his body does not necessarily negate the commission 1. An accusation of rape can be made with
immature, courts are inclined to give credit to her penis into another person’s mouth or anal orifice, of rape, hymenal laceration not being, to repeat, facility and while the accusation is difficult to
account of what transpired, considering not only or any instrument or object, into the genital or an element of the crime of rape. (People v. ZZZ, prove, it is even more difficult for the person
her relative vulnerability but also the shame to anal orifice of another person. G.R. No. 229862, 19 June 2019) accused, although innocent, to disprove;
which she would be exposed if the matter to
which she testified is not true. Youth and The gravamen of rape through sexual assault is Attempted Rape vs. Acts of Lasciviousness 2. Considering the intrinsic nature of the crime,
immaturity are generally badges of truth and "the insertion of the penis into another person’s only two persons being usually involved, the
sincerity. The absence of fresh lacerations in mouth or anal orifice, or any instrument or object, ATTEMPTED ACTS OF testimony of the complainant should be
“AAA’s” hymen does not prove that appellant did into another person’s genital or anal orifice.’’ RAPE LASCIVIOUSNESS scrutinized with great caution; and
not rape her. A freshly broken hymen is not an (Ricalde v. People, G.R. No. 211002, 21 Jan. 2015)
There is no intention
essential element of rape and healed lacerations There is intent to 3. The evidence for the prosecution must stand
to lie with the offended
do not negate rape. In addition, a medical Hymenal Laceration NOT an Element of the effect sexual or fall on its own merit, and cannot be
woman. The intention
examination and a medical certificate are merely Crime of Rape cohesion, although allowed to draw strength from the weakness
is merely to satisfy
corroborative and are not indispensable to the unsuccessful. of the evidence for the defense. (People v.
lewd design.
prosecution of a rape case. The credible Q: AAA narrated that, she had fallen asleep Ogarte, G.R. No. 182690, 30 May 2011)
disclosure of a minor that the accused raped her after doing laundry, while her stepfather, ZZZ,
Q: Braulio invited Lulu, his 11-year old
is the most important proof of sexual abuse. was doing carpentry works. Suddenly, she Q: ZZZ was charged with the crime of rape
stepdaughter, inside the master bedroom. He
(People v. De Jesus, G.R. No. 190622, 07 Oct. 2013) woke up and found ZZZ on top of her, his after he allegedly had carnal knowledge of his
pulled out a knife and threatened her with
lower body naked. He then sat on the floor granddaughter, AAA, against her will. The
harm unless she submitted to his desires. He
Q: XXX (then a 10-year old boy) requested his with his penis showing and removed her short prosecution offered the testimonies of the
was touching her chest and sex organ when
mother to pick up Ricalde at McDonald’s Bel- pants and underwear, after which he went victim AAA and Barangay Captain Manuel
his wife caught him in the act.
Air, Sta. Rosa. Ricalde, then thirty-one (31) back on top of her and masturbated. He took Lotec. The victim, AAA, presented a
years old, is a distant relative and textmate of AAA's hands and put them on his penis, telling straightforward and positive testimony that
The prosecutor is unsure whether to charge
XXX. her that if she became pregnant, "he would be her grandfather raped her. Barangay Captain
Braulio for acts of lasciviousness under Art.
happy." ZZZ then succeeded in having carnal Lotec testified that when AAA told him that
336 of the RPC, for lascivious conduct under
After dinner, XXX’s mother told Ricalde to knowledge with AAA. ZZZ raped her, Barangay Captain Lotec
R.A. No. 7610 (Special Protection against Child
spend the night at their house as it was late. brought her to the police station where a
Abuse, Exploitation, and Discrimination Act),
He slept on the sofa while XXX slept on the Upon examination, it was found that there police officer and a local social worker
or for rape under Art.266-A of the RPC. What
living room floor. It was around 2:00 a.m. was redness and abrasion on the right side of attended to her. Upon cross-examination,
is the crime committed? Explain. (2016 BAR)
when XXX awoke as "he felt pain in his anus the victim's labia minora, "caused by a Barangay Captain Lotec described AAA during
and stomach and something inserted in his smooth, soft object.” ZZZ testified that AAA’s their conversation as “pale and trembling.”
A: The acts of Braulio of touching the chest and
anus." He saw that Ricalde "fondled his penis." mother, BBB, arrived and she opened the door Was the prosecution able to prove beyond
sex organ of Lulu who is under twelve (12) years

reasonable doubt the guilt of the accused- lewdness and lust for her. (Cruz v. People, G.R. No. A: YES. The Court laments that neither the RTC
appellant ZZZ for the crime of rape? 166441, 08 Oct. 2014) nor the CA was able to discuss the doubt on
Ansano's identity as the perpetrator of the crime
A: YES. In determining a victim’s credibility in Q: Pojo raped AAA, but it took AAA twenty- even though the issue was glaring in the records
rape cases, courts should be wary of adopting seven (27) days from the crime to report the of the case. Both the RTC and the CA focused on
outdated notions of a victim’s behavior based on incident of the rape. Should AAA file a whether the crime indeed happened and
gender stereotypes. Regardless of such complaint later on, will it affect her credibility examined AAA's testimony only through that
preconceptions, conviction may be warranted as a complaining witness? lens. The RTC simply said that "[t]he clear,
based “solely on the testimony of the victim, consistent and spontaneous testimony of [AAA]
provided of course, that the testimony is credible, A: NO. A delay in reporting the incident of rape unrelentingly established how Ansano sexually
natural, convincing, and consistent with human does not diminish the credibility of the [assaulted] her on April 6, 2005 with the use of
nature and the normal course of things.” complaining witness. (People v. Pojo, G.R. No. force, threat and intimidation." The CA was
183709, 06 Dec. 2010) unfortunately as terse, as it held that: "AAA
positively identified accused-appellant as the
In this case, AAA's account of having been
Q: An Information was filed against Teodoro perpetrator. The clear, consistent and
attacked by accused-appellant was sufficiently
Ansano for the rape of 15-year-old minor AAA, spontaneous testimony of AAA established that
corroborated by Barangay Captain Lotec's
a resident of XXX. AAA testified that on April accused-appellant committed rape against the
testimony that he saw AAA "pale and trembling."
6, 2005, at about 5:00 PM, she was going to victim," adding that Ansano's defense of alibi and
Such description is based on his personal
fetch her father at Narra, where the latter was denial simply failed to stand in light of AAA's
knowledge, having actually observed and spoken
then selling goods at the river. Accused positive identification.
to AAA regarding her ordeal. This, taken with the
Ansano was then carrying a bolo, wearing a
prosecution's other corroborating evidence and
long-sleeved shirt and long pants used in the A conviction in a criminal case must be supported
AAA's straightforward identification of accused-
farm; while AAA was wearing red t-shirt and by proof beyond reasonable doubt — moral
appellant as the perpetrator, makes AAA's
school uniform skirt. certainty that the accused is guilty. The defense
testimony sufficiently credible independent of
may be weak, but the prosecution is even weaker.
her perceived propensity for truthfulness based
Ansano poked his bolo at her and told her to As a result of this finding, it will be unnecessary
on gender stereotypes. (People v. ZZZ, G.R. No.
go with him to the falls near the Narra tree. to discuss the other issues raised. (People v.
229209, 12 Feb. 2020)
Because she was afraid and he threatened to Ansano, G.R. No. 232455. 02 Dec. 2020, J. Caguioa)
kill her if she does not go with him, she went
Q: Cruz and his wife employed AAA and BBB to
along. She came to know the name and
help them in their plastic and glassware
identity of the accused on March 19, 2006 at
business during a town fiesta in La Union.
8:00 PM, when she saw him in their house
After fixing the wares in order for display they
having a drinking spree with her father. She
went to bed inside the tents. Less than an hour
was able to recognize him ("namumukhaan");
passed, AAA was awakened with Cruz on top
he has a scar and "butil-butil" on his face; he
of her mashing her breast and touching her
has a moustache and "medyo singkit." The
vagina. AAA fought back and was able to free
defense presented accused himself, Teodoro
herself from Cruz. She went out to seek for
Ansano, 45 years old, single, slipper maker
help. Is Cruz guilty for the crime of attempted
and residing at XXX. He stated that he does not
rape?
personally know AAA.
A: NO. Cruz is not guilty of attempted rape. The
The RTC convicted Ansano of the crime
intent to commit rape must be inferred from
charged. The CA affirmed Ansano's
overt acts directly leading to rape. In embracing
conviction, and held that the prosecution was
AAA and touching her vagina and breasts did not
able to sufficiently prove the elements of the
directly manifest his intent to lie with her. The
crime charged. Did the CA err in convicting
lack of evidence showing his erectile penis being
Ansano?
in the position to penetrate her when he was on
top of her deterred any inference about his intent
to lie with her. At most, his acts reflected

A: Although the crime of kidnapping can only be commission of another offense primarily A: YES, the accused is liable for Serious Illegal
H. CRIMES AGAINST PERSONAL committed by a private individual, the fact that intended by the offenders. (People v. Puno, G.R. Detention as against the daughter of the judge. In
LIBERTY AND SECURITY the accused is a public official does not No. 97471, 17 Feb. 1993) the case at bar, when the accused detains the
ARTS. 267-292, RPC, TITLE IX automatically preclude the filing of an daughter of the judge and was not allowed to be
information for kidnapping against him. A public Essence of the Crime of Kidnapping released until the judge acquits him, there was
officer who detains a person for the purpose of actual deprivation of the victim’s liberty.
extorting ransom cannot be said to be acting in an The actual deprivation of the victim’s liberty, Deprivation of liberty is qualified to serious
CHAPTER 1: CRIMES AGAINST LIBERTY official capacity. coupled with the intent of the accused to effect it. illegal detention when the victim is a female
(People v. Jacalne, G.R. No. 168552, 03 Oct. 2011) punishable under Art. 267 of the RPC.
Sec. 1: Illegal Detention PO3 Borja’s membership in the Philippine
National Police does not automatically preclude NOTE: The original Spanish version of Art. 267 The accused may also be liable for the crime of
the filing of an information for kidnapping or used the term lock up (encarcerar) rather than Grave Coercion under Art. 286 of the RPC. Since
KIDNAPPING AND SERIOUS
serious illegal detention against him. He may be kidnap (sequestrator or raptor) which includes the purpose of the accused is to compel the judge
ILLEGAL DETENTION
prosecuted under Art. 267 of the Revised Penal not only imprisonment of a person but also the to acquit him, the taking of the judge’s daughter
ART. 267, RPC
Code if it is shown that he committed acts deprivation of his liberty in whatever form and constitutes violence to control the judge to do
unrelated to the functions of his office. (People v. length of time. (People v. Jatulan, GR. No. 171653, something against his will.
Elements of Kidnapping and Serious Illegal
P03 Borja, G.R. No. 199710, 02 Aug. 2017) 24 Apr. 2007)
Detention (2006 BAR) (P-K-I-C-MoSSMiFP)
Deprivation as Contemplated in Art. 267, RPC
2. He Kidnaps or detains another, or in any When Detention is Considered Illegal
1. Offender is a Private individual who is not
other manner deprives the latter of his Deprivation required by Art. 267 of the RPC
any of the parents of the victim;
liberty; When such detention is not ordered by a means not only the imprisonment of a person, but
competent authority or not permitted by law. also the deprivation of his liberty in whatever
NOTE: If the offender is a public officer who
3. Act of detention or kidnapping must be form and for whatever length of time. It involves
has the authority to arrest or detain a person,
Illegal; and Crimes that May be Possibly Committed when a situation where the victim cannot go out of the
the crime committed is Arbitrary Detention.
a Female is Transported from One Place to place of confinement or detention or is restricted
4. In the commission of the offense, any of the Another or impeded in his liberty to move. If the victim is
Q: Ronalyn Manatad was walking with her
following Circumstances is present: (2009 a child, it also includes the intention of the
friend in Quezon City, when a man who was
BAR) 1. Forcible abduction – If a woman is accused to deprive the parents of the custody of
later identified to be PO3 Julieto Borja,
transported from one place to another by the child. (People v. Baluya, G.R. No. 181822, 13
grabbed Ronalyn’s right forearm and took her
a. Kidnapping or detention lasts for More virtue of restraining her of her liberty and Apr. 2011)
inside a van where three (3) other men were
than three (3) days; (2014 BAR) that act is coupled with lewd designs.
waiting. The abductors called Ronalyn’s
b. It is committed Simulating public Q: Jomarie, a minor, was dragged to the house
brother, Edwin and demanded P100,000 in
authority; 2. Kidnapping with serious illegal detention – of Gutierrez after she refused to go with him.
exchange for Ronalyn’s liberty. Edwin sought
c. Any Serious physical injuries are If a woman is transported just to restrain her Upon reaching the house, he tied her hands.
assistance from the National Anti-Kidnapping
inflicted upon the person kidnapped or liberty. There is no lewd design or intent. When Jomarie pleaded that she be allowed to
Task Force. When Edwin and PO3 Borja met at
detained or threats to kill him are made; go home, he refused. Although Jomarie only
Wildlife Park for the exchange of the ransom
or 3. Grave coercion – If a woman is carried away stayed outside the house, it was inside the
money, the police operatives immediately
d. The person kidnapped or detained is a just to break her will, to compel her to agree gate of a fenced property which is high enough
arrested PO3 Borja.
Minor, Female, or a Public officer. to the demand or request by the offender. such that people outside could not see what
(1991, 2005 BAR) happens inside. Was there kidnapping?
However, they failed to rescue Ronalyn. The
Q: The accused in a pending case forcibly
kidnappers of Ronalyn thereafter took her to
NOTE: In case of a minor, the kidnapper must snatched the daughter of a judge and kept her A: YES. When Gutierrez tied the hands of Jomarie,
the Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency
NOT be one of the parents. in an undisclosed location. The accused then the former’s intention to deprive Jomarie of her
where she was charged with illegal sale of
called to tell the judge that the daughter liberty has been clearly shown. For there to be
shabu.
For the crime of kidnapping to exist, there must would only be released if the judge would kidnapping, it is enough that the victim is
be indubitable proof that the actual intent of the acquit the accused in the pending case. Did the restrained from going home.
The RTC found PO3 Borja guilty beyond
malefactors was to deprive the offended party of accused commit a crime with these acts?
reasonable doubt of kidnapping for ransom.
her liberty, and not where such restraint of her Explain briefly. (2020-21 BAR) Because of her tender age, and because she did
Can PO3 Borja, as a public official, be
freedom of action was merely incident in the not know her way back home, she was then and
prosecuted for the crime of kidnapping?

there deprived of her liberty. It has been Effect of the Voluntary Release of the Victim NOTE: If the victim is kidnapped and illegally of Art. 267, as amended by R.A. No. 7659. (People
repeatedly held that if the victim is a minor, the on the Criminal Liability of the Kidnappers detained for the purpose of extorting v. Montanir, et. al, G.R. No. 187534, 04 Apr. 2011)
duration of his detention is immaterial. (People v. (2004 BAR) ransom, the duration of his detention is
Jacalne, G.R. No. 168552, 03 Oct. 2011) immaterial. (People v. Ramos, G.R. No. 178039 Q: Suppose aside from demanding money, two
1. If it is serious illegal detention, the voluntary 19 Jan. 2011) (2) persons were killed on occasion of
Q: Anniban and Lerio are neighbors. Lerio release has no effect on the criminal liability kidnapping, what is the crime committed?
entered the house of Anniban, laid down of the offenders. 2. When the victim is killed or dies as a
beside the infant child of Anniban and began consequence of the detention; A: Kidnapping for ransom with homicide (not
chatting with her. Lerio then told Anniban 2. If it is slight illegal detention, the voluntary 3. When the victim is raped; or double homicide) is committed. Regardless of the
that she would take the infant outside to bask release will mitigate the criminal liability of 4. When the victim is subjected to torture or number of killings or death that occurred as a
him under the morning sun but the latter the offenders. dehumanizing acts. consequence of the kidnapping, the appropriate
refused. denomination of the crime should be the special
3. In kidnapping for ransom, voluntary release NOTE: If the victim is a woman or a public officer, complex crime of kidnapping for ransom with
A few minutes later, Anniban realized that will not mitigate the crime. the detention is always serious no matter how homicide. (People v. Reyes, G.R. No. 178300, 581
Lerio and her child were no longer in the short the period of detention is. SCRA 691, 17 Mar. 2009)
house. After searching, Anniban found her Ransom
infant child, Lerio’s boyfriend, and Lerio on Special Complex Crimes that May Arise in When the Taking of the Victim is Only
board a vessel. Lerio, together with co- The money, price or consideration paid or Kidnapping Incidental to the Basic Purpose to Kill
accused were charged with Kidnapping of a demanded for the redemption of a captured
Minor. Are they liable as charged? person or persons, the payment of which releases 1. Kidnapping with murder or homicide; The crime is murder and not the special complex
them from captivity. crime of kidnapping with homicide because the
A: YES. All the elements of kidnapping under Art. NOTE: Homicide is used in the generic sense primordial intent is to kill the victim and the
267(4) are present. The prosecution has No specific form of ransom is required to and includes murder because the killing is deprivation of liberty is merely incidental
adequately and satisfactorily proven that consummate the felony of kidnapping for not treated as a separate crime but a thereto. (People v. Delim, G.R. No. 142773, 28 Jan.
accused-appellant is a private individual; that ransom, as long as the ransom was intended as a qualifying circumstance. 2003)
accused-appellant took one-month old baby bargaining chip in exchange for the victim’s
Justin Clyde from his residence, without the freedom. (People v. Jatulan, GR. No. 171653, 24 2. Kidnapping with rape; or When Other Persons, Not the Victims
knowledge or consent of, and against the will of Apr. 2007) 3. Kidnapping with physical injuries. Themselves, are Killed on the Occasion of
his mother; and that the victim was a minor, one- Kidnapping
month old at the time of the incident, the fact of Demand for Ransom is NOT Necessary to Q: Rafael was forcibly dragged and poked with
which accused-appellant herself admitted. Consummate the Crime a gun by the accused. Upon Rosalina’s plea for Two separate crimes of murder or homicide and
(People v. Lerio, G.R. No. 209039, 09 Dec. 2015) pity due to Rafael’s existing heart ailment, kidnapping are committed. The killing would be
Asking for ransom money is not an element of the Rosalina was allowed to apply CPR. Later that treated as a separate crime.
Q: Suppose the kidnapped victim offense. No specific form of ransom is required to afternoon, while being detained inside a
disappeared, will such disappearance negate consummate the felony of kidnapping for ransom room, unknown to Rosalina, Rafael had just Q: The accused detained the victim AAA for
criminal liability of the kidnappers? so long as it was intended as a bargaining chip in died and his body was placed inside the trunk thirty-nine (39) days and raped her four (4)
exchange for the victim’s freedom. Neither actual of a car. What crime was committed? times, is the RTC correct in its ruling that
A: NO. In kidnapping, the essential element is demand for nor actual payment of ransom is kidnapping with rape, four (4) counts of rape
deprivation of the victim’s liberty and the necessary for the crime to be committed. It is A: The special complex crime of Kidnapping with and rape through sexual assault were
subsequent disappearance of the victim will not enough if the crime was committed for the Homicide due to R.A. No. 7659, which amended committed?
exonerate the accused from prosecution. purpose of extorting ransom. (People v. Art. 267 of the RPC. As expounded in People v.
Salimbago, G.R. No. 121365, 14 Sept. 1999) Ramos (G.R. No. 118570, 12 Oct. 1998), where the A: NO. The crime committed was a special
Otherwise, kidnappers can easily avoid person kidnapped is killed in the course of the complex crime of kidnapping with rape.
punishment by the simple expedient of disposing Qualifying Circumstances of the Crime of detention, regardless of whether the killing was Emphatically, the last paragraph of Art. 267 of the
of their victim’s bodies. (People v. Bernal, G.R. No. Kidnapping and Serious Illegal Detention purposely sought or was merely an afterthought, RPC, as amended, states that when the victim is
113685, 19 June 1997) the kidnapping and murder or homicide can no killed or dies as a consequence of the detention or
1. If the purpose of the kidnapping is to extort longer be complexed under Art. 48, nor be treated is raped, or is subjected to torture or
ransom; as separate crimes, but shall be punished as a dehumanizing acts, the maximum penalty shall
special complex crime under the last paragraph be imposed. This provision gives rise to a special

complex crime. As to Consideration of Multiple Rapes Illegal Detention vs. Arbitrary Detention Voluntary Release as a Privileged Mitigating
If there are multiple Circumstance for Slight Illegal Detention
Notably, however, no matter how many rapes had rapes, only one rape ILLEGAL ARBITRARY
been committed in the special complex crime of shall be complexed It is a privileged mitigating circumstance because
DETENTION DETENTION
kidnapping with rape, the resultant crime is only with forcible the penalty is lower by one (1) degree. But, it
one kidnapping with rape. In a way, R.A. No. 7659 Even if there are abduction because Committed by a must show that he was in a position to prolong
Committed by a
depreciated the seriousness of rape because no multiple rapes, there the abduction is a private person who the detention for more than three (3) days and
public officer who
matter how many times the victim was raped, like is only one crime of necessary means to kidnaps, detains, or yet he released the person detained within that
detains a person
in the present case, there is only one crime kidnapping with rape. commit only the first otherwise deprives time.
without legal grounds
committed – the special complex crime of rape, thus the other another of his liberty
kidnapping with rape. (People v. Mirandilla, Jr., rape incidents will be Crime is against Crime against the No mitigation of the penalty is allowed when the
G.R. No. 186417, 27 July 2011) treated as separate personal liberty and fundamental law of proceedings have already been instituted for in
crimes. security the State this case, the accused already acted because of
Q: If the crime of kidnapping was committed As to Treatment of Attempted Rape fear rather than repentance.
through conspiracy and rape was committed If rape is merely SLIGHT ILLEGAL DETENTION
on the occasion thereof, but one of the If rape was merely attempted, there is ART. 268, RPC UNLAWFUL ARREST
conspirators were no longer associated with attempted, 2 separate only forcible ART. 269, RPC
the one who raped the victim, can he be held crimes are abduction, the Elements of Slight Illegal Detention (P-I-C-K)
liable for kidnapping with rape? committed- attempt to rape is Elements of Unlawful Arrest (A-D-No)
kidnapping and deemed merely a 1. Offender is a Private individual;
A: NO. There was no opportunity to prevent his attempted rape. manifestation of lewd 2. He Kidnaps or detains another, or in any 1. Offender Arrests or detains another person;
co-conspirators from raping the victim because at designs. other manner deprives him of his liberty; 2. Purpose of the offender is to Deliver him to
the time of rape, he was no longer associated with 3. Act of kidnapping or detention is Illegal; and the proper authorities; and
his co-conspirators. He cannot be held liable for Kidnapping vs. Forcible Abduction 4. Crime is committed without the attendance 3. Arrest or detention is Not authorized by law
the subsequent rape of the victim. (People v. of any of the Circumstances enumerated in or there is no reasonable ground therefor.
Anticamara et al., G.R. No. 178771, 08 June 2011) FORCIBLE Art. 267.
KIDNAPPING
ABDUCTION NOTE: In unlawful arrest, the illegal detention is
Kidnapping with Rape vs. Forcible Abduction NOTE: If there is a demand for ransom, the only incidental. However, if it is arbitrary
with Rape At the outset, the At the outset, the
penalty is Reclusion Perpetua to death just like detention, it is the unlawful arrest which is
intention of the taking of the victim
when what was committed was serious illegal incidental.
FORCIBLE offender is merely to is coupled with
KIDNAPPING WITH detention and a demand for ransom was made.
ABDUCTION WITH detain the victim. lewd designs.
RAPE Essence of the Crime of Unlawful Arrest
RAPE Effect of the Voluntary Release of the Victim
As to Plurality of Crimes Kidnapping for Ransom vs. Robbery, insofar on the Criminal Liability of the Kidnappers The arrest must be made for the purpose of
The crime is The crime is complex as the delivery of money to the offenders is delivering the person arrested to the proper
composite or a special under Art. 48 since concerned If the offender: (3-B-W) authorities but it was made without any
complex crime if the forcible abduction is a reasonable grounds therefor.
woman kidnapped is necessary means to KIDNAPPING FOR 1. Voluntarily releases the person so kidnapped
ROBBERY or detained within three (3) days from the NOTE: If the purpose is not to deliver the person
also raped. commit the rape. RANSOM
commencement of the detention; to the proper authorities, the crime could be
As to Lewd Designs The motive of the
2. Without having attained the purpose Illegal Detention under Art. 267 or 268 of the RPC
There is no lewd Ransom is paid in offenders is not to
There is lewd design. intended; and since the person arrested would necessarily be
design. exchange for the restrain or deprive
3. Before the institution of criminal deprived of his liberty.
offended party’s the victim of his
As to Treatment of Rape proceedings against him, his liability is
liberty. liberty but to divest
Rape is not a separate mitigated. (1997, 2004 BAR) Persons Liable under this Article
him of his valuables.
crime but merely a Rape may be treated
qualifying as a separate crime. Offender is any person, whether a public officer
circumstance. or a private individual. However, the public
officer must not be vested with the authority to

arrest or detain a person or must not act in his which enacts laws of local application. He or she arrest incurs criminal liability for illegal is that the offender was entrusted with the
official capacity. Otherwise, Art. 124 (Arbitrary is a person in authority, per Sec. 388 of the Local detention under Art. 267 or 268. custody of the minor, what is actually being
Detention) is applicable and not Art. 269. Government Code. Meanwhile, a barangay tanod punished is not the kidnapping but the deliberate
is deemed as an agent of persons in authority 3. If the offender is a public officer, the crime is failure of that person to restore the minor to his
If the offender is a public officer or a law enforcer whose duties are described in Sec. 388 of the arbitrary detention under Art. 124. parents or guardians.
and he arrested or detained, without legal or Local Government Code. While deemed as
reasonable ground, any person within his persons in authority and agents of persons in 4. If the detention or arrest is for a legal ground, As the penalty for such an offense is so severe, the
jurisdiction for the purpose of delivering him to authority, respectively, the barangay kagawad but the public officer delays delivery of the Court further explained that “deliberate” as used
the proper authorities, such officer is guilty of and barangay tanod are not the public officers person arrested to the proper judicial in Art. 270 means something more than mere
Arbitrary Detention under Art. 124 of the RPC. whose official duty is to arrest or detain persons authorities, the crime is delay in the delivery negligence - it must be premeditated, headstrong,
contemplated within the purview of Art. 269 of of detained persons under Art. 125. foolishly daring or intentionally and maliciously
If the person arrested or detained is not within the RPC. Even granting that petitioners may have wrong. (People v. Marquez, G.R. No. 181440, 13
his jurisdiction, the officer’s act would constitute had the authority to inquire into the surrounding Delay in the Delivery of Detained Persons vs. Apr. 2011)
Unlawful Arrest under this article. circumstances, and that what transpired was a Unlawful Arrest
stop and frisk search, petitioners failed to cite any Crime Can be Committed by the Parents of the
Barangay Kagawad and Barangay Tanod, NOT suspicious circumstance that warranted Pacis' Minor
DELAY IN THE
Public Officers Contemplated Within the immediate arrest. UNLAWFUL
DELIVERY OF
Purview of Art. 269 ARREST This happens where they live separately and the
DETAINED PERSONS
Petitioners argue that due to the numerous custody of the minor is given to one of them, the
Q: Duropan and Coloma were Barangay reports of stealing nipa leaves, it was reasonable Detention is for some Detention is not other parent kidnaps such minor from the one
Kagawad and Barangay Tanod, respectively, for them to suspect that Pacis violated the law. legal ground. authorized by law. having the lawful custody of the child.
of Lincod, Maribojoc, Bohol. Duropan, Coloma, This argument falls short in light of three (3) Crime is committed by
and another barangay official saw William things: (1) they were aware that ALIMANGO failing to deliver such Absence of Any of the Elements of Art. 270,
Committed by
Pacis (Pacis), Lino Baldoza Jr., Jeremias existed, whose members were authorized to person to the proper RPC
making an arrest not
Moquila, Melvin Magbanua, and Ronnel harvest nipa; (2) they personally knew Pacis; and judicial authority
authorized by law.
Zambra harvesting nipa palm in a (3) they were uncertain that Cabalit owns the within a certain If any of the elements of Art 270 is absent, the
plantation. Coloma approached them and land where they found Pacis and his group. period. kidnapping of the minor will then fall under Art.
asked who gave them authority to harvest. (Duropan v. People, G.R. No. 230825, 10 June 2020) The offender is a 267 (kidnapping and serious illegal detention),
Pacis replied that they were ALIMANGO The offender is a private individual, or but if the accused is any of the parents, Art. 267
members, cooperative duly registered which Period of Detention Fixed by Law public officer who has a public officer who will not apply. Arts. 270 and 271 will apply.
was authorized to develop, utilize, and the authority to arrest has no authority to
protect the Mangrove-Nipa Area in Lincod, There is no period of detention fixed by law. What or detain a person. arrest or detain a Kidnapping and Serious Illegal Detention vs.
Maribojoc, Bohol. is controlling is the motive of the offender. person. Kidnapping and Failure to Return a Minor
Despite their objections, Pacis' group was If his purpose is to deliver him to the proper Sec. 2: Kidnapping of Minors KIDNAPPING AND KIDNAPPING AND
brought to the Police Station of Maribojoc, authorities, it is still unlawful arrest. But the SERIOUS ILLEGAL FAILURE TO
Bohol. Upon investigation, Pacis and his absence of this motive may be shown by the DETENTION RETURN A MINOR
companions were released. The Maribojoc length of time the victim is detained. KIDNAPPING AND FAILURE TO
As to Relation of Offender to the Victim
Chief of Police determined that the barangay RETURN A MINOR
Offender is not Offender is entrusted
officials had no legal basis to arrest Pacis. Are Crimes that May be Committed if a Person is ART. 270, RPC
entrusted with the with the custody of
Duropan and Coloma liable under Art. 269 of Arrested and/or Detained custody of the victim. the minor.
the RPC? Elements of Kidnapping and Failure to Return As to Acts Punished
1. If the arrest is made without a warrant and a Minor (2002 BAR) (En-Fa) What is punished is
A: YES. Petitioner Duropan was a barangay under circumstances not allowing a the deliberate failure
kagawad, while petitioner Coloma was a warrantless arrest, the crime would be 1. Offender is Entrusted with the custody of a Illegally detaining or of the offender having
barangay tanod of Lincod, Maribojoc, Bohol. unlawful arrest. minor person; and kidnapping the the custody of the
2. He deliberately Fails to restore the said minor. minor to restore him
A barangay kagawad is a member of the 2. If the person arrested is not delivered to the minor to his parents or guardians. to his parents or
legislative council of the sangguniang barangay, authorities, the private individual making the guardian.
While one of the essential elements of this crime

INDUCING A MINOR TO ABANDON HIS HOME Sec. 3: Slavery and Servitude EXPLOITATION OF CHILD LABOR Minor is compelled to
ART. 271, RPC ART. 273, RPC render services for Debtor himself is the
the supposed debt of one compelled to
SLAVERY
Elements of Exploitation of Child Labor his parent or work for the offender.
Elements of Inducing a Minor to Abandon his ART. 272, RPC
(R-A-R) guardian.
Home (M-I)
Service of minor is
Elements of Slavery
1. Offender Retains a minor in his service; not limited to Limited to household
1. A Minor is living in the home of his parents or
2. It is Against the will of the minor; and household and farm and farm work.
guardian or the person entrusted with his 1. Offender purchases, sells, kidnaps or detains
3. It is under the pretext of Reimbursing work.
custody; and a human being; and
himself of a debt incurred by an ascendant,
2. Offender Induces said minor to abandon such guardian or person entrusted with the CHAPTER 2: CRIMES AGAINST SECURITY
2. The purpose of the offender is to enslave
home. custody of such minor. (2006, 2009 BAR)
such human being.
Sec. 1: Abandonment of Helpless Persons
Inducement must be actual, committed with NOTE: Indebtedness is not a ground for
If a person was obliged to render service in and Exploitation of Minors
criminal intent, and determined by a will to cause detention. However, if the minor consents to
another’s house as a servant without
damage. The minor should not leave his home of remuneration whatever and to remain there so render service and be retained under the pretext
of reimbursing a debt incurred, there is no crime. ABANDONMENT OF PERSONS IN DANGER
his own free will. long as he has not paid his debt, the crime of
The debt must be that incurred by the AND ABANDONMENT OF ONE’S OWN VICTIM
slavery is committed. (De los Reyes v. Alojado, G.R. ART. 275, RPC
The Minor Actually Need NOT Abandon the No. 5671, 24 Aug. 1910) ascendants, guardian or custodian of the minor.
Home to Commit the Crime
SERVICES RENDERED UNDER COMPULSION Punishable Acts
Qualifying Circumstance in the Crime of
It is not necessary that the minor actually Slavery IN PAYMENT OF DEBT
1. Failing to render assistance to any person
abandon the home to commit the crime. What ART. 274, RPC
whom the offender finds in an uninhabited
constitutes the crime is the act of inducing a When the purpose of the offender is to assign the
place wounded or in danger of dying when he
minor to abandon his home or the home of his offended party to some immoral traffic (e.g., Elements (C-A-P)
can render such assistance without
guardians and it is not necessary that the minor Prostitution).
detriment to himself, unless such omission
actually abandons the home. 1. Offender Compels a debtor to work for him,
shall constitute a more serious offense.
Slavery vs. White Slave Trade either as household servant or farm laborer;
Rationale for Penalizing the Crime of Inducing 2. It is Against the debtor’s will; and
Elements: (F-A-W-N)
a Minor to Abandon his Home WHITE SLAVE 3. The purpose is to require or enforce the
SLAVERY a. The place is Not inhabited;
TRADE Payment of a debt. (2006 BAR)
b. Accused found there a person Wounded
It is intended to discourage and prevent The offender is NOT The offender is or in danger of dying;
disruption of filial relationship and undue engaged in engaged in NOTE: If there is no creditor-debtor relationship
c. Accused can render Assistance without
interference with the parents’ right and duty to prostitution. prostitution. between the offender and the offended party,
detriment to himself; and
the custody of their minor children and to rear coercion is committed.
d. Accused Fails to render assistance.
them. Slavery vs. Illegal Detention
Exploitation of Child Labor vs. Services
2. Failing to help or render assistance to
Kidnapping and Serious Illegal Detention vs. Rendered under Compulsion in Payment of
SLAVERY ILLEGAL DETENTION another whom the offender has accidentally
Inducing a Minor to Abandon his Home Debt
The offended party is detained. wounded or injured.
INDUCING A The purpose for the The purpose is to SERVICES
KIDNAPPING AND NOTE: The character of the place is
MINOR TO detention is to deprive or restrain the EXPLOITATION OF RENDERED UNDER
SERIOUS ILLEGAL immaterial.
ABANDON HIS enslave the offended offended party of his CHILD LABOR COMPULSION IN
DETENTION
HOME party. liberty. Art. 273, RPC PAYMENT OF DEBT
Art. 267, RPC 3. Failing to deliver a child under seven (7)
Art. 271, RPC Art. 274, RPC
years of age whom the offender has found
Cannot be committed Parents can commit Does not distinguish
abandoned, to the authorities or to his family,
by the parents of the this crime against Victim is a minor. whether victim is a
or failing to take him to a safe place.
minor their own children minor or not.

NOTE: It is immaterial that the offender did 2. If the life of the minor was in danger because Elements of the Crime of Indifference of EXPLOITATION OF MINORS
not know that the child is under seven (7) of the abandonment. Parents (Pa-Ne-S) ART. 278, RPC
years.
If the offender is the parent of the minor who is 1. Offender is a Parent; Punishable Acts
Uninhabited Place abandoned, he shall be deprived of parental 2. He Neglects his children by not giving them
authority. education; and 1. Causing any boy or girl under 16 to perform
It is determined by possibility of person receiving 3. His Station in life requires such education any dangerous feat of balancing, physical
assistance from another. Even if there are many NOTE: Parents guilty of abandoning their and his financial condition permits it. strength or contortion, the offender being
houses around the place, it may still be children shall be deprived of parental authority. any person;
uninhabited if the possibility of receiving NOTE: For the parents to be penalized for the
assistance is remote. ABANDONMENT OF MINOR BY A PERSON crime of Indifference of Parents, it must be shown 2. Employing children under 16 years of age
ENTRUSTED WITH HIS CUSTODY; that they are in a position to give their children who are not the children or descendants of
ABANDONING A MINOR INDIFFERENCE OF PARENTS the education in life and that they consciously and the offender in exhibitions of acrobat,
ART. 276, RPC ART. 277, RPC deliberately neglect their children. gymnast, rope walker, diver, or wild animal
tamer, the offender being an acrobat, etc., or
Elements of Abandoning a Minor (C-A-No-7) Acts Punished under Art. 277 Abandonment of Minor by Person Entrusted circus manager or person engaged in any of
with his Custody; Indifference of Parents vs. said callings;
1. Offender has the Custody of the child; 1. Delivering a minor to a public institution or Abandoning a Minor
2. Child is under seven (7) years of age; other persons without the consent of the one 3. Employing any descendant under 12 years of
3. He Abandons such child; and who entrusted such minor to the care of the ABANDONMENT OF age in dangerous exhibitions enumerated in
4. He has No intent to kill the child when the offender or, in the absence of that one, MINOR BY PERSON the next preceding paragraph, the offender
latter is abandoned. without the consent of the proper ENTRUSTED WITH ABANDONING A being engaged in any of the said callings;
authorities; and HIS CUSTODY; MINOR
Kind of Abandonment Contemplated by Law INDIFFERENCE OF ART. 276, RPC 4. Delivering a child under 16 years of age
2. Neglecting one’s children by not giving them PARENTS gratuitously to any person if any of the
The abandonment contemplated by law is not the the education which their station in life ART. 277, RPC callings enumerated in paragraph 2, or to any
momentary leaving of a child but the requires and financial condition permits. As to Custody habitual vagrant or beggar, the offender
abandonment of such minor that deprives him of The custody of the being an ascendant, guardian, teacher or
the care and protection from danger to his Elements of the Abandonment of Minor by offender is specific, person entrusted in any capacity with the
The custody of the
person. One Charged with the Rearing or Education of that is, the custody for care of such child; and
minor is stated in
said Minor (Cha-Del-Not) the rearing or
general.
NOTE: A permanent, conscious, and deliberate education of the 5. Inducing any child under 16 years of age to
abandonment is required in this article. There 1. Offender has Charge of the rearing of minor. abandon the home of its ascendants,
must be an interruption of the care and education of a minor; As to Age guardians, curators or teachers to follow any
protection that a child needs by reason of his 2. He Delivers said minor to a public institution Minor is under 18 Minor is under 7 person entrusted in any of the callings
tender age. or other persons; and years of age. years of age. mentioned in par. 2 or to accompany any
3. One who entrusted such child to the offender As to Abandonment habitual vagrant or beggar, the offender
Qualifying Circumstances under Art. 276, RPC has Not consented to such act; or if the one Minor is abandoned being any person.
who entrusted such child to the offender is in such a way as
Minor is delivered to
1. When death of the minor resulted from such absent, the proper authorities have not to deprive him of the NOTE: The exploitation of the minor must be of
a public institution or
abandonment. consented to it. care and protection such nature as to endanger his life or safety in
other person.
that his tender years order to constitute the offense described in this
NOTE: Intent to kill cannot be presumed NOTE: Only the person charged with the rearing need. article.
from the death of the child. The ruling that or education of the minor is liable.
intent to kill is conclusively presumed from Kind of Business contemplated under Art. 278
the death of the victim is applicable only to
crimes against persons and not to crimes Art. 278 contemplates a business that generally
against security, particularly the crime of attracts children so that they themselves may
abandoning a minor under Art. 276. enjoy working there unaware of the danger to

their own lives and limb, such as circuses. Exploitation of Minors vs. R.A. No. 7610 faithful compliance with his or her own parental necessary that it be a permanent dwelling of a
(Special Protection of Children against Child duties. (De Guzman v. Perez, G.R. No. 156013, 25 person.
When the Employer is the Parent or Abuse, Exploitation and Discrimination Act) July 2006)
Ascendant of the Child who is already 12 NOTE: In general, all members of the household
Years of Age EXPLOITATION R.A. No. 7610 NOTE: The neglect of child punished under Art. must be presumed to have authority to extend an
As to its Application 59(4) of P.D. 603 is also a crime (known as invitation to enter the house.
The crime of exploitation of minors is not Applies to minors Applies to minors indifference of parents) penalized under the
committed if the employer is a parent or below 16 years of age. below 18 years old. second paragraph of Art. 277 of the RPC (De “Against the Will”
ascendant unless the minor is less than twelve As to Danger to the Child Guzman v. Perez, supra). Hence, it is excluded
(12) years old. As long as the from the coverage of R.A. No. 7610. The entrance is either expressly or impliedly
employment is prohibited.
If the employer is an ascendant, the law regards The business is of inimical – even ADDITIONAL PENALTIES
that he would look after the welfare and such kind that would though there is no FOR OTHER OFFENSES NOTE: There must be an opposition on the part
protection of the child. Hence, the age is lowered place the life or limb physical risk – and ART. 279, RPC of the owner of the house to the entry of the
to twelve (12) years. Below that age, the crime is of the minor in detrimental to the accused. Lack of permission does not amount to
committed. danger, even though child’s interest – The offender is not only liable for the prohibition. (People v. De Peralta, G.R. No. L-
working for him is not against moral, abandonment or exploitation but also for all its 17332, 18 Aug. 1921)
Qualifying Circumstance under Art. 277 against the will of the intellectual, physical, consequences. If as a result, physical injuries or
minor. and death resulted, another crime is committed by Instances where Prohibition to Enter a
If the delivery of the child to any person following mental development authority of Art. 279. Dwelling is Implied or Presumed
any of the callings of acrobat, gymnast, rope- of the minor.
walker, diver, wild-animal tamer or circus As to Liability of Employer 1. Entering a dwelling of another at late hour of
Sec. 2: Trespass to Dwelling
manager or to any habitual vagrant or beggar is If the child fell and the night.
made in consideration of any price, compensation suffered physical 2. When the entrance is made through means
or promise, the penalty is higher. QUALIFIED TRESPASS TO DWELLING not intended for ingress.
injuries while
ART. 280, RPC 3. The existence of enmity or strained relations
working, the
Exploitation of Minors vs. Inducing a Minor to employer shall be No such similar between the accused and the occupant.
Abandon his Home liable for said provision exists Elements of Qualified Trespass to Dwelling 4. The door is closed even if it is not locked.
physical injuries in under R.A. 7610. (P-E-A) (2002, 2009 BAR)
INDUCING A MINOR addition to his Qualifying Circumstance of the Offense
EXPLOITATION
TO ABANDON liability for 1. Offender is a Private person;
OF MINORS
HIS HOME exploitation of 2. He Enters the dwelling of another; and If the offense is committed by means of violence
ART. 278 (5), RPC
ART. 271, RPC minors. 3. Such entrance is Against the latter’s will. or intimidation, the penalty is higher (prision
The purpose of correctional in medium and maximum periods;
inducing the minor to Criminal Liability for Neglect of Child under If the Offender is a Public Officer fine not exceeding P200,000).
abandon the home is Art. 59 (4) of P.D. 603 Attaches if Any of the
No such purpose If the offender is a public officer or employee, the
to follow any person Parents is Guilty of Neglecting the Child’s If violence or intimidation is employed, there is
engaged in any of the Education entrance into the dwelling against the will of the no need for prohibition. In fact, even if violence or
callings mentioned occupant is violation of domicile punishable intimidation took place immediately after the
Victim is under 16 Victim is under 18 The crime may be committed by any of the under Art. 128. offender has entered the dwelling, there is
years of age years of age parents. Liability for the crime does not depend Qualified Trespass to Dwelling. (U.S. v. Abanto,
on whether the parent is also guilty of neglecting Dwelling G.R. No. 5266, 16 Feb. 1910; U.S. v. Arceo, G.R. No.
his/her child. The law intends to punish the 1491, 05 Mar. 1904)
neglect of any parent, which neglect corresponds A place that a person inhabits or any building or
to the failure to give the child the education which structure exclusively devoted for rest and Examples of Trespass by Means of Violence
the family’s station in life and financial condition comfort. Whether a building is a dwelling house
permit. The irresponsible parent cannot or not depends upon the use. It includes the 1. Pushing the door violently and maltreating
exculpate himself/herself from the consequences dependencies which have interior the occupants after entering.
of his/her neglect by invoking the other parent’s communication with the house. It is not

2. Cutting of a ribbon string with which the things, the trespass yielding to the more 2. Entrance is made while either of them is other condition even though not unlawful,
door latch of a closed room was fastened. The serious crime. uninhabited; and the offender attained his purpose;
cutting of the fastenings of the door was an
act of violence. 3. But if the purpose is not shown and while NOTE: A place is said to be uninhabited if 2. By making such threat without the offender
inside the dwelling he was found by the there is no one living on such place. attaining his purpose; and
3. Wounding by means of a bolo, the owner of occupants, one of whom was injured by him,
the house immediately after entrance. the crime committed will be trespass to 3. Prohibition to enter is manifest; and 3. By threatening another with the infliction
dwelling and frustrated homicide, physical 4. Trespasser has not secured the permission of upon his person, honor or property or that of
Examples of Trespass by Means of injuries, or if there was no injury, unjust the owner or the caretaker thereof. his family of any wrong amounting to a crime,
Intimidation vexation. the threat, not being subject to a condition.
Trespass to Dwelling vs. Trespass to Property
1. Firing a revolver in the air by persons Q: At about 11:00 in the evening, Dante forced Essence of Grave Threats
attempting to force their way into a house. his way inside the house of Mamerto. Jay, TRESPASS TO TRESPASS TO
Mamerto’s son, saw Dante and accosted him. DWELLING PROPERTY It is essential that there be intimidation. In
2. The flourishing of a bolo against inmates of Dante pulled a knife and stabbed Jay on his As to Offender intimidation, there is a promise of some future
the house upon gaining an entrance. abdomen. Mamerto heard the commotion and Offender is a private Offender is any harm or injury, either to the person, honor, or
went out of his room. Dante, who was about to person. person. property of the offended party. (Reyes, 2017)
Trespass to Dwelling may be Committed by escape, assaulted Mamerto. Jay suffered As to Commission
the Owner of the House injuries which, were it not for the timely Offender enters It must inspire terror or fear upon another. It is
medical attendance, would have caused his Offender enters a characterized by moral pressure that produces
closed premises or
In cases where the owner has allowed the rooms death. Mamerto sustained injuries that dwelling house. alarm.
fenced estate.
or the houses to be rented by other persons, incapacitated him for twenty-five (25) days. As to Place
trespass to dwelling is committed if the owner What crime/s did Dante commit? (1994 BAR) Place entered is Place entered is Threat
thereof enters the room or house without the inhabited. uninhabited.
knowledge and consent and against the will of the A: Dante committed qualified trespass to As to Act Constituting the Crime It is the declaration of an intention or
boarder or tenant. dwelling, frustrated homicide for the stabbing of Act constituting the determination to injure another by the
Jay, and less serious physical injuries for the crime is entering the commission upon his person, honor, or property
Circumstances when the Crime of Trespass to assault on Mamerto. The crime of qualified Act constituting the closed premises or or upon that of his family of some wrong which
Dwelling is NOT Committed (2006 BAR) trespass to dwelling should not be complexed crime is entering the the fenced estate may or may not amount to a crime.
with frustrated homicide because when the dwelling against the without securing the
1. When the purpose of the entrance is to trespass is committed as a means to commit a will of the owner. permission of the Qualifying Circumstance of the Offense
prevent serious harm to himself, the more serious crime, trespass to dwelling is owner or caretaker
occupant or third persons. absorbed by the greater crime and the former thereof. If the threat is made in writing or through a
constitutes an aggravating circumstance of middleman, the penalty is to be imposed in its
As to Prohibition
2. When the purpose of the offender in entering dwelling. (People v. Abedoza, 53 Phil 788) maximum period.
Prohibition to enter is Prohibition to enter
is to render some service to humanity or
express or implied. must be manifest.
justice. OTHER FORMS OF TRESPASS Grave Threats vs. Light Threats
ART. 281, RPC
3. Anyone who shall enter cafes, taverns, inns Sec. 3: Threats and Coercion
GRAVE THREATS LIGHT THREATS
and other public houses while they are open. Elements of Other Forms of Trespass When the wrong When the wrong
GRAVE THREATS threatened to be threatened to be
Crimes that May be Committed when a Person 1. Offenders enter the closed premises or the ART. 282, RPC inflicted amounts to a inflicted does not
Trespasses a Dwelling fenced estate of another; crime. amount to a crime.
Punishable Acts
1. If the purpose in entering the dwelling is not NOTE: The term premises signifies distinct Threat vs. Coercion
shown, trespass is committed. and definite locality. It may mean a room, 1. Threatening another with the infliction upon
shop, building or definite area, but in either his person, honor, or property, or that of his THREAT COERCION
2. If the purpose is shown, it may be absorbed case, locality is fixed. family of any wrong amounting to a crime Essence of threat Essence of coercion is
in the crime as in robbery with force upon and demanding money or imposing any is intimidation. violence or intimidation.

There is no condition 2. Threatening to publish a libel – If there is Other Light Threats vs. Grave Threats 3. Person that restrained the will and liberty of
Wrong or harm
involved; hence, there is such a threat to make a slanderous or another has No authority of law or the right
done is future and
no futurity in the harm or libelous publication against the offended OTHER LIGHT to do so.
conditional. GRAVE THREATS
wrong done. party. THREATS
ART. 282, RPC
ART. 285, RPC NOTE: Coercion is consummated even if the
Threat vs. Robbery BONDS FOR GOOD BEHAVIOR The threat is made in offended party did not accede to the purpose of
The threat is made
ART. 284, RPC the heat of anger, and the coercion. The essence of coercion is an attack
with the deliberate
THREAT ROBBERY the subsequent acts of on individual liberty.
purpose of creating in
As to Intimidation The person making the threats under the the accused showed
the mind of the
Intimidation is future Intimidation is actual preceding articles (grave and light threats) may that he did not persist Paragraph 2: Penalty next higher in degree
person threatened
and conditional. and immediate. also be required by the court to give bail in the idea involved in
the belief that the
Intimidation may be conditioned upon the promise not to molest the his threat. (U.S. v. Purpose of the Law in Punishing Grave
Intimidation is threats will be carried
through an person threatened or not to pursue the threats Paguirigan, 14 Phil. Coercion
personal. into effect.
intermediary. he/she made. 453)
As to Subject Involved To enforce the principle that no person may take
May refer to the If the person making the threat failed to post a Nature of Other Light Threats the law into his own hands and that ours is a
Refers to personal government of law and not of men. (People v.
person, honor or bond, such person can be sentenced to the
property. It is not subject to a demand for money or any Mangosing, CA-G.R. No. 1107-R, 29 Apr. 1948)
property. penalty of destierro.
As to Intent to Gain material consideration and the wrong threatened
Intent to gain is not an There is intent to does not amount to a crime. When Grave Coercion Occurs
OTHER LIGHT THREATS
essential element. gain. ART. 285, RPC
GRAVE COERCIONS Grave coercion arises only if the act which the
As to Danger of the Threat
ART. 286, RPC offender prevented another to do is not
The danger to the The danger involved Punishable Acts
prohibited by law or ordinance.
victim is not instantly is directly imminent
imminent nor the to the victim and the 1. Threatening another with a weapon, or by Punishable Acts
Kinds of Grave Coercion
gain of the culprit obtainment of gain drawing such weapon in a quarrel, unless it
immediate. immediate. be in lawful self-defense. Here, the weapon 1. Preventing another, by means of violence,
1. Preventive – The offender uses violence to
must not be discharged; threat or intimidation, from doing something
prevent the victim from doing what he wants
LIGHT THREATS not prohibited by law; and
to do. Here, the act prevented is not
ART. 283, RPC 2. Orally threatening another, in the heat of
prohibited by law.
anger, with some harm constituting a crime, 2. Compelling another, by means of violence,
Elements of Light Threats (T-No-De-Pu) without persisting in the idea involved in his threat or intimidation, to do something
NOTE: In grave coercion, the act of
threat; and against his will, whether it be right or wrong.
preventing by force must be made at the time
1. Offender makes a Threat to commit a wrong; the offended party was doing or about to do
3. Orally threatening to do another any harm Elements of Grave Coercion (1998, 1999,
2. The wrong does Not constitute a crime; the act to be prevented. If the act was already
not constituting a felony. 2009 BAR) (Pre-No-V)
3. There is a Demand for money or that other done when violence is exerted, the crime is
condition is imposed, even though lawful; unjust vexation.
NOTE: In other light threats, there is no demand 1. A person Prevented another from doing
and
for money nor any condition imposed when the something not prohibited by law, or that he
4. Offender has attained or has not attained his 2. Compulsive – The offender uses violence to
Purpose. offender threatens the offended party. His acts compelled him to do something against his
compel the offended party to do what he does
are limited to verbal threat during the incident will, be it right or wrong;
not want to do. The act compelled may or
NOTE: Light threat is in the nature of involving him and the offended party.
may not be prohibited by law.
blackmailing. 2. Prevention or compulsion be effected by
Violence, threats or intimidation; and
Possible Crimes involving Blackmailing
NOTE: The threat must be present, clear,
imminent and actual. Such threat cannot be
1. Light threats – If there is no threat to publish
made in writing or through a middle man.
any libelous or slanderous matter against the
offended party; and

No Grave Coercion when a Person Prohibits LIGHT COERCION OTHER SIMILAR COERCIONS; COMPULSORY CHAPTER 3: DISCOVERY AND REVELATION
Another to Do an Act because the Act is a ART. 287, RPC PURCHASE OF MERCHANDISE AND PAYMENT OF SECRETS
Crime, and Violence and Intimidation is OF WAGES BY MEANS OF TOKENS
Employed Elements of Light Coercion (Se-Vi-Cre-P) ART. 288, RPC
FORMATION, MAINTENANCE, AND
PROHIBITION OR COMBINATION OF CAPITAL
There is no grave coercion because the act from 1. Offender must be a Creditor; Punishable Acts and their Elements OR LABOR THROUGH VIOLENCE OR THREATS
which a person is prevented from doing is a 2. He Seizes anything belonging to his debtor; ART. 289, RPC
crime. It may only give rise to threat or physical 3. Seizure of the thing be accomplished by 1. Forcing or compelling, directly or indirectly
injuries, if some injuries are inflicted. means of Violence or a display of material or knowingly permitting the act of forcing or
Elements
force producing intimidation; and compelling of the laborer or employee of the
However, in case of grave coercion where the 4. Purpose of the offender is to apply the same offender to purchase merchandise or
offended party is being compelled to do 1. Offender employs violence or threats, in a
to the Payment of the debt. commodities of any kind from him.
something against his will, whether it be wrong degree as to compel or force the laborers or
or not, the crime of grave coercion is committed employees in the free legal exercise of their
In the crime of other light coercion or unjust Elements: (Pao-Em-For)
if violence or intimidation is employed in order to industry or work; and
vexation embraced in Art. 287(2), violence is a. Offender is any Person, agent or officer
compel him to do the act. 2. Purpose is to organize, maintain or prevent
absent. Thus, taking possession of the thing of any association or corporation; coalitions of capital or labor, strike of
belonging to the debtor, through deceit and b. He or such firm or corporation has
Q: Isagani lost his gold necklace bearing his laborers or lockout of employers.
misrepresentation for the purpose of applying Employed laborers or employees; and
initials. He saw Roy wearing the said necklace. the same to the payment of debt is unjust c. He Forces or compels directly or
Isagani asked Roy to return to him the The acts shall not constitute a more serious
vexation under the second paragraph of Art. 287. indirectly, or knowingly permits to be
necklace as it belongs to him, but Roy refused. offense in accordance with the provisions of the
forced or compelled, any of his or its
Isagani then drew his gun and told Roy, “If you Code.
Unjust Vexation (1994, 2006, 2007, 2009, laborers or employees to purchase
will not give back the necklace to me, I will kill 2010 BAR) merchandise or commodities of any
you!” Out of fear for his life and against his DISCOVERING SECRETS THROUGH
kind from him or said firm or
will, Roy gave the necklace to Isagani. What SEIZURE OF CORRESPONDENCE
Unjust vexation is any act committed without corporation. (2014 BAR)
offense did Isagani commit? (1998 BAR) violence but which unjustifiably annoys or vexes ART. 290, RPC
an innocent person. 2. Paying the wages due his laborer or
A: Isagani committed the crime of grave coercion employee by means of tokens or objects Elements (D-I-P-S)
(Art. 286, RPC) for compelling Roy, by means of NOTE: In determining whether the crime of other than the legal tender currency of the
serious threats or intimidation, to do something unjust vexation is committed, the offender’s act Philippines, unless expressly requested by 1. Offender is a Private individual or even a
against the latter’s will, whether it be right or must have caused annoyance, irritation, vexation, such laborer or employee. public officer not in the exercise of his official
wrong. Serious threats or intimidation torment, distress, or disturbance to the mind of function;
approximating violence constitute grave the person to whom it is directed. (People v. Elements: (O-Pa-Not) 2. He Seizes the papers or letters of another;
coercion, not grave threats. Such is the nature of Gozum, 54, O.G. 7409) a. Offender Pays the wages due a laborer or 3. Purpose is to Discover the secrets of such
the threat in this case because it was committed employee employed by him by means of another person; and
with a gun, is a deadly weapon. Resulting Crimes when the Property of a tokens or object; 4. Offender is Informed of the contents of the
Debtor is Seized b. Those tokens or objects are Other than papers or letters seized.
Qualifying Circumstances of Grave Coercion the legal currency of the Philippines; and
1. Light coercion – If by means of violence, the c. Such employee or laborer does Not NOTE: It is not applicable to parents, guardians,
1. If the coercion is committed in violation of property is applied to the debt. expressly request that he be paid by or persons entrusted with the custody of minors
the exercise of the right of suffrage. means of tokens or objects. with respect to papers or letters of the children
2. If the coercion is committed to compel 2. Robbery – If the value of the property seized or minors placed under the care or custody.
another to perform any religious act. is greater than that of the debt (intent to gain NOTE: The use of tokens, promissory notes,
3. If the coercion is committed to prevent is present in this case) and violence and vouchers, coupons, or any other form alleged to Nature of the Crime
another from performing any religious act. intimidation are employed. represent legal tender is absolutely prohibited
even when expressly requested by the employee. This is a crime against the security of one’s papers
3. Estafa – If there is no obligation on the part and effects. The purpose must be to discover its
of the offended party but was only feigned. effects. The act violates the privacy of
There is estafa because deceit is employed. communication. It is necessary that the offender

should actually discover the contents of the letter. REVEALING SECRETS WITH ABUSE OF OFFICE 2. Robbery by the use of force upon things.
ART. 291, RPC I. CRIMES AGAINST PROPERTY (Arts. 299 and 302, RPC)
NOTE: Contents of the correspondence need not ARTS. 293-332, RPC, TITLE X
be secret. Prejudice to the offended party is not Elements (Ma-L-Rev) Elements of Robbery in General (P-U-I-V)
an element of the offense.
1. Offender is a Manager, employee or servant; 1. There is Personal property belonging to
“Seize” as contemplated in this Article CHAPTER 1: ROBBERY IN GENERAL another; (1992, 1996 BAR)
2. He Learns the secrets of his principal or
master in such capacity; and 2. There is Unlawful taking of that property;
There must be taking possession of papers or 3. He Reveals such secrets. WHO ARE GUILTY OF ROBBERY 3. Taking must be with Intent to gain; and
letters of another even for a short time only. If the ART. 293, RPC 4. There is Violence against or intimidation of
papers or letters were delivered voluntarily to NOTE: Damage is not an element of this article. any person or force upon things. (1992,
the accused, this crime is not committed. Robbery (1998 BAR) 2002, 2005 BAR)
Essence of the Crime of Revealing Secrets with
Qualifying Circumstance Abuse of Office It is the taking of personal property belonging to NOTE: Robberies committed in different houses
another, with intent to gain, by means of violence constitute separate crimes of robbery. But if the
When the offender reveals the contents of such The offender learned of the secret in the course of against or intimidation of any person or using robberies are committed upon different victims
paper or letters of another to a 3rd person, the employment. He is enjoying a confidential force upon anything. on the same occasion and in the same place only,
penalty is higher. relation with the employer or master so he one robbery is committed as the robberies are
should respect the privacy of matters personal to NOTE: For the appellant to be guilty of mere incidents of a single criminal intent.
Public Officer Revealing Secrets of Private the latter. consummated robbery, there must be
Individual vs. Discovering Secrets through incontrovertible proof that property was taken Personal Property is the Subject of Robbery
Seizure of Correspondence REVELATION OF INDUSTRIAL SECRETS from the victim. The appellant is guilty of
ART. 292, RPC attempted robbery only when he commences the The property taken must be personal property,
PUBLIC OFFICER commission of robbery directly by overt acts and for if real property is occupied by means of
DISCOVERING Elements (Pew-S-R-P)
REVEALING does not perform all the acts of execution which violence against or intimidation of person, the
SECRETS THROUGH
SECRETS OF would produce robbery by reason of some causes crime is usurpation. (Art. 312, RPC)
SEIZURE OF 1. Offender is a Person in charge, employee or
PRIVATE or accident other than his own spontaneous
CORRESPONDENCE workman of a manufacturing or industrial
INDIVIDUAL desistance. Q: Is Robbery committed when police officers
ART. 290, RPC establishment; seized the opium without causing the
ART. 230, RPC
Public officer comes Offender is a private Illustration: In a case, Totoy demanded from the prosecution of the offenders, and thereafter
2. Manufacturing or industrial establishment said police officers appropriated the opium?
to know the secret of individual or even a victim, "Tol, pera-pera lang ito, dahil kailangan
has a Secret of the industry which the
any private public officer not in the lang." The victim refused to part with his earnings
offender has learned; A: YES. The person from whom the property was
individual by reason exercise of his official and resisted. He even tried to get out of the
of his office. function. taxicab but Totoy pulled him back and stabbed taken need not be the owner of such. Legal
NOTE: The business secret must not be
It is necessary that the him. Randy, Rot-Rot, and Jon-Jon followed suit possession is sufficient. (U.S. v. Sana Lim, G.R No.
known to other business entities or persons.
The secret is not offender seizes the and stabbed the victim with their bladed 9604, 19 Nov. 1914)
It is a matter to be discovered, known and
necessarily papers or letters of weapons. The victim was able to flee from the
used by and must belong to one person or
contained in papers another to discover vehicle without anything being taken from him. Generally, Identity of Real Owner is NOT
entity exclusively. Secrets must relate to
or letters. the secrets of the Totoy and his confederates commenced by overt Necessary
manufacturing process.
latter. acts the execution of the robbery, but failed to
If there is a secret perform all the acts of execution by reason of the GR: The identity of the real owner is not
Reveals the secret 3. Offender Reveals such secrets; and
discovered, it is not victim's resistance. (People v. Bocalan, G.R. No. necessary so long as the personal property taken
without justifiable does not belong to the accused.
necessary that it be NOTE: The revelation of the secret might be 141527, 04 Sept. 2003)
reason.
revealed. made after the employee or workman has
Classification of Robbery XPN: If the crime is Robbery with Homicide
ceased to be connected with the
establishment.
1. Robbery with violence against, or Presumption of Intent to Gain
4. Prejudice is caused to the owner. intimidation of persons (Arts. 294, 297, and
298, RPC); In unlawful taking of personal property intent to

gain is presumed. The element of personal Q: Police Inspector Belver was alighting from (2) the personal property belongs to another; (3) money or property by voluntarily
property belonging to another and that of intent a bus in front of Bicol Express Eater when he the taking is with animus lucrandi; and (4) the force or intimidation
to gain must concur. was approached by three men, later identified taking is with violence against or intimidation of
as Poquiz, Valencia, and Olerfenes. The three persons or force upon things. Sec. 1: Robbery with Violence against or
Occurrence of Violence and Intimidation men declared a robbery. Valencia then Intimidation of Persons
snatched Belver’s backpack while the other There is intimidation when there is unlawful
GR: Violence or intimidation must be present accused attempted to take his hanger bag, but coercion; extortion; duress; putting in fear. To
OBBERY WITH VIOLENCE AGAINST OR
before the taking of personal property is the latter failed to do so. The accused argues take, or attempt to take, by intimidation means
INTIMIDATION OF PERSONS
complete. that the element of intent to gain is wanting “wilfully to take, or attempt to take, by putting in
ART. 294, RPC
since Belver was never totally dispossessed of fear of bodily harm.” As shown in United States v.
XPN: When violence results in homicide, rape his possessions. Is their contention correct? Osorio, material violence is not indispensable for
intentional mutilation or any of the serious there to be intimidation, intense fear produced in Punishable Acts under Art. 294, RPC (2000,
physical injuries penalized under pars. 1 and 2 of A: NO. The crime of Robbery is considered the mind of the victim which restricts or hinders 2005, 2010 BAR)
Art 263, the taking of the personal property is complete from the moment the offender gains the exercise of the will is sufficient. (Jomar Ablaza
robbery complexed with any of those crimes possession of the thing even if he has no v. People, G.R. No. 217722, 26 Sept. 2018) 1. When by reason or on occasion of the
under Art. 294, even if the taking was already opportunity to dispose of the same. In the present robbery the crime of homicide is committed;
complete when the violence was used by the case, Belver’s bag was already forcibly taken and In this case, the demand of the police officer for
offender. was dispossessed of the same when Poquiz and P1,000 to refrain from arresting the motorcycle 2. When the robbery is accompanied by:
Valencia left the scene of the crime. It is of no rider and because of the fear of being a. Rape;
Unlawful Taking moment that Belver was able to subsequently incarcerated for a crime he did not commit and b. Intentional mutilation; or
recover the items forcibly taken from him. Such the motorcycle rider complied, the charge for c. Arson
It means appropriating a thing belonging to instance does not preclude the presence of intent robbery against the off-duty police officer is
another and placing it under one’s control and to gain on the part of the accused. (Ruel Poquiz proper since the taking with intent to gain, 3. When by reason or on the occasion of such
possession. and Rey Valencia v. People, G.R. No. 238715, 11 Jan. commited through intimidation are present. robbery, any of the physical injuries resulting
2021) in:
The property must belong to another. Thus, one Robbery with Violence vs. Grave Threats vs. a. Insanity;
who, by means of violence or intimidation, took Q: One Sunday afternoon, while standing at Grave Coercion b. Imbecility;
his own property from the depositary is not guilty the corner of C.P. Garcia and Katipunan c. Impotency; or
of robbery. Avenue, an off-duty police officer accosted a d. Blindness is inflicted
ROBBERY
motorcycle rider and asked them to alight. GRAVE GRAVE
WITH
The taking of personal property must be unlawful The off-duty police officer then inspected the THREATS COERCION 4. When by reason or on the occasion of
VIOLENCE
to constitute robbery. If the property is in motorcycle’s compartment box. Pretending robbery, any of the physical injuries resulting
There is in the:
possession of the offender given to him in trust by that a sachet of shabu was found, the off-duty No intent to No intent to
intent to a. Loss of the use of speech;
the owner, the crime is estafa. Also, the unlawful police officer demanded P1,000 in order to gain gain
gain b. Loss of the power to hear or to smell;
taking must not be under the claim of title or prevent an arrest.
Intimidation c. Loss of an eye, a hand, a foot, an arm or
ownership.
is immediate a leg;
Fearful of being incarcerated for life for a Intimidation;
and offended d. Loss of the use of any of such member;
Unlawful Taking is Complete when crime that was not really committed, the Promises
Immediate party is or
motorcycle rider readily complied. Unknown some future
harm compelled to e. Incapacity for the work in which the
1. As to robbery with violence against or to the off-duty police officer, a surveillance harm or
do something injured person is theretofore
intimidation of persons– from the moment camera caught the entire incident. Will a injury
against his habitually engaged is inflicted
the offender gains possession of the thing charge of robbery prosper against the off-
will
even if the culprit had no opportunity to duty police officer? Explain briefly. (2020-21
dispose of the same, the unlawful taking is BAR) 5. If the violence or intimidation employed in
Robbery vs. Bribery the commission of the robbery is carried to a
complete.
A: YES, the charge for Robbery against the off- degree clearly unnecessary for the
2. As to robbery with force upon things– the duty police officer will prosper. The elements of ROBBERY BRIBERY commission of the crime;
thing must be taken out of the the crime of robbery under Art. 293 of the RPC The victim is He parts with his
building/premises to consummate the crime. are: (1) that there is taking of personal property; 6. When in the course of its execution, the
deprived of his money, in a sense,
offender shall have inflicted upon any person

not responsible for the commission of the 2. What is the crime committed? committed. (People v. Comiling, G.R. No. 140405, caused his death when the robbers pointed
robbery any of the physical injuries in 04 Mar. 2004) their guns at him. Was there robbery with
consequence of which the person injured: A: The crime committed is Robbery with homicide?
Intimidation of Persons. (Asa v. People, supra) NOTE: Even if the killing preceded or was done
a. Becomes deformed; ahead of the robbing, whether intentional or not, A: YES. It is immaterial that death supervened as
b. Loses any other member of his body; The Complex Crime of Robbery in an the crime is robbery with homicide. If aside from a mere accident as long as the homicide was
c. Loses the use thereof; Inhabited House by Armed Persons and homicide, rape or physical injuries are also produced by reason or on the occasion of the
d. Becomes ill or incapacitated for the Robbery with Violence Against or committed by reason or on the occasion of the robbery, because it is only the result which
performance of the work in which he is Intimidation of Persons robbery, the rape or physical injuries are matters, without reference to the circumstances,
habitually engaged for more than 90 considered aggravating circumstances in the or causes, or persons intervening in the
days; or In the case of Aurora Fransdilla v. People, the crime of robbery with homicide. Whenever commission of the crime which must be
e. Becomes ill or incapacitated for labor information fully alleged the complex crime of homicide is committed as a consequence of or on considered. (People v. Domingo, G.R. No. 82375,
for more than 30 days. robbery in an inhabited house under Art. 299, the occasion of a robbery, all those who took part 18 Apr. 1990)
RPC, and robbery with intimidation or violence as principals in the commission of the crime will
7. If the violence employed by the offender does under Art. 294, RPC by averring that "the above- also be guilty as principals in the crime of robbery Q: A, B, C committed robbery in the house of
not cause any of the serious physical injuries named accused, conspiring together, with homicide. Angelica. Simeon, the houseboy of Angelica
defined in Art. 263, or if the offender employs confederating with and mutually helping one put up a fight. He tried to wrest the gun from
intimidation only. another, did then and there wilfully, unlawfully Elements of Robbery with Homicide (I-B-A-H) the hand of A. In the process, the gun fired
and feloniously with intent to gain, and by means hitting A who died as a result. Who is liable for
NOTE: The crime defined in this article is a special
of violence and intimidation upon person rob the 1. The taking of personal property with the death of A? And what crime is committed?
complex crime. Art. 48 does not apply.
residence x x x." And, secondly, the Prosecution violence or Intimidation against persons;
competently proved the commission of the 2. The property taken Belongs to another; A: B and C are liable for Robbery with Homicide.
Q: A messaged B threatening to post
complex crime by showing during the trial that 3. The taking was done with Animo lucrandi; Simeon is not liable because his act is in
provocative photos of her. B begged the latter
the accused, after entering the residential house and accordance with law. The crime applies to the
not to release her photos because a lot of
of the complainants at No. 24-B Mabait St., 4. On the occasion of the robbery or by reason robbers themselves. The death of their
people would be affected. In desperation, B
Teacher's Village, Quezon City, took away thereof, Homicide was committed. (People v. companion A was by reason or on the occasion of
told A that she would do anything to get back
valuables, including the vault containing Baccay, G.R. No. 120366, 16 Jan. 1998; People robbery.
her photos. A then told her that he would
Cynthia's US dollar currencies, and in the process v. Mantung, G.R. No. 130372, 20 July 1999)
delete all the photos in his possession and
committed acts of violence against and Q: Suppose the victims were killed, not for the
take down her fake Facebook account if she
intimidation of persons during the robbery by NOTE: Homicide as used in paragraph (1) of Art. purpose of committing robbery and the idea
would agree to have sex with him. B did not
slapping and threatening Lalaine and tying her 294 is to be understood in its generic sense as to of taking the money and other personal
agree and instead offered to pay P5,000.00 in
up, and herding the other members of the include parricide and murder. property of the victims was conceived by the
exchange of the pictures and petitioner
household inside the bodega of the house. (G.R. culprits only after killing. Is this a case of
agreed.
No. 197562, 20 Apr. 2015) Intent to Commit Robbery must Precede the robbery with homicide?
Killing
1. Did the counter-offer constitute as
ROBBERY WITH HOMICIDE A: NO. The intention of the perpetrators is really
consent?
The offender must have the intent to take to kill the victim and robbery came only as an
Robbery with Homicide (2009, 2014 BAR) personal property before the killing. afterthought. The perpetrators are liable for two
A: NO. B’s counter-offer does not make it "with
separate crimes of robbery and homicide or
her consent," as the same was made as a result of
If death results or even accompanies a robbery, Intent to Kill NOT Necessary murder, (qualified by abuse of superior strength).
A’s existing and continuing threat of posting the
the crime will be robbery with homicide provided (People v. Domingo, supra)
private photos on Facebook. It is worthy to note
that the robbery and the homicide are In robbery with homicide, the law does not
that A did not offer to voluntarily and
consummated. The crime of robbery with require that the homicide be committed with NOTE: There is no crime of robbery in band with
unconditionally return the photos of B but
homicide is a special complex crime or a single intent to kill. The crime exists even though there murder or robbery with homicide in band or
instead asked for something in exchange for him
indivisible crime. The killings must have been is no intention to commit homicide. robbery with multiple homicides. If on the
not to post the same on Facebook. In effect, when
perpetrated by reason or on the occasion of occasion of the robbery with homicide, robbery
A accepted private complainant's counter-offer of
robbery. As long as the homicide resulted, during, Q: On the occasion of the robbery, the with force upon things was also committed, the
P5,000.00 instead of sex, his demand was merely
or because of the robbery, even if the killing is by storeowner, a septuagenarian, suffered a crime committed would not only be one robbery
amended or changed from sexual into a monetary
mere accident, robbery with homicide is stroke due to the extreme fear which directly but also a complex crime of robbery with
one. (Asa v. People, G.R. No. 236290, 20 Jan. 2021)

homicide and robbery with force upon things. A: NONE. Treachery cannot be considered as or Animus lucrandi; and about to leave, XA decided on impulse to rape
qualifying circumstance of murder, because the 4. The robbery is accompanied by Rape. OD. As XA was molesting her, YB and ZC stood
Q: Jervis and Marlon asked their friend, crime charged is the special crime of robbery outside the door of her bedroom and did
Jonathan, to help them rob a bank. Jervis and with homicide. The treachery which attended the For a conviction of the crime of robbery with rape nothing to prevent XA from raping OD.
Marlon went inside the bank, but were unable commission of the crime must be considered not to stand, it must be shown that the rape
to get any money from the vault because the as qualifying but merely as a generic aggravating was committed by reason or on the occasion of What crime or crimes did XA, YB, and ZC
same was protected by a time-delay circumstance. (People v. Mantawar, 80 Phil. 817; a robbery and not the other way around. This commit, and what is the criminal liability of
mechanism. They contended themselves with People v. Abang, G.R. No. L-14623, 29 Dec. 1960) special complex crime under Art. 294 of the RPC each? (2004 BAR)
the customer’s cellphones and a total of contemplates a situation where the original
P5,000 in cash. After they dashed out of the NOTE: When in the course of the robbery intent of the accused was to take, with intent to A: The crime committed by XA, YB, and ZC is the
bank and rushed into the car, Jonathan pulled someone is killed but rape and arson are also gain, personal property belonging to another and composite crime of robbery with rape, a single,
the car out of the curb, hitting a pedestrian committed, the crime is still Robbery with rape is committed on the occasion thereof or as indivisible offense under Art. 294(1) of the RPC.
which resulted in the latter’s death. What Homicide. The rape and arson can be appreciated an accompanying crime. (People v. Gallo, G.R. No.
crime or crimes did Jervis, Marlon, and as aggravating circumstance. (Estrada, 2011) 181902, 31 Aug. 2011) Although the conspiracy among the offenders
Jonathan commit? Explain your answer. was only to commit robbery and only XA raped
(2007 BAR) ROBBERY WITH RAPE Q: In the complex crime of robbery with rape, CD, the other robbers, YB and ZC, were present
is the fact showing that one person charged as and aware of the rape being committed by their
A: Jervis and Marlon committed the crime of Robbery with Rape (1996, 1999, 2003, 2004 co-conspirator sexually assaulted the victim co-conspirator. Having done nothing to stop XA
robbery, while Jonathan committed the special BAR) relevant? from committing the rape, YB and ZC thereby
complex crime of robbery with homicide. Jervis concurred in the commission of the rape by their
and Marlon are criminally liable for the robbery The crime of robbery with rape is a crime against A: NO. Whether the accused-appellant sexually co-conspirator XA.
only because that was the crime conspired upon property which is a single indivisible offense. The assaulted the victim is irrelevant. The accused
and actually committed by them, assuming that rape accompanies the robbery. In a case where may still be convicted of the special complex The criminal liability of all, XA, YB, and ZC, shall
the taking of the cellphones and the cash from the rape and not homicide is committed, there is only crime of robbery with rape when conspiracy be the same, as principals in the special complex
bank’s customers was effected by intimidation. a crime of robbery with rape if both the robbery exists. When two or more persons are charged as crime of robbery with rape which is a single,
They will not incur liability for the death of the and the rape are consummated. co-conspirators in the crime of robbery with indivisible offense where the rape accompanying
pedestrian because they have nothing to do with rape, it is irrelevant whether one or all of them the robbery is just a component.
it. Only Jonathan will incur liability for the death NOTE: Although the victim was raped twice on committed the rape. For as long as conspiracy to
of the pedestrian, aside from the robbery, the occasion of Robbery, the additional rape is rob is proven, all will be treated as principals in Criminal Intent to Gain Precedes Intent to
because he alone brought about such death. not considered as an aggravating circumstance in the crime of robbery with rape. (People v. Rape
Although the death caused was not intentional the crime of robbery and rape. There is no law Coritana, G.R. No. 209584, 03 Mar. 2021)
but accidental, it shall be a component of the providing for the additional rape/s or homicide/s The law does not distinguish whether rape was
special complex crime of robbery with homicide for that matter to be considered as aggravating Q: In case there is conspiracy, are all committed before, during, or after the robbery. It
because it was committed in the course of the circumstance. It further observed that the conspirators liable for the crime of robbery is enough that the robbery accompanied the rape.
commission of the robbery. enumeration of aggravating circumstances under with rape? Robbery must not be a mere accident or
Art. 14 of the RPC is exclusive, unlike in Art. 13 of afterthought.
No Crime of Robbery with Multiple Homicide the same Code, which enumerates the mitigating A: YES. In People v. Suyu, it was ruled that once
(1995, 2007, 2009 BAR) circumstances where analogous circumstances conspiracy is established between several Illustration: Where 6 accused entered the house
may be considered. (People v. Regala, G.R. No. accused in the commission of the crime of of the offended party, brandishing firearms and
There is no crime of robbery with multiple 130508, 05 Apr. 2000; People v. Sultan, G.R. No. robbery, they would all be equally culpable for knives and after ransacking the house for money
homicide under the RPC. The crime is robbery 132470, 27 Apr. 2000) the rape committed by anyone of them on the and jewelry, brought the offended party out of the
with homicide notwithstanding the number of occasion of the robbery, unless anyone of them house to a grassy place where she was ordered to
homicides committed on the occasion of the Elements of Robbery with Rape (I-B-A-R) proves that he endeavored to prevent the others undress and although she was able to run away,
robbery and even if murder, physical injuries, and from committing rape. (People v. Gallo, supra) was chased and caught, and thereafter raped by
rape were also committed on the same occasion. 1. The taking of personal property is committed all of the accused, the latter committed robbery
(People v. Hijada, G.R. No. 123696, 11 Mar. 2004) with violence or Intimidation against Q: Together XA, YB, and ZC planned to rob with rape. (People v. Villagracia, G.R. No. 94311, 14
persons; Miss OD. They entered her house by breaking Sept. 1993)
Q: Is there such a crime as robbery with 2. The property taken Belongs to another; one of the windows in her house. After taking
murder? 3. The taking is characterized by intent to gain her personal properties and as they were

Instances when There Could be a Separate timely arrival of the police, such that the ROBBERY WITH PHYSICAL INJURIES, penalty imposed upon all the malefactors shall be
Crime of Robbery and Rape offenders had no choice but to detain the victims COMMITTED IN AN UNINHABITED PLACE the maximum of the corresponding penalty
as hostages in exchange for their safe passage, the AND BY A BAND, OR WITH THE USE OF provided by law, without prejudice to the
If the two (2) crimes were separated both by time detention is absorbed by the crime of robbery FIREARM ON A STREET, ROAD OR ALLEY criminal liability for illegal possession of such
and space, there is no complex crime of Robbery and is not treated as a separate crime. ART. 295, RPC firearms. This is a special aggravating
with Rape. (People v. Angeles, G.R. No. 104285-86, circumstance applicable only in a case of robbery
21 May 1993) ROBBERY WITH ARSON Qualifying Circumstances in band.
R.A. No. 7659
Q: Can there be such a crime as robbery with If committed: Liability for the Acts of the Other Members of
attempted rape? Commission of Composite Crime 1. In an uninhabited place; the Band
2. By a band;
A: NO. The crime cannot be a complex crime of The composite crime would only be committed if 3. By attacking a moving train, street car, A member of the band is liable for any of the
robbery with attempted rape under Art. 48, the primordial intent of the offender is to motor vehicle, or airship; assaults committed by the other members
because a robbery cannot be a necessary means commit robbery and there is no killing, rape, or 4. By entering the passengers’ compartments thereof, when the following requisites concur:
to commit attempted rape; nor attempted rape, to intentional mutilation committed by the offender in a train, or in any manner taking the
commit robbery. (People v. Cariaga, C.A., 54 O.G. during the robbery. Otherwise, the crime would passengers thereof by surprise in the 1. That he was a member of the band;
4307) be robbery with homicide, or robbery with rape, respective conveyances; or 2. That he was present at the commission of a
or robbery with intentional mutilation, in that 5. On a street, road, highway, or alley, and the robbery by that band;
ROBBERY WITH PHYSICAL INJURIES order and the arson would only be an aggravating intimidation is made with the use of 3. That the other members of the band
circumstance. firearms, the offender shall be punished by committed an assault; and
Physical Injuries must be Serious the maximum periods of the proper 4. That he did not attempt to prevent the
Robbery must Precede Arson penalties prescribed in Art. 294. assault.
To be considered as such, the physical injuries
must always be serious. If the physical injuries are It is essential that robbery precede the arson, as Any of these five qualifying circumstances of In Robbery by a band, all are liable for any assault
only less serious or slight, they are absorbed in in the case of rape and intentional mutilation, robbery with physical injuries or intimidation committed by the band, unless one or some
the robbery. The crime becomes merely robbery. because the amendment included arson among must be alleged in the information and proved attempted to prevent the assault.
But if the less serious physical injuries were the rape and intentional mutilation which have during the trial.
committed after the robbery was already accompanied the robbery. ATTEMPTED AND FRUSTRATED ROBBERY
consummated, there would be a separate charge Non-Applicability of this Article in Other COMMITTED UNDER CERTAIN
for the less serious physical injuries. It will only NOTE: Arson has been made a component only of Cases CIRCUMSTANCES
be absorbed in the robbery if it was inflicted in robbery with violence against or intimidation of ART. 297, RPC
the course of the execution of the robbery. The persons but not of robbery by the use of force This article does not apply in cases of Robbery
same is true in the case of slight physical injuries. upon things. Hence, if the robbery was by the use with homicide, robbery with intentional Application of this Article
of force upon things and therewith arson was mutilation, robbery with rape and robbery with
Q: Suppose a gang robbed a mansion in Forbes committed, two distinct crimes are committed. serious physical injuries resulting in insanity, It applies when homicide is committed on the
Park. On the occasion of the robbery, physical imbecility, impotency or blindness. This is occasion of an attempted or frustrated robbery.
injuries were inflicted on the household OTHER CASES OF SIMPLE ROBBERY because the Article omitted these crimes in the
members. The robbers also detained the enumeration. (Reyes, 2008) The term homicide is used in a generic sense. It
children to compel their parents to come out Any kind of robbery with less serious physical includes murder, parricide, and infanticide.
with the money. What crime/s is/are injuries or slight physical injuries falls under this ROBBERY COMMITTED BY A BAND
committed by the robbers? specie of robbery. ART. 296, RPC The clause “unless the homicide committed shall
deserve a higher penalty under the provisions of
A: The detention was a necessary means to NOTE: But where there is no violence exerted to this code” may be illustrated thus: In an
Robbery Committed by a Band (2010 BAR)
facilitate the robbery. Thus, the offenders will be accomplish the snatching, the crime committed is attempted or frustrated robbery, the killing of the
held liable for the complex crimes of robbery with not robbery but simple theft. victim is qualified by treachery or relationship.
Robbery is committed by a band when at least
serious physical injuries and serious illegal The proper penalty for murder or parricide shall
four (4) armed malefactors take part in the
detention. There is sufficient intimidation where the acts of be imposed because it is more severe.
commission of a robbery.
the offender inspired fear upon the victim
But if the victims were detained because of the although the accused was not armed. NOTE: If any unlicensed firearm is used, the

EXECUTION OF DEEDS BY MEANS OF c. By using false keys, picklocks, or similar Requisites: ROBBERY IN AN UNINHABITED PLACE
VIOLENCE OR INTIMIDATION tools; or a. It must be contiguous to the building; AND BY A BAND
ART. 298 d. By using any fictitious name or b. It must have an interior entrance connected ART. 300, RPC
pretending the exercise of public therewith; and
Elements (Com-De-V) (2001 BAR) authority. c. It must form part of the whole. The Robbery mentioned in this article, if
committed in an uninhabited place or by a band,
1. Offender has intent to Defraud another; The whole body of culprit must be inside the Illustration: A small store located on the ground shall be punished by the maximum period of the
2. Offender Compels him to sign, execute, or building to constitute entering. floor of a house is a dependency of the house, penalty provided therefor.
deliver any public instrument or document; there being no partition between the store and
and 3. Once inside the building, the offender took the house, and in going to the main stairway, one Robbery with force upon things (Art. 299, RPC), in
3. Compulsion is by means of Violence or personal property belonging to another has to enter the store which has a door. (U.S. v. order to be qualified, must be committed in an
intimidation. with intent to gain. Ventura, G.R. No. 13715, 22 Jan. 1919) uninhabited place and by a band (Art. 300, RPC)
while robbery with violence against or
Force upon Things False Keys
Art. 298 applies even if the document signed, intimidation of persons must be committed in an
executed, or delivered is a private or commercial uninhabited place or by a band. (Art. 295, RPC)
It requires some element of trespass into the Genuine keys stolen from the owner or any keys
document.
establishment where the robbery was other than those intended by the owner for use in
committed; e.g. the offender must have entered ROBBERY IN AN UNINHABITED PLACE OR
Robbery by Execution of Deeds vs. Grave the lock forcibly opened by the offender.
the premises where the robbery was committed. IN A PRIVATE BUILDING
Coercion ART. 302, RPC
If no entry was effected, even though force may Elements of the 2nd Kind of Robbery with
have been employed in the taking of the property Force upon Things under Art. 299
ROBBERY BY from within the premises, the crime will only be Elements
GRAVE COERCION
EXECUTION OF DEEDS theft. 1. Offender is inside a dwelling house, public
There is an intent to gain No intent to gain 1. Offender entered an uninhabited place or a
building or edifice devoted to religious
There is an intent to There is no intent to Public Building building which was not a dwelling house, not
worship, regardless of circumstances under
defraud defraud a public building, or not an edifice devoted to
which he entered it; and
It refers to every building owned by the religious worship;
Government or belonging to a private person but 2. Offender takes personal property belonging
Sec. 2: Robbery by the Use of Force upon Things
used or rented by the Government, although 2. Any of the following circumstances was
to another, with intent to gain, under any of
temporarily unoccupied by the same. present:
the following circumstances:
ROBBERY IN AN INHABITED HOUSE OR
PUBLIC BUILDING OR EDIFICE Inhabited House a. Entrance was effected through an
a. By the breaking of doors, wardrobes,
DEVOTED TO WORSHIP opening not intended for entrance or
chests, or any other kind of locked or
ART. 299, RPC It refers to any shelter, ship or vessel constituting egress
sealed furniture or receptacle, or door; or
the dwelling of one or more persons even though
Elements of the 1st Kind of Robbery with Force the inhabitants thereof are temporarily absent NOTE: If the entrance was made through the
NOTE: Door refers only to “doors, lids or
upon Things under Art. 299 therefrom when the robbery is committed. door which was open, or closed but unlocked,
opening sheets” of furniture or other
and not through the window, the person who
portable receptacles, not to inside doors of
1. Offender entered an inhabited house, or Dependencies took personal property from the house with
house or building.
public building, or edifice devoted to intent to gain is guilty only of theft and not
religious worship; (1992, 2007, 2008 BAR) It consists of all interior courts, corrals, robbery. Where an opening created by the
b. By taking such furniture or objects away to
warehouses, granaries, barns, coach houses, accidental bumping of a vehicle in the store’s
be broken or forced open outside the place
2. Entrance was effected by any of the following stables, or other departments, or enclosed wall was made the entrance of the
of the robbery.
means: interior entrance connected therewith and which malefactor, the taking of the personal
form part of the whole. Orchards and other lands property inside the store is robbery and not
NOTE: The crime committed would be
a. Through an opening not intended for used for cultivation or production are not theft because the hole is not intended for
estafa or theft, if the locked or sealed
entrance or egress; included, even if closed, contiguous to the entrance or egress.
receptacle is forced open in the building
b. By breaking any wall, roof, or floor, or building, and having direct connection therewith. where it is kept and not taken away to be
breaking any door or window; (2000 b. Wall, roof, floor, or outside door or
broken outside.
BAR) window was broken

NOTE: Like Robbery in an inhabited house, Instances of Committing Robbery in a Store POSSESSION OF PICKLOCKS Essence of Brigandage
the breaking should be made in order to and Crime Committed OR SIMILAR TOOLS
effect the entrance into the place. If the wall, ART. 304, RPC Brigandage is a crime of depredation wherein the
roof, floor etc. was broken in the course of 1. If the store is used as a dwelling of one or unlawful acts are directed not only against
escaping, the act committed is not Robbery. more persons, the robbery committed Elements (Pick-La-Ro) (2009 BAR) specific, intended or preconceived victims, but
therein would be considered as committed in against any and all prospective victims anywhere
c. Entrance was effected through the use of an inhabited house under Art. 299. (People v. 1. Offender has in his possession Picklocks or on the highway and whoever they may
false keys, picklocks, or other similar Suarez, G.R. No. L-6431, 29 Mar. 1954) similar tools; potentially be.
tools; 2. Such picklocks or similar tools are specially
2. If the store was not actually occupied at the adopted to the commission of Robbery; and Robbery by Band vs. Brigandage
d. Door, wardrobe, chest, or any sealed or time of the robbery and was not used as a 3. Offender does not have Lawful cause for such
closed furniture or receptacle was dwelling, since the owner lived in a separate possession. ROBBERY BY BAND BRIGANDAGE
broken; house, the robbery committed therein is
Purpose
punished under Art. 302. (People v. Silvestre,
FALSE KEYS Purpose is to commit
e. Closed or sealed receptacle was 34 O.G. 1535)
ART. 305, RPC robbery in highway;
removed, even if the same be broken Purpose is to commit
or to kidnap a person
open elsewhere; 3. If the store is located on the ground floor of robbery not
False Keys (S-O-Pick) for ransom or any
the house belonging to the owner, having an necessarily in
other purpose
NOTE: Under letters d and e, the robber did interior entrance connected therewith, it is a highways.
1. Picklocks or similar tools; attained by force and
not enter through a window or effected dependency of an inhabited house and the
2. Genuine keys Stolen from the owner; violence.
entrance by breaking the floor, door, wall, robbery committed therein is punished
3. Any key other than those intended by the Commission of the Crime
etc. Otherwise, these circumstances by under the last paragraph of Art. 299. (U.S. v.
owner for use in the lock forcibly Opened by Actual commission of Mere formation is
themselves already make the act as that of Tapan, G.R. No. 6504, 11 Sept. 1911)
the offender. robbery is necessary. punished.
robbery. In these cases, the robbers entered
through the door, and once inside, broke the Preconceived Victim
ROBBERY OF CEREALS, FRUITS, OR
Possession of false keys in pars. 2 and 3 above are It may be committed
wardrobe, sealed or close receptacles etc., or FIREWOOD IN AN UNINHABITED PLACE There is always a
not punishable. If the key was entrusted to the even without a
took away closed or sealed receptacle to be OR PRIVATE BUILDING preconceived victim.
offender and he used it to steal, the crime preconceived victim.
broken elsewhere. ART. 303, RPC
committed is not robbery but theft.
3. With intent to gain, the offender took The main object of the Brigandage Law is to
Applicability
therefrom personal property belonging to CHAPTER 2: BRIGANDAGE prevent the formation of bands of robbers. The
another. heart of the offense consists in the formation of a
This applies when the robbery was committed by
BRIGANDAGE band by more than three armed persons for the
the use of force upon things, without violence
Breaking of a padlock is use of force upon things. ART. 306, RPC purpose indicated in Art. 306. Such formation is
against or intimidation of any person in an
The crime committed by the accused who sufficient to constitute a violation of Art. 306.
inhabited house, public building, or edifice
entered in a warehouse by breaking the padlock devoted to religious worship (Art. 299) or in an Brigandage (HRV-4-Band)
of the door and took away personal property is On the other hand, if robbery is committed by a
uninhabited place or private building. (Art. 302)
robbery. (People v. Mesias, G.R. No. L-45749 29 Jan. band, whose members were not primarily
There is brigandage when the following
1938) organized for the purpose of committing robbery
The place where the robbery is committed under requisites are present:
or kidnapping, etc., the crime would not be
Art. 302 must be a building which is not an
Building brigandage but only robbery. (People v. Puno, G.R.
inhabited house or public building or edifice to 1. There be at least 4 armed malefactors;
No. 97471, 17 Feb. 1993)
religious worship. 2. They formed a Band of robbers; and
Includes any kind of structure used for storage or 3. The purpose is any of the following:
safekeeping of personal property, such as (a) Highway Robbery under P.D. 532
freight car and (b) warehouse. (U.S. v. Magsino, a. To commit robbery in the Highway;
G.R. No. 1339, 28 Nov. 1903; U.S. v. Roque, et al., 4 Highway robbery or brigandage is the seizure for
b. To kidnap persons for the purpose of
Phil 242) ransom, extortion, or other unlawful purposes or
extortion or to obtain Ransom; and
the taking away of property of another by means
c. To attain by means of force and
of violence against or other unlawful means,
Violence any other purpose.
committed by any person on any Philippine

Highway. Indiscriminately Elements (I-B-P-Without-C-V) same to the owner or to the authorities since
Committed against
committed against the term “lost” is generic in nature and
predetermined victims
Any person who aids or protects highway persons 1. There is taking of Personal property; embraces loss by stealing or by any act of a
robbers or abets the commission of highway The offender is a The commission of 2. Property taken Belongs to another; person other than the owner as well as by the
robbery or brigandage shall be considered as an brigand who roams in robbery is only 3. Taking was done with Intent to gain; act of the owner himself through same casual
accomplice. public highways and incidental and the 4. Taking was done Without the Consent of the occurrence. (People v. Rodrigo, G.R. No. L-
carries out his robbery offender is not a owner; and 18507, 31 Mar. 1966)
Philippine Highway in public highways brigand 5. Taking is accomplished without the use of
Violence against or intimidation of persons Finder in Fact
Any road, street, passage, highway, and bridges of force upon things. (Baltazar v. People, G.R.
AIDING AND ABETTING
or other parts thereof, or railway or railroad No. 164545, 20 Nov. 2006) A person who finds a lost item. The case of the
A BAND OF BRIGANDS
within the Philippines used by persons, or finder of a lost property affirms the fact that the
ART. 307, RPC
vehicles, or locomotives, or trains for the Illustration: While praying in church, A felt and offender obtains only physical possession of the
movement or circulation of persons or saw his wallet being taken by B, but because of thing. The finder in fact has an obligation to
Elements (Ari-B-K)
transportation of goods, articles, or property, or the solemnity of the proceedings, he did not make deliver the property to the owner if known,
both. any move; while the taking was with his otherwise, surrender the property to the
1. There is a band of Brigands;
knowledge, it was without his consent, and Theft authorities.
2. Offender Knows the band to be of brigands;
Gravamen of Highway Robbery/Brigandage is committed.
and
under P.D. No. 532 Finder in Law
3. Offender does any of the following acts:
“Taking”
a. He in any manner Aids, abets or protects
The Supreme Court pointed out that the purpose An officer of the law whom a lost item is
such band of brigands;
of brigandage is, inter alia, indiscriminate The act of depriving another of the possession surrendered or turned over.
b. He gives them information of the
highway robbery. P.D. 532 punishes as highway and dominion of movable property. The taking
movements of the police or other peace
robbery or brigandage only those acts of robbery must be accompanied by the intention, at the time 3. Those who after having maliciously damaged
officers of the government; or
perpetrated by outlaws indiscriminately against of the taking, of withholding the thing with some the property of another, remove or make use
c. He acquires or receives the property
any person or persons on a Philippine highway as character of permanency. of the fruits or object of the damage caused
taken by such brigands.
defined therein, not acts committed against a by them; or
predetermined or particular victim. (People v. In the case of Pit-og v. People (G.R. No. 76539, 11
NOTE: There is presumption of law as to
Puno, G.R. No. 97471, 17 Feb. 1993) Oct. 1990), the Court acquitted the petitioner who 4. Those who enter an enclosed estate or a field
knowledge, unless the contrary is proven. (Art.
took the sugarcane and bananas believing them where trespass is forbidden or which belongs
307(2))
NOTE: In U.S. v. Feliciano (3 Phil. 422), it was to be her own, due to the absence of criminal to another and, without the consent of its
pointed out that highway robbery or brigandage intent to gain. owner, hunt or fish upon the same or gather
Penalty
is more than ordinary robbery committed on a fruits, cereals or other forest or farm
highway. The purpose of brigandage is Persons Liable (1995, 1998, 2000, 2008, 2009 products.
Prision correccional in its medium period to
indiscriminate robbery in highways. If the BAR)
prision mayor in its minimum period.
purpose is only a particular robbery, the crime is Q: While driving on the way to his apartment,
only robbery or robbery in band, if there are at 1. Those who, with intent to gain, but without Dawson placed a bundle of money on his lap.
least four armed participants. CHAPTER 3: THEFT violence against or intimidation of persons Upon alighting from the car, the bundled
nor force upon things, take personal money fell on the road near his vehicle. A
Highway Robbery vs. Brigandage THEFT property of another without the latter’s minor noticed the bundled money and picked
ART. 308, RPC consent; it up before going home. Pante and two other
HIGHWAY ROBBERY BRIGANDAGE minors shared the lost money and divided the
P.D. 532 Art. 306, RPC Theft 2. Those who having found lost property, fail to same among themselves. They were all
deliver the same to the local authorities or to charged with the crime of Theft. Pante denied
Crime must be Mere formation of its owner; (1998, 2001 BAR) liability on the ground that he is not a finder
Theft is committed by any person who, with
committed band is punishable in law since the one who found the lost money
intent to gain but without violence against or
One malefactor will At least 4 armed intimidation of persons nor force upon things, NOTE: Lost property includes stolen was his co-accused minor. Is his contention
suffice malefactors shall take personal property of another without property so that the accused who found a tenable?
the latter’s consent. stolen horse is liable if he fails to deliver the

A: NO. A finder under Art. 308 of the RPC is not A: NO. In a charge for theft, it is enough that the Proof that the accused is in possession of a Q: Bea and Julia were inside a jeepney with
only limited to the actual finder since the gist of personal property subject thereof belongs to recently stolen property gives rise to a valid two male persons later identified as Gerald
the offense is the furtive taking and another and not to the offender. It is irrelevant presumption that he stole the property. and Dominic. When the jeepney stopped at a
misappropriation of the property found. Though whether the person deprived of the possession of red light, Gerald snatched the necklace of Bea
not the actual finder, there is no dispute that the watch has or has no right to the watch. Theft No Crime of Frustrated Theft then he and Dominic disembarked from the
Pante knew for a fact that his two co-accused is committed by one who, with intent to gain, jeepney and ran away. Gerald was
minors did not own the subject money. Instead of appropriates property of another without the Unlawful taking, which is the deprivation of one’s apprehended and with the information that
returning the money, Pante convinced his co- consent of its owner. Furthermore, the crime is personal property, is the element which produces he gave regarding Dominic’s identity, the
accused minors not to return and to divide it committed even when the offender receives the felony in its consummated stage. At the same police were also able to arrest Dominic.
among themselves. At that moment, Pante placed property of another but acquires only physical time, without unlawful taking as an act of Gerald and Dominic were both charged with
himself precisely in the situation as if he was the possession to hold the same. P is a finder in law execution, the offense could only be attempted robbery. In snatching the necklace robbery or
actual finder. (Fernando Pante v. People, G.R. No. liable for theft not estafa. theft, if at all. With these considerations, under theft?
218969, 18 Jan. 2021) Art. 308 of the RPC, theft cannot have a frustrated
Test to Determine whether an Object can be stage. Theft can only be attempted or A: The crime committed by Edwin is only
Ownership in Theft, Immaterial the Subject of Theft consummated. (Valenzuela v. People, G.R. No. theft, instead of robbery. The elements of
160188, 21 June 2007) robbery are: (1) there is a taking of personal
Ownership is immaterial in theft. The subject of The test of what is the proper subject of larceny property; (2) the personal property belongs to
the crime of theft is any personal property seems to be not whether the subject is corporeal NOTE: The ability of the offender to freely another; (3) the taking is with animus lucrandi;
belonging to another. Hence, as long as the but whether it is capable of appropriation by dispose of the property stolen is not a and (4) the taking is with violence against or
property taken does not belong to the accused another. constitutive element of the crime of theft. Such intimidation of persons or with force upon things.
who has a valid claim thereover, it is immaterial factor runs immaterial to the statutory definition Theft, on the other hand, is committed by any
whether said offender stole it from the owner, a NOTE: In the old ruling, when a person stole a of theft, which is the taking, with intent to gain, of person who, with intent to gain but without
mere possessor, or even a thief of the property. check but was not able to use the same because personal property of another without the latter’s violence against or intimidation of persons nor
(Miranda v. People, G.R. No. 176298, 25 Jan. 2012) the check bounced, he shall be guilty of the crime consent. force upon things, shall take the personal
of theft according to the value of the parchment. property of another without the latter's consent.
Illustration: Where the finder of the lost or In the new ruling, however and following the Theft vs. Estafa
mislaid property entrusts it to another for same circumstances, he shall be guilty of an Thus, the distinguishing element between the
delivery to a designated owner, the person to impossible crime. (Jacinto v. People, G.R. No. crimes of robbery and theft is the use of violence
THEFT ESTAFA
whom it is thus confided, assumes by voluntary 162540, 13 July 2009) or intimidation as a means of taking the property
substitution, as to both the property and the Where both the material belonging to another; the element is present in
owner, the same relation as was occupied by the Complete Unlawful Taking If only the physical and juridical possession the crime of robbery and absent in the crime of
finder. If he misappropriates it, he is guilty of or material are transferred, theft. The testimonies of the witnesses reveal that
Theft as if he were the actual finder of the same. Unlawful taking is deemed complete from the possession of the misappropriation of the the snatching of the necklace was without
(People v. Avila, G.R. No. 19786, 31 Mar. 1923) moment the offender gains possession of the thing is transferred property would violence against or intimidation of persons or
thing, even if he has no opportunity to dispose of constitute estafa with force upon things. The Court clarified that
Q: Mario found a watch in a jeep he was riding, the same. for the requisite of violence to obtain in cases of
and since it did not belong to him, he Theft vs. Robbery simple robbery, the victim must have sustained
approached policeman P and delivered the Immateriality of Carrying Away of the Thing less serious physical injuries or slight physical
watch with instruction to return the same to Taken THEFT ROBBERY injuries in the occasion of the robbery. The Court
whoever may be found to be the owner. P added that the fact that the necklace was
The offender does not
failed to return the watch to the owner and, In theft, it is not required for the thief to be able The offender uses "grabbed" did not automatically mean that force
use violence or
instead, sold it and appropriated for himself to carry away the thing taken from the owner. violence or attended the taking.
intimidation or does
the proceeds of the sale. The consummation of this crime takes place upon intimidation or enters
not enter a house or
the voluntary and malicious taking of the a house or building The Court explained that the use of the word
building through any
Charged with theft, P reasoned out that he property which is realized upon the material through any of the "grabbed", by itself, shows that violence or
of the means specified
cannot be found guilty because it was not he occupation of the taking, that is, when he had full means specified in physical force was employed by the offenders in
in Arts. 299 and 302,
who found the watch. Moreover, the watch possession thereof even if he did not have the Arts. 299 and 302, RPC taking Snyders' necklaces. The Court, however,
RPC
turned out to be stolen property. Is P's opportunity to dispose of the same. finds the argument to be a pure play of semantics.
defense valid? (1998 BAR) Grab means to take or seize by or as if by a sudden

motion or grasp; to take hastily. Clearly, the same Union Plant to truckers who would buy conscience, she decided to leave her own conclusion than that Mejares, taking advantage of
does not suggest the presence of violence or cement for profit. purse in place of the one she took. Her act was her being a domestic helper of private
physical force in the act; the connotation is on the discovered and Clepto was charged with theft. complainant for approximately a year, committed
suddenness of the act of taking or seizing which In these transactions, he instructed the She claimed that there was no theft, as the the crime of qualified theft.
cannot be readily equated with the employment customers that the payments be made in the store suffered no injury or prejudice because
of violence or physical force. Here, it was form of “Pay to Cash” checks, for which he did she had left a purse in place of the one she Thus, the Court has been consistent in holding
probably the suddenness of taking that shocked not issue any receipts. He did not remit the took. Comment on her defense. (2014 BAR) that "intent to gain or animus lucrandi is an
Snyder and not the presence of violence or checks but these were either encashed or internal act that is presumed from the unlawful
physical force since, as pointed out by petitioner, deposited to his personal bank account. What A: The defense of Clepto has no merit. Theft is taking by the offender of the thing subject of
Snyder did not at all allege that She was pushed is the crime committed? already consummated from the moment Clepto asportation. Thus, actual gain is irrelevant as the
or otherwise harmed by the persons who took took possession of one of the smaller purses important consideration is the intent to gain." In
her necklaces. (Edwin del Rosario v. People, G.R. A: Qualified theft through grave abuse of inside a high-end shop, without paying for it. She this case, it is clear from the established facts that
No. 235739, 22 July 2019, J. Caguioa) confidence. His position entailed a high degree took the personal property of another, with it was Mejares who opened the drawer in the
of confidence, having access to funds collected intent to gain, without the consent of the latter. masters' bedroom and took away the cash and
QUALIFIED THEFT from UCC clients. As Branch Manager of UCC who Damage or injury to the owner is not an element valuables it contained. (People v. Mejares, G.R. No.
ART. 310, RPC was authorized to receive payments from UCC of theft, hence, even if she left her purse in lieu of 2255735, 10 Jan. 2018)
customers, he gravely abused the trust and the purse she took, theft is still committed.
Qualified Theft (S-G-V-Co-Fi-Fi) (2007, 2010 confidence reposed upon him by the THEFT OF THE PROPERTY OF THE NATIONAL
BAR) management of UCC. Precisely, by using that Q: On May 22, 2012, according to Raquel LIBRARY AND NATIONAL MUSEUM
trust and confidence, Mirto was able to Torres, one of the household helper of victims ART. 311, RPC
1. If theft is committed by a domestic Servant; perpetrate the theft of UCC funds to the grave Spouses Gavino, Belen Mejares received a call.
2. If the theft is committed with Grave abuse of prejudice of the latter. (People v. Mirto, G.R. No. She hurried to the computer room and Theft of property of National Library and
confidence; 193479, 19 Oct. 2011) answered the call away from Torres. When National Museum has a fixed penalty regardless
Mejares returned, she was “pale, perspiring, of its value, but if the crime is committed with
NOTE: If the offense is to be qualified by Q: Mrs. S was a bank teller. In need of money, and panicky.” When Torres asked about the grave abuse of confidence, the penalty for
abuse of confidence, the abuse must be grave, she took P5,000.00 from her money drawer identity of the caller, Mejares did not answer. qualified theft shall be imposed.
like an accused who was offered food and and made it appear that a certain depositor She told her instead that Gavino met an
allowed to sleep in the house of the made a withdrawal from his account when in accident and instructed her to get something
CHAPTER 4: USURPATION
complainant out of the latter’s pity and fact no such withdrawal was made. What from a drawer in the master’s bedroom.
charity, but stole the latter’s money in his crime was committed by Mrs. S?
Since it was locked, Mejares was supposedly OCCUPATION OF REAL PROPERTY OR
house when he left the place.
A: Qualified theft. Mrs. S was only in material told to destroy it. When Mejares emerged USURPATION OF REAL RIGHTS IN PROPERTY
possession of the deposits as she received the from the bedroom, she was holding a plastic ART. 312, RPC
3. If the property stolen is a motor Vehicle, mail
matter or large cattle; (2002 BAR) same in behalf of the bank. Juridical possession hamper that contained black wallet and
4. If the property stolen consist of Coconuts remains with the bank. Juridical possession envelopes and was talking to someone on her Punishable Acts
taken from the premises of a plantation; means possession which gives the transferee a phone.
5. If the property stolen is Fish taken from a right over the thing which the transferee may set 1. Taking possession of any real property
fishpond or fishery; or up even against the owner. If a bank teller Later on, Mejares told Torres that she was belonging to another by means of violence
6. If property is taken on the occasion of Fire, appropriates the money for personal gain then instructed by Gavino to also take a watch and against or intimidation of persons; and
earthquake, typhoon, volcanic eruption, or the felony committed is theft. Further, since Mrs. jewelry since the cash was not enough to pay
any other calamity, vehicular accident or civil S occupies a position of confidence, and the bank the driver in the accident who was 2. Usurping any real rights in property
disturbance. (2006 BAR) places money in her possession due to the threatening to sue. Mejares placed everything belonging to another by means of violence
confidence reposed on her, the felony of qualified in a green bag and tried to leave the against or intimidation of persons. (Reyes,
Q: Mirto is a Branch Manager of UCC. It was theft was committed. (Roque v. People G.R. No. condominium. Is Valencia liable of the crime 2021)
alleged that he used the credit line of 138954, 25 Nov. 2004) of qualified theft?
accredited dealers in favor of persons who
either had no credit lines or had exhausted Q: Clepto went alone to a high-end busy shop A: YES. Normal human experience, as well as the
their credit lines. He diverted cement bags and decided to take one of the smaller purses consistency in and confluence of the testimonies
from the company’s Norzagaray Plant or La without paying for it. Overcame by of prosecution witnesses, lead to no other

Elements of Occupation of Real Property or possession of any real property or shall usurp any al., 51 O.G. 1389) Qualifying Circumstances
Usurpation of Real Rights in Property real rights in property belonging to another, is
criminally liable under Art. 312 of the RPC or ALTERING BOUNDARIES OR LANDMARKS 1. Person who shall abscond with his property
1. Offender takes possession of any real Occupation of Real Property or Usurpation of Real ART. 313, RPC to the prejudice of his creditors shall suffer
property or usurps any real rights in Rights in Property. In addition, they may also be the penalty of prision mayor if he be a
property; charged with other crimes resulting from their Elements of Altering Boundaries or merchant.
2. Real property or real rights belongs to acts of violence. Landmarks
another; 2. Penalty of prision correccional in its
3. Violence against or intimidation of persons is No Separate Charge of Homicide 1. There are boundary marks or monuments of maximum period to prision mayor in its
used by the offender in occupying real towns, provinces, or estates, or any other medium period if he be not a merchant.
property or usurping real rights in property; If in the act of occupying a real property, marks intended to designate the boundaries (Reyes, 2021)
(1996 BAR) and somebody was killed, there can be no separate of the same; and
4. There is intent to gain. charge of homicide. If homicide was used in order CHAPTER 6: SWINDLING AND
2. Offender alters said boundary marks.
to occupy the property, then homicide is OTHER DECEITS
If the accused is the owner of the property which absorbed. If a person was killed after the offender Intent to gain is not necessary. The mere act of
he usurped from the possessor, he cannot be held has already occupied the property, he is liable for alteration or destruction of the boundary marks SWINDLING (ESTAFA)
liable for usurpation. Considering that this is a a separate charge of homicide. is sufficient. ART. 315, RPC
crime against property, there must be intent to
gain. In the absence of the intent to gain, the act Acts Punished by R.A. No. 947
CHAPTER 5: CULPABLE INSOLVENCY Elements of Estafa in General
may constitute coercion.
Entering or occupying public agricultural land
1. Accused defrauded another by abuse of
Q: A group of homeless and destitute persons including public lands granted to private FRAUDULENT INSOLVENCY
confidence or by means of deceit – This
invaded and occupied the houses built by the individuals. ART. 314, RPC
covers the three different ways of
National Housing Authority (NHA) for certain
committing estafa under Art. 315, thus:
military personnel. To gain entry to the Squatters Elements of Fraudulent Insolvency (D-A-P)
houses, the group intimidated the security
a. With unfaithfulness or abuse of
guards posted at the entrance gate with the 1. Those who have the capacity or means to pay 1. Offender is a Debtor, that is, he has
confidence;
firearms they were carrying and destroyed rent or for legitimate housing but are obligations due and payable;
b. By means of false pretenses or
the padlocks of the doors of the houses with squatting anyway. 2. He Absconds with his property; and
fraudulent acts; or
the use of crowbars and hammers. They 2. Also the persons who were awarded lots but 3. There be Prejudice to his creditors.
c. Through fraudulent means
claimed that they would occupy the houses sold or lease them out.
and live therein because the houses were idle 3. Intruders of lands reserved for socialized The fraud must result in the actual prejudice of
2. Damage or prejudice capable of pecuniary
and they were entitled to free housing from housing, pre-empting possession by his creditors. If the accused concealed his
estimation is caused to the offended party or
the government. occupying the same. (Urban Development and property fraudulently but it turned out that he
third person.
Housing Act, R.A. No. 7279) has some other property with which to satisfy his
For the reason that the houses were already obligation, he is not liable under this article.
a. The failure of the entrustee to turn over
awarded to military personnel who have been NOTE: R.A. No. 7279 (Urban Development and
the proceeds of the sale of the goods,
found to have fully complied with the Housing Act does not define the word “squatter.” Essence of the Crime
documents, or instruments covered by a
requirements for the award thereof, NHA What the law defines is “professional squatter.”)
trust receipt, to the extent of the amount
demanded the group to vacate within ten (10) Any property of the debtor is made to disappear
owing to the entruster, or as appearing
days from notice the houses they occupied There is only civil liability if there is no violence for the purpose of evading the fulfillment of the
in the trust receipt; or
and were still occupying. Despite the lapse of or intimidation in taking possession of real obligations and liabilities contracted with one or
the deadline, the group refused to vacate the property. more creditors to the prejudice of the latter
b. The failure to return said goods,
houses in question. What is the criminal Being a merchant qualifies the crime as the
documents, or instruments if they were
liability of the members of the group, if any, Thus, if the accused took possession of the land of penalty is increased.
not sold or disposed of in accordance
for their actions? (2018 BAR) the offended party through other means, such as
with the terms of the trust receipt.
strategy or stealth, during the absence of the
A: The members of the group who, by means of owner or of the person in charge of the property,
violence against or intimidation, shall take there is only civil liability. (People v. Dimacutak, et

Elements of Estafa with Unfaithfulness or d. There is a demand made by the offended is received in trust, on commission, for A: NO. The essence of estafa under Art. 315(1)(b)
Abuse of Confidence under Art. 315 (1) party to the offender. administration or under any other circumstance of the RPC is the appropriation or conversion of
involving the duty to make delivery of or to money or property received, to the prejudice of
1. Under par. (a): NOTE: The fourth element is not necessary return the same, even though the obligation is the owner thereof. It takes place when a person
when there is evidence of misappropriation guaranteed by a bond; (2) that there is actually appropriates the property of another for
a. Offender has an onerous obligation to of the goods by the defendant. conversion or diversion of such property by the his own benefit, use, and enjoyment. The failure
deliver something of value; person who has so received it or a denial on his to account, upon demand, for funds or property
b. He alters its substance, quantity, or Illustration: The accused received in trust part that he received it; (3) that such conversion, held in trust is a mere circumstantial evidence of
quality; and the money from the complainants for the diversion or denial is to the injury of another; and misappropriation.
c. Damage or prejudice is caused to particular purpose of investing the same with (4) that there be demand for the return of the
another. the Philtrust Investment Corp. with the property. In other words, the demand for the return of the
obligation to make delivery thereof upon thing delivered in trust and the failure of the
Illustration: Where the accused is bound by demand but failed to return the same despite Anent the first element, when "the money, goods, accused to account for it are circumstantial
virtue of a contract of sale, payment having demands. It was admitted that she used the or any other personal property is received by the evidence of misappropriation.
been received to deliver first class of rice (e.g. money for her business. Accused is guilty of offender from the offended party (1) in trust or
milagrosa) but delivered an inferior kind, or estafa through misappropriation. (Fontanilla (2) on commission or (3) for administration, the However, this presumption is rebuttable. If the
that he bound himself to deliver 1000 sacks v. People, G.R. No. 120949, 05 July 1996) offender acquires both material or physical accused is able to satisfactorily explain his failure
but delivered less than 1000 because the (2015 BAR) possession and juridical possession of the thing to produce the thing delivered in trust, he may
other sacks were filled with different received." not be held liable for estafa. In the case at bar,
materials, he is guilty of estafa with A money market transaction, however, however, since the medical representative failed
unfaithfulness or abuse of confidence by partakes the nature of a loan, and non- The Court, however, finds that BB only had to explain his inability to produce the thing
altering the quantity or quality of anything of payment thereof would not give rise to material possession, and not juridical possession, delivered to him in trust, the rule that “the failure
value by virtue of an obligation to do so. criminal liability for estafa through of the goods delivered to her for sale in Appliance to account, upon demand, for funds or property
misappropriation or conversion. In money Shop XYZ-Katipunan. held in trust is circumstantial evidence of
2. Under par. (b): market placements, the unpaid investor misappropriation” applies without doubt.
should institute against the middleman or Juridical possession means a possession which (Filadams Pharma, Inc. v. CA, G.R. No. 132422, 30
a. Money, goods, or other personal dealer, before the ordinary courts, a simple gives the transferee a right over the thing which Mar. 2004)
property is received by the offender in action for recovery of the amount he had the transferee may set up even against the owner.
trust, or on commission, or for invested, and if there is allegation of fraud, (Zenaida Layson Vda. De Manjares v. People, G.R. Q: D’Aigle posits that Art. 315(1)(b) of the RPC
administration, or under any other the proper forum would be the SEC. No. 207249, 14 May 2021, J. Caguioa) requires that the person charged was given
obligation involving the duty to make (Sesbreno v. CA, G.R. No. 84096, 26 Jan. 1995) juridical possession of the thing
delivery of, or to return, the same; 3. Under par. (c): misappropriated.
Q: AA and BB were initially engaged in the
NOTE: The obligation to return or business of buying-and-selling of appliances. a. The paper with the signature of the Here, he did not acquire juridical possession
deliver the thing must be contractual Because AA had become a regular customer, offended party is in blank; of the things allegedly misappropriated
without transferring to the accused the she and BB had an agreement that her store b. Offended party delivered it to the because his relation to SPIs properties was
ownership of the thing received. would be used to establish Appliance Shop offender; only by virtue of his official functions as a
Otherwise, his failure to return it will XYZ-Katipunan and that AA would be its c. Above the signature of the offended corporate officer. It is actually SPI, on whose
give rise to civil liability only. (Reyes, branch manager. When BB visited Appliance party, a document is written by the behalf he has acted, that has the juridical
2021) Shop XYZ-Katipunan branch, he did not find offender without authority to do so; and possession of the said properties. Is the
any cash there. He grew suspicious, so he d. The document so written creates a D’Aigle correct?
b. There is misappropriation or conversion asked the auditor to conduct a preliminary liability of, or causes damage to, the
of such money or property by the audit. The preliminary audit revealed a offended party or any third person. A: NO. Misappropriation or conversion may be
offender, or denial on his part of such shortage of around P65,000.00 per month of proved by the prosecution by direct evidence or
receipt; operation. Is BB liable for Estafa? Q: Is the accused’s mere failure to turn over by circumstantial evidence. The failure to account
the thing delivered to him in trust despite upon demand, for funds or property held in trust,
c. Such misappropriation or conversion or A: NO. The elements of estafa through conversion demand and the duty to do so, constitutes is circumstantial evidence of misappropriation.
denial is to the prejudice of another; and or misappropriation, punished under Art. 315 estafa under Art. 315(1)(b)?
(1)(b) of the RPC are: (1) that personal property

As mentioned, D’Aigle failed to account for, upon credit, agency, business or imaginary Application of Art. 315 (2)(d) defense?
demand, the properties of SPI which were transactions; or
received by him in trust. This already constitutes c. By means of other similar deceits. Art. 315 (2) (d) applies when: A: NO. In the case of People v. Isleta, et.al. and
circumstantial evidence of misappropriation or 1. Check is drawn to enter into an obligation reiterated in the case of Zalgado v. CA, it was held
conversion of said properties to petitioners own 2. Under par. (b) – Altering the quality, 2. Obligation is not pre-existing that the appellant, who only negotiated directly
personal use. (Andre D’Aigle v. People G.R. No. fineness, or weight of anything pertaining to and personally the check drawn by another, is
174181, 27 June 2012) his art or business. NOTE: The check must be genuine. If the check is guilty of estafa because he had “guilty knowledge
falsified and is encashed with the bank or that at the time he negotiated the check, the
Q: Aurelia introduced Rosa to Victoria, a 3. Under par. (c) – Pretending to have bribed exchanged for cash, the crime is estafa thru drawer has no sufficient funds.” (Garcia v. People,
dealer of jewelry. Rosa agreed to sell a any government employee, without falsification of a commercial document. G.R. No. 144785, 11 Sept. 2003)
diamond ring and a bracelet to Victoria on a prejudice to the action for calumny which the
commission basis, on the condition that, if the offended party may deem proper to bring Illustration: The accused must be able to obtain Elements of Estafa through Fraudulent Means
items cannot be sold, they may be returned to against the offender. (2014 BAR) something from the offended party by means of under Art. 315 (3)
Victoria forthwith. the check he issued and delivered. Thus, if A
4. Under par. (d) – postdating a check or issued a check in favor of B for a debt he has 1. Under par.(a) –
Unable to sell the ring and the bracelet, Rosa issuing a check in payment of an obligation. incurred a month or so ago, the dishonor of the a. Offender induced the offended party to
delivered both items to Aurelia with the (2014 BAR) check for insufficiency of funds in the bank does sign a document;
understanding that Aurelia should, in turn, not constitute Estafa. b. Deceit was employed to make him sign
return the items to Victoria. Aurelia dutifully 5. Under par. (e) – the document;
returned the bracelet to Victoria but sold the a. By obtaining any food, refreshment or But if A told B to deliver to him P10,000 and he c. Offended party personally signed the
ring, kept the cash proceeds thereof to accommodation at a hotel, inn, would issue in favor of B a check in the sum of document; and
herself, and issued a check to Victoria which restaurant, boarding house, lodging P11,000 as it was a Sunday and A needed the cash d. Prejudice was caused.
bounced. house or apartment house without urgently, and B gave his P10,000 having in mind
paying thereof, with intent to defraud the profit of P1,000 when he encashed the check Illustration: A induced an illiterate owner
Victoria sued Rosa for estafa under Art. 315 of the proprietor or the manager thereof; on Monday and the check bounced when who was desirous of mortgaging his property
the RPC, insisting that delivery to a third deposited, A can be held liable for Estafa. In such for a certain amount, to sign a document
person of the thing held in trust is not a b. By obtaining credit at any of said case, it was clear that B would have not parted which he believed was only a power of
defense in estafa. Is Rosa criminally liable for establishments using any false with his P10,000 were it not for the issuance of attorney but in truth it was a deed of sale. A
estafa under the circumstances? (1999 BAR) pretense; or A’s check. is guilty of Estafa under par. 3(a) and the
damage could consist at least in the
A: NO. Rosa cannot be held criminally liable for c. By abandoning or surreptitiously Good Faith as a Defense disturbance in property rights. (U.S. v.
estafa. Although she received the jewelry from removing any part of his baggage from Malong, GR. No. L-12597, 30 Aug. 1917)
Victoria under an obligation to return the same or any of said establishments after The payee’s knowledge that the drawer has no
deliver the proceeds thereof, she did not obtaining credit, food, refreshment or sufficient funds to cover the postdated checks at 2. Under par. (b) – Resorting to some
misappropriate it. In fact, she gave them to accommodation therein, without the time of their issuance negates estafa. fraudulent practice to insure success in a
Aurelia specifically to be returned to Victoria. The paying thereof. gambling game;
misappropriation was done by Aurelia, and Effect of Failure to Comply with a Demand to
absent the showing of any conspiracy between Elements of Estafa under Art. 315(2)(d) Settle the Obligation 3. Under par. (c) –
Aurelia and Rosa, the latter cannot be held a. Offender removed, concealed, or
criminally liable for Aurelia's acts. 1. The postdating or issuance of a check in The effect of failure to comply with a demand to destroyed;
payment of an obligation contracted at the settle the obligation will give rise to a prima b. Any court record, office files,
Elements of Estafa by means of False time the check was issued; facie evidence of deceit, which is an element of documents or any other papers; and
Pretenses or Fraudulent Acts under Art. 315 2. Lack of sufficiency of funds to cover the the crime of estafa, constituting false pretense or c. With intent to defraud another.
(2) check; and fraudulent act as stated in the second sentence of
3. Damage to the payee. (People v. Montaner, paragraph 2(d), Art. 315 of the RPC. (People v. Illustration: When a lawyer, pretending to
1. Under par. (a) – G.R. No. 184053, 31 Aug. 2011) Montaner, supra) verify a certain pleading in a case pending
a. Using fictitious name; before a court, borrows the folder of the case
b. Falsely pretending to possess power, Q: Can the fact that the accused was not the and removes or destroys a document which
influence, qualifications, property, actual maker of the check be put up as a

constitutes evidence in the said case, said Novation Theory Q: Reynaldo and Adrandea were authorized to or by the novation of the contract. Nevertheless,
lawyer is guilty of estafa under par. 3(c). extend credit accommodation to clients up to in cases involving the type of estafa under Art.
It contemplates a situation wherein the victim’s P200,000. However, Metrobank’s client, 315, paragraph 1 (b), where there is an
Q: What does fraud and deceit in the crime of acceptance of payment converts the offender’s Universal Converter Philippines, Inc., was underlying contractual relationship or bilateral
estafa mean? criminal liability to a civil obligation. It applies able to make withdrawals totaling agreement between the parties which they can
only if there is a contractual relationship between P81,652,000 against uncleared regional modify or alter, novation may serve to either
A: In Alcantara v. CA, the Court, citing People v. the accused and the complainant. checks. Such withdrawals were without prior prevent the rise of criminal liability, or to cast
Balasa, explained the meaning of fraud and approval of Metrobank’s head office. doubt on the true nature of the original basic
deceit, viz.: Payment of an Obligation Before the transaction. The prevention of the rise of criminal
Institution of the Complaint Subsequently, Metrobank and Universal liability happens when there is novation before
Fraud in its general sense is deemed to comprise entered into a Debt Settlement Agreement an Information is filed in court.
anything calculated to deceive, including all acts, Payment of an obligation before the institution of whereby the latter acknowledged its
omissions, and concealment involving a breach of the complaint does not relieve the offender from indebtedness to the former in the total Here, Nelly and Sorongon entered into an
legal or equitable duty, trust, or confidence justly liability. Mere payment of an obligation before amount of P50,990,976. Will the Debt amicable settlement before the former’s filing of
reposed, resulting in damage to another, or by the institution of a criminal complaint does not, Settlement extinguish the criminal liability Information for estafa against the latter. There,
which an undue and unconscientious advantage on its own, constitute novation that may prevent for estafa? the parties agreed that they would desist from
is taken of another. criminal liability. filing countercharges in the future. Hence,
A: NO. Novation is not a mode of extinguishing Sorongon should not be held liable for estafa.
It is a generic term embracing all multifarious The criminal liability for estafa already criminal liability for estafa. The criminal liability (Sorongon v. People, G.R. No. 230669, 16 June 2021,
means which human ingenuity can device, and committed is not affected by the subsequent therefor is not affected by a compromise or J. Caguioa)
which are resorted to by one individual to secure novation of contract, for it is a public offense novation of contract. Reimbursement or belated
an advantage over another by false suggestions which must be prosecuted and punished by the payment to the offended party of the money Robbery vs. Theft vs. Estafa
or by suppression of truth and includes all State. (Milla v. People, G.R. No. 188726, 25 Jan. swindled by the accused does not extinguish the
surprise, trick, cunning, dissembling and any 2012) criminal liability of the latter. (Metropolitan Bank
ROBBERY THEFT ESTAFA
unfair way by which another is cheated. and Trust Company v. Rogelio Reynado and Jose
Effect of Novation or Compromise to the Adrandea, GR. No. 164538, 09 Aug. 2010) Only
Only personal Subject
Deceit is the false representation of a matter of Criminal Liability of a Person Accused of personal
property is matter may be
fact whether by words or conduct, by false or Estafa Q: In March 2005, Nelly and Sorongon entered property is
involved real property
misleading allegations, or by concealment of that into an amicable settlement over the latter’s involved
which should have been disclosed which deceives Novation or compromise does not affect the unpaid accounts to the former. The Taking is by Taking is not Taking is not
or is intended to deceive another so that he shall criminal liability of the offender. So, partial settlement provided that the parties agreed means of by means of by means of
act upon it to his legal injury. (Lateo y Eleazar v. payment or extension of time to pay the amount that there will be no countercharges related force force upon force upon
People, G.R. No. 161651, 08 June 2011) misappropriated or acceptance of a promissory to the case to be filed in the future. Nelly also upon things things or things or
note for payment of the amount involved does not agreed to waive her ownership of the or violence violence violence
Demand as a Condition Precedent to the extinguish criminal liability, because a criminal properties subject of their dispute in favor of against or against or against or
Existence of Estafa offense is committed against the people and the Sorongon, one of these properties being a intimidation intimidation intimidation
offended party may not waive or extinguish the cement mixer that was allegedly borrowed by of persons. of persons. of persons.
GR: There must be a formal demand on the criminal liability that the law imposes for the Sorongon from Nelly. Penalty does
offender to comply with his obligation before he commission of the offense. not Penalty Penalty
can be charged with estafa. In January 2006, Nelly filed a complaint for necessarily depends on depends on
In order that novation of contract may relieve the estafa against Sorongon after the latter failed depend on the amount the amount
XPNs: accused of criminal liability, the novation must to return the cement mixer despite demand. the amount involved. involved.
1. When the offender’s obligation to comply is take place before the criminal liability is incurred; Sorongon invoked the amicable settlement to involved.
subject to a period; and criminal liability for estafa is not affected by negate his liability. Is Sorongon correct? Offender Offender
2. When the accused cannot be located despite compromise or novation of contact for it is a takes the takes the
Offender
due diligence. public offense which must be prosecuted and A: YES. The general rule is that criminal liability property property
receives the
punished by the State at its own volition. for estafa is not affected by payment, without the without the
property.
indemnification, reimbursement of or consent of consent of the
compromise as to the amounts misappropriated, the owner by owner and

using threats, without using Estafa with Abuse of Confidence vs. estafa under Art. 315(2)(a) of the RPC. We OTHER FORMS OF SWINDLING
intimidation threats, Malversation explicated in People v. Cortez and Yabut that: In ART. 316, RPC
or violence. intimidation this jurisdiction, it is settled that the offense of
or violence. ESTAFA WITH illegal recruitment is malum prohibitum where Other Forms of Swindling
ABUSE OF MALVERSATION the criminal intent of the accused is not necessary
NOTE: The crime is theft even if the property was CONFIDENCE for conviction, while estafa is malum in se where 1. Conveying, selling, encumbering, or
delivered to the offender by the owner or Funds or property are Involves public funds the criminal intent of the accused is crucial for mortgaging any real property, pretending to
possessor, if the latter expects an immediate always private or property conviction. Conviction for offenses under the be the owner of the same.
return of the property delivered, that is, he Offender is a private Labor Code does not bar conviction for offenses
delivered only the physical or material individual or even a Offender is usually a punishable by other laws. Conversely, conviction Elements:
possession of the property. (U.S. v. De Vera, G.R. public officer who is public officer who is for estafa under Art. 315(2)(a) of the RPC does a. Thing be immovable;
No. 16961, 19 Sept. 1921) not accountable for accountable for public not bar a conviction for illegal recruitment under b. Offender who is not the owner of said
public funds or funds or property the Labor Code. It follows that one’s acquittal of property should represent that he is the
However, if what was delivered was juridical property the crime of estafa will not necessarily result in owner thereof;
possession of the property, that is, a situation his acquittal of the crime of illegal recruitment in c. Offender should have executed an act of
Crime is committed by
where the person to whom it was delivered can large scale, and vice versa. (People v. Ochoa, G.R. ownership (selling, leasing,
appropriating, taking
set off his right to possess even as against the No. 173792, 31 Aug. 2011; 2015 BAR) encumbering or mortgaging the real
Crime is committed by or misappropriating or
owner, and the latter should not be expecting the property); and
misappropriating, consenting, or,
immediate return of the property, the Q: In providing the penalty, may the Court d. Act is made to the prejudice of the
converting or denying through abandonment
misappropriation or taking of that property is validly provide penalties for crimes against owner or of a third person.
having received or negligence,
estafa. (U.S. v. Figueroa, G.R. No. 6748, 16 Mar. property based on the current inflation rate
money, goods or other permitting any other
1912) computing from the time the case was filed? NOTE: There must be existing real property
personal property person to take the
in order to be liable under this Article. If the
public funds or
Q: A, intending to redeem certain jewels, gave A: NO. There seems to be a perceived injustice real property is inexistent, the offender will
property
the pawnshop tickets to B, her servant, so that brought about by the range of penalties that the be liable for estafa under par. 2(a).
Offenders are entrusted with funds or property
the latter might take care of them courts continue to impose on crimes against
Continuing offenses
temporarily. property committed today, based on the amount 2. Disposing real property knowing it to be
of damage measured by the value of money eighty encumbered even if the encumbrance be not
Estafa through false pretense made in writing is (80) years ago in 1932. However, this Court
One week later, B met C who got the tickets recorded. (1998 BAR)
only a simple crime of estafa, not a complex crime cannot modify the said range of penalties because
and refused to return them alleging that the
of estafa through falsification. that would constitute judicial legislation. Elements:
tickets were of no value notwithstanding the
a. That the thing disposed of is real
demands made by B. Later, C redeemed the
Estafa vs. Infidelity in the Custody of Verily, the primordial duty of the Court is merely property;
jewels without the knowledge and consent of
Document to apply the law in such a way that it shall not
A or B. What crime did C commit?
usurp legislative powers by judicial legislation NOTE: If the thing encumbered is a
INFIDELITY IN THE and that in the course of such application or personal property, it is Art. 319 (selling
A: Complex crime of theft and estafa, because
ESTAFA CUSTODY OF construction, it should not make or supervise or pledging personal property) which
the former is a necessary means to commit the
DOCUMENTS legislation, or under the guise of interpretation, governs and not this Article.
latter. C, with intent to gain, took the pawnshop
tickets without the consent of either A or B. This Private individual modify, revise, amend, distort, remodel, or
Public officer entrusted
is theft. By redeeming the jewels by means of the was entrusted with rewrite the law, or give the law a construction b. Offender knew that the real property
with the document.
the document. which is repugnant to its terms. (Corpuz v. People, was encumbered, whether the
pawnshop tickets, he committed estafa using a
fictitious name. (People v. Yusay, G.R. No. L-26957, Intent to defraud. No intent to defraud. G.R. No. 180016, 29 Apr. 2014) encumbrance is recorded or not;
02 Sept. 1927)
Separate Charges of Estafa and Illegal NOTE: Encumbrance includes every
Recruitment right or interest in the land which exists
in favor of third persons
It is settled that a person may be charged and
convicted separately of illegal recruitment under c. There must be express representation
R.A. No. 8042, in relation to the Labor Code, and by the offender that the real property is
free from encumbrance; and

d. Act of disposing of the real property be Elements: 3. Consideration is some loan of money, credit investment and unpaid interest income would
made to the damage of another. a. Offender is a surety in a bond given in a or other personal property; and be released to her. Unfortunately, she was
criminal or civil action; 4. Transaction is to the detriment of such unable to recover it. Demands were made to
NOTE: If the loan had already been granted b. He guaranteed the fulfillment of such minor. Osorio, but these remained unheeded. Osorio
before the property was offered as a security, obligation with his real property or was charged with estafa under Art. 315(2)(e).
Art. 316 (2) is not violated. properties; Actual Proof of Deceit or Misrepresentation, Is Osorio guilty of estafa under Art. 315(2)(e)?
c. He sells, mortgages, or, in any other NOT Necessary
3. Wrongful taking of personal property from manner encumbers said real property; A: NO. Osorio is not guilty of estafa under Art.
its lawful possessor to the prejudice of the and It is not essential that there is actual proof of 315(2)(e), but is guilty of other deceits under Art.
latter or a third person; d. Such sale, mortgage or encumbrance is deceit or misrepresentation. It is sufficient that 318 of the RPC. Art. 318 of the RPC is broad in
without express authority from the the offender takes advantage of the inexperience application. It is intended as a catch-all provision
Elements: court, or made before the cancellation or emotions of the minor. to cover all other kinds of deceit not falling under
a. Offender is the owner of personal of his bond, or before being relieved Arts. 315, 316, and 317 of the RPC.
property; from the obligation contracted by him. OTHER DECEITS
b. Said personal property is in the lawful ART. 318, RPC Osorio, in soliciting Gabriel’s money, falsely
possession of another; NOTE: Art. 316 contemplates the existence of represented that it would be invested in Philam
c. Offender wrongfully takes it from its actual damage as an element of the offense. Mere Other Kinds of Deceit under Art. 318 (2000 Life and that its proceeds would be used to pay
lawful possessor; and intent to cause damage is not sufficient. BAR) for Gabriel's insurance premiums. This false
d. Prejudice is thereby caused to the representation is what induced Gabriel to part
possessor or third person. Art. 316 (1) vs. Art. 315 par. 2 (a) 1. Defrauding or damaging another by any with her funds and disregard the payment of her
other deceit not mentioned in the preceding insurance premiums.
4. Executing any fictitious contract to the ART. 316 (1) ART. 315(2)(A) articles; and
prejudice of another; Refers only to real Covers real and Since Osorio deviated from what was originally
property personal property 2. Interpreting dreams, making forecasts, agreed upon by placing the investment in another
5. Accepting any compensation given to him The offender exercises telling fortunes, or taking advantage of the company, Gabriel's insurance policies lapsed.
under the belief it was in payment of services or executes, as part of It is broader because credulity of the public in any other similar Osorio must be criminally liable for
or labor when he did not actually perform the false it can be committed manner, for profit or gain. misrepresenting to Gabriel that the latter's
such services or labor; and representation, some even if the offender money would be invested in Philam Life Fund
act of dominion or does not execute NOTE: Deceits in this article include false Management and that its proceeds may be
NOTE: This Article requires fraud as an ownership over the acts of ownership, as pretenses and fraudulent acts. utilized to pay for Gabriel's insurance premiums.
important element. If there is no fraud, it property to the damage long as there was a (Osorio v. People, G.R. No. 207711, 02 July 2018)
becomes payment not owing, known as and prejudice of the false pretense Q: Osorio, an agent of Philam Life, offered
solutio indebiti under the Civil Code with the real owner of the thing Gabriel insurance policy. During the meeting, CHAPTER 7: CHATTEL MORTGAGE
civil obligation to return the wrong payment. Osorio presented her ID and calling card.
(Reyes, 2017) SWINDLING A MINOR Gabriel accepted and consistently paid her REMOVAL, SALE OR PLEDGE OF
ART. 317, RPC premiums. Later on, Gabriel received a letter MORTGAGED PROPERTY
It would seem that what constitutes estafa from PMIAM thanking her for investing her ART. 319, RPC
under this paragraph is the malicious failure money with PMIAM.
Elements of Swindling a Minor
to return the compensation wrongfully
received. (Reyes, 2017) NOTE: R.A. No. 11057, otherwise known as the
1. Offender takes advantage of the inexperience Gabriel confronted Osorio on why her
Personal Property Security Act (“PPSA”), which
or emotions or feelings of a minor; investment was diverted to PMIAM. Osorio
6. Selling, mortgaging, or in any manner took effect on Feb. 9, 2019, expressly repealed
2. He induces such minor to assume an explained that PMIAM investments would Secs. 1 to 16 of the Chattel Mortgage Law.
encumbering real property while being a yield a higher rate of return. Displeased,
obligation, or to give release, or to execute a
surety in bond without express authority Gabriel asked for a refund of her initial
transfer of any property right; Punishable Acts
from the court or before being relieved from investment. Consequently, Gabriel received
the obligation. P13,000.00 from PMIAM. In spite of this,
NOTE: Real property is not included because 1. Knowingly removing any personal property
it cannot be made to disappear, since a minor Gabriel insisted on the refund.
mortgaged under the Chattel Mortgage Law
cannot convey real property without judicial to any province or city other than the one in
authority. PMIAM informed Gabriel that her initial
which it was located at the time of execution

of the mortgage, without the written consent Chattel Mortgage vs. Estafa b. Any building of public or private materials.
of the mortgagee or his executors, ownership, devoted to the public in
administrators, or assigns. CHATTEL ESTAFA general, or where people usually gather NOTE: If there was intent to kill, the crime
MORTGAGE ART. 316, RPC or congregate for a definite purpose such committed is not arson but murder by means of
Elements: As to Property Involved as, but not limited to official fire.
a. Personal property is mortgaged under The property The property governmental function or business,
the Chattel Mortgage Law; involved is a personal involved is a real private transaction, commerce, trade Destructive Arson vs. Simple Arson under P.D.
b. Offender knows that such property is so property. property. workshop, meetings and conferences, or 1613
mortgaged; As to Commission merely incidental to a definite purpose
c. Offender removes such mortgaged Selling or pledging of such as but not limited to hotels, motels, The nature of Destructive Arson is distinguished
personal property to any province or personal property transient dwellings, public conveyance from Simple Arson by the degree of perversity or
city other than the one in which it was already pledged or or stops or terminals, regardless of viciousness of the criminal offender.
located at the time of the execution of It is sufficient that the whether the offender had knowledge
mortgaged is
the mortgage; real property that there are persons in said building or Special Aggravating Circumstances in Arson
committed by the
d. Removal is permanent; and mortgaged be sold as edifice at the time it is set on fire and
mere failure to obtain
e. There is no written consent of the free, even though the regardless also of whether the building is 1. If committed with intent to gain;
the consent of the
mortgagee or his executors, vendor may have actually inhabited or not; (1994 BAR) 2. If committed for the benefit of another;
mortgagee in writing
administrators or assigns to such obtained the consent 3. If the offender be motivated by spite or
even if the offender
removal. of the mortgagee in c. Any train or locomotive, ship or vessel, hatred towards the owner; or
should inform the
writing. airship or airplane, devoted to 4. If committed by a syndicate.
purchaser that the
NOTE: Any person can be the offender. thing sold is transportation or conveyance, or for
mortgaged. public use, entertainment or leisure; NOTE: The slightest discoloration of a part of a
2. Selling or pledging personal property already As to Purpose building is consummated arson. But when a
pledged, or any part thereof, under the terms To protect the d. Any building, factory, warehouse person who intends to burn a structure by
of the Chattel Mortgage Law, without the To protect the installation and any appurtenances collecting and placing rags soaked in a gasoline
purchaser, whether
consent of the mortgagee written on the back mortgagee. thereto, which are devoted to the service and placed them near the wall of the building but
the first or the second.
of the mortgage and noted on the record of public utilities; or who was discovered as he was about to set fire to
thereof in the office of the register of deeds of the rags is liable for attempted arson.
CHAPTER 8: ARSON AND OTHER CRIMES
the province where such property is located. e. Any building the burning of which is for
INVOLVING DESTRUCTIONS
the purpose of concealing or destroying CHAPTER 9: MALICIOUS MISCHIEF
Elements: evidence of another violation of law, or
a. Personal property is already pledged NOTE: The laws on arson in force today are P.D. for the purpose of concealing
1613 on Simple Arson, and Art. 320, as amended MALICIOUS MISCHIEF
under the terms of the Chattel Mortgage bankruptcy or defrauding creditors or to
by R.A. No. 7659 on Destructive Arson. (Reyes, ART. 327, RPC
Law; collect from insurance. (1995 BAR)
b. Offender, who is the mortgagor of such 2017) 2. Two or more persons or by a group of
property, sells, or pledges the same or persons, regardless of whether their purpose Malicious Mischief
any part thereof; and DESTRUCTIVE ARSON is merely to burn or destroy the building or
c. There is no consent of the mortgagee ART. 320, RPC, as amended by R.A. 7659 the burning merely constitutes an overt act in The willful damaging of another’s property by
written on the back of the mortgage and the commission of another violation of law. any act not constituting arson or crimes of
noted on the record thereof in the office Commission of Destructive Arson destruction due to hate, revenge, or mere
of the register of deeds. 3. Any person who shall burn: pleasure of destroying.
1. Any person who shall burn: (2000 BAR)
NOTE: Chattel mortgage must be valid and a. Any arsenal, shipyard, storehouse or Elements of Malicious Mischief
subsisting. Removal of the mortgaged a. One or more buildings or edifices, military powder or fireworks factory,
personal property must be coupled with consequent to one single act of burning, ordinance, storehouse, archives or 1. Offender deliberately caused damage to the
intent to defraud. or as a result of simultaneous burnings, general museum of the Government. property of another;
or committed on several or different 2. Such act does not constitute arson or other
occasions; b. In an inhabited place, any storehouse or crimes involving destruction; and
factory of inflammable or explosive

3. Act of damaging another’s property be was not justified in summarily and extra- telegraph, or telephone lines. possession of another; and
committed merely for the sake of damaging judicially demolishing Julita’s nipa hut. As it is,
it. Mario proceeded, not so much to safeguard the When is the Crime Qualified 3. Brothers and sisters and brothers-in-law and
lot, as it is to vent out his anger and express his sisters-in-law, if living together.
Q: There was a collision between the side view disgust over the “no trespassing” sign he placed This crime would be qualified if the damage
mirrors of two (2) vehicles. Immediately thereon. Indeed, his act of summarily results in any derailment of cars, collision, or NOTE: The exemption does not apply to
thereafter, the wife and the daughter of A demolishing the house smacks of his pleasure in other accident. strangers participating in the commission of the
alighted from the CRV and confronted B. A, in causing damage to it. (Valeroso v. People, G.R. No. offense.
view of the hostile attitude of B, summoned 149718, 29 Sept. 2003) DESTROYING OR DAMAGING STATUES,
his wife and daughter to enter the CRV and Reason for Exemption
PUBLIC MONUMENTS OR PAINTINGS
while they were in the process of doing so, B
SPECIAL CASES OF MALICIOUS MISCHIEF OR ART. 331, RPC
moved and accelerated his Vitara backward The law recognizes the presumed co-ownership
QUALIFIED MALICIOUS MISCHIEF
as if to hit them. Was there malicious of the property between the offender and the
ART. 328, RPC Persons Liable
mischief? offended party.
Punishable Acts 1. Any person who shall destroy or damage
A: YES. The hitting of the back portion of the CRV Persons also Included in the Enumeration
statues or any other useful or ornamental
by B was clearly deliberate. The act of damaging
1. Causing damage to obstruct the performance public monuments;
the rear bumper of the CRV does not constitute The stepfather, adopted children, natural
of public functions;
arson or other crimes involving children, concubine, paramour, and common-law
2. Using any poisonous or corrosive substance; 2. Any person who shall destroy or damage any
destruction. When the Vitara bumped the CRV, B spouses.
3. Spreading any infections among cattle; and useful or ornamental painting of a public
was venting out his anger and hate as a result of
4. Causing damage to the property of the nature.
a heated encounter between him and A.
National Museum or National Library, or to
(Taguinod v. People, G.R. No. 185833, 12 Oct.
any archive or registry, waterworks, road, CHAPTER 10: EXEMPTION FROM CRIMINAL
2011)
promenade, or any other thing used in LIABILITY IN CRIMES AGAINST PROPERTY
common by the public.
Q: Mario was hired by the PNB as caretaker of
its lot situated in Balanga, Bataan. PERSONS EXEMPT FROM CRIMINAL
NOTE: The cases of malicious mischief under this
Consequently, Mario put up on the said lot a LIABILITY IN CRIMES AGAINST PROPERTY
article are also called qualified malicious
sign which reads "No Trespassing, PNB ART. 332, RPC
mischief.
Property" to ward off squatters. Despite the
sign, Julita, believing that the said lot was Crimes involved in this Article
owned by her grandparents, constructed a OTHER MISCHIEFS
nipa hut thereon. Hence, Mario, together with ART. 329, RPC
1. Theft;
four others, tore down and demolished 2. Swindling (estafa); and
Julita's hut. Julita thus filed with the MTC a Q: The cows of B caused destruction to the
3. Malicious mischief.
criminal complaint for malicious mischief. plants of A. As an act of revenge, A and his
Mario admitted that he deliberately tenants killed said cows. What is the crime
If any of the crimes is complexed with another
demolished Julita's nipa hut but he contends committed?
crime, such as Estafa thru Falsification, Art. 332 is
that the third element of the crime of not applicable.
malicious mischief, i.e., that the act of A: The crime committed out of hate and revenge,
damaging another's property be committed is that of malicious mischief penalized by Art.
Persons Exempted under Art. 332, RPC (2000,
merely for the sake of damaging it, is not 329, RPC. 2008 BAR)
present in this case. He maintains that the
demolition of the nipa hut is for the purpose DAMAGE AND OBSTRUCTION TO 1. Spouses, ascendants and descendants, or
of safeguarding the interest of his employer. MEANS OF COMMUNICATION relatives by affinity in the same line;
Was the court correct in convicting Mario of ART. 330, RPC
malicious mischief? 2. The widowed spouse with respect to the
How Committed property which belonged to the deceased
A: YES, Mario’s conviction for malicious mischief spouse before the same passed into the
must be sustained. As to the third element, Mario It is committed by damaging any railway,

man. The sexual intercourse need not to be contracts with illegal consideration. (Reyes, 2021; Illustration: For the crime of concubinage by
J. CRIMES AGAINST CHASTITY proved by direct evidence. Circumstantial Arroyo, Jr. v. CA, G.R. No. 96602, 19 Nov. 1991) having sexual intercourse under a
ARTS. 333-346, RPC, TITLE XI evidence like seeing the married woman and her scandalous manner to exist, it must be done
paramour in scanty dress, sleeping together, CONCUBINAGE imprudently and wantonly as to offend
alone in a house, would suffice. ART. 334, RPC modesty and sense of morality and decency.
Thus, where the accused and his mistress
NOTE: Rape is no longer a crime against chastity.
Q: Is the acquittal of one of the defendants Punishable Acts under Concubinage lived in the same room of a house, comported
It has been re-classified under R.A. No. 8353 as a
operates as a cause of acquittal of the other? themselves as husband and wife publicly and
crime against persons.
1. Keeping a mistress in the conjugal dwelling. privately, giving the impression to everybody
A: NO, because of the following reasons: 2. Having sexual intercourse, under scandalous that they were married, and performed acts
Crimes which are considered as Private
circumstances, with a woman who is not his in sight of the community which gave rise to
Crimes (A-C-S-A-A)
1. There may not be a joint criminal intent, wife. criticism and general protest among
although there is joint physical act. One of the 3. Cohabiting with her in any other place. neighbors, they committed concubinage.
1. Adultery
parties may be insane and the other sane, in
2. Concubinage
which case, only the sane could be held liable Unlike in adultery where a single sexual c. Cohabiting with her in any other place.
3. Seduction
criminally. (Reyes, 2017) intercourse may constitute such a crime, in
4. Abduction
concubinage, a married man is liable only when Illustration: If the charge is cohabiting with
5. Acts of lasciviousness
2. The man may not know that the woman is he had sexual intercourse under scandalous a woman not his wife in any other place,
They cannot be prosecuted except upon the married, in which case, the man is innocent. circumstances. proof of actual sexual intercourse may not be
complaint initiated by the offended party. The necessary too. But the term “cohabit” means
law regards the privacy of the offended party 3. Death of the woman during the pendency of Elements of Concubinage (1994, 2002, 2010 intercourse together as husband or wife or
here as more important than the disturbance to the action cannot defeat the trial and BAR) living together as husband and wife. The
the order of society. The law gives the offended conviction of the man. cohabitation must be for some period of time
party the preference whether to sue or not to sue. 1. Man must be married; which may be a week, a year or longer as
But the moment the offended party has initiated 4. Even if the man had left the country and 2. He committed any of the following acts: distinguished from occasional or transient
the criminal complaint, the public prosecutor will could not be apprehended, the woman can be meetings for unlawful sexual intercourse.
take over and continue with prosecution of the tried and convicted. a. Keeping a mistress in the conjugal
offender. This is so because when the prosecution dwelling; 3. As regards the woman, she must know him to
starts, the crime already becomes public and it is Adultery vs. Prostitution be married.
beyond the offended party to pardon the Illustration: If the charges consist in keeping
offender. ADULTERY PROSTITUTION a mistress in the conjugal dwelling, there is Parties Included in the Complaint
It is a private It is a crime against no need of proof of sexual intercourse. The
offense. public morals. conjugal dwelling is the house of the spouses The complaint must include both parties if they
CHAPTER 1: ADULTERY AND CONCUBINAGE
Committed by a woman even if the wife happens to be temporarily are both alive. In case of pardon or when the
Committed by a
whether married or not, absent therefrom. The woman however must offended spouse consented, the same shall bar
ADULTERY married woman
who for money or be brought to the conjugal house by the the prosecution of the offenses, provided it be
ART. 333, RPC who shall have
profit, habitually accused as concubine to fall under this done before the institution or filing of the
sexual intercourse
indulges in sexual article. Thus, if the co-accused was criminal complaint.
Elements of Adultery (2002, 2008, 2015 BAR) with a man not her
intercourse or voluntarily taken and sheltered by the
husband.
lascivious conduct. spouses in their house, and treated as an Q: May a husband be liable for concubinage
1. That the woman is married; and adultery at the same time for the same act
adopted child being a relative of the
2. That she has sexual intercourse with a man Pari delicto is NOT a Defense of illicit intercourse with the wife of another
complaining wife, her illicit relations with the
not her husband. man?
accused husband does not make her a
3. As regards the man with whom she had Where the accused claims that her husband’s mistress.
sexual intercourse, he knows that she is extra-marital affair precludes him from filing a A: YES. When the husband commits concubinage
married. criminal complaint for adultery on the ground of with a married woman and provided that the two
b. Having sexual intercourse, under
pari delicto, the Court held that: The concept of scandalous circumstances, with a offended parties, i.e., his wife and the husband of
A single intercourse consummates the crime of pari delicto is not found in the RPC, but only in Art. his mistress file separate cases against him.
woman who is not his wife; or
adultery. Each sexual intercourse constitutes a 1411 of the Civil Code, the latter relating only to
crime of adultery, even if it involves the same

CHAPTER 2: RAPE AND ACTS OF Illustration: When the accused not only kissed offended party was a person of either sex. (XXX v. that his constitutional right to be informed of
LASCIVIOUSNESS and embraced the complainant but also fondled People, G.R. No. 243151, 02 Sept. 2019, J. Caguioa) the nature and cause of accusation against
her breast with particular design to him was violated. Rule on BBB’s contention.
independently derive vicarious pleasure Requirement in Order to Sustain Conviction
NOTE: Art. 335 of the RPC has been repealed by
therefrom, the element of lewd design exists. for Acts of Lasciviousness A: BBB’s contention is incorrect. Following the
R.A. No. 8353 (Anti-Rape Law of 1997). The new
If lewd design cannot be proven as where the doctrine of variance, even though the crime
provisions on Rape are found in Arts. 266-A to 266-
accused merely kissed and embraced the It is essential that the acts complained of be charged against petitioner is for Attempted Rape,
D of the RPC.
complainant either out of passion or other prompted by lust or lewd designs and that the he can be convicted of the crime of Acts of
motive, touching her breast as a mere incident, victim did not consent or encourage such acts. Lasciviousness under Art. 336 of the RPC without
Kinds of Acts of Lasciviousness
the act would be categorized as unjust vexation. violating his constitutional rights because the
(People v. Climaco, 46 O.G. 3186) Intent to Rape as an Element of the Crime latter is necessarily included in the crime of
1. Under Art. 336 (Acts of lasciviousness); and
Attempted Rape. (Valenzona v. People, G.R. No.
2. Under Art. 339 (Acts of lasciviousness with the
Offended Party under this Article Intent to rape is NOT a necessary element of the 203785, 20 Jan. 2021)
consent of the offended party)
crime of acts of lasciviousness; otherwise, the
The offended party may be a man or a woman: crime would be attempted rape. Q: An information was filed against XXX for
ACTS OF LASCIVIOUSNESS the rape of his daughter AAA, who was 10
ART. 336, RPC years old at the time, in 2003. During trial,
1. Under twelve (12) years of age; or NOTE: There can be no frustration of acts of
2. Being over twelve (12) years of age, the lasciviousness, rape, or adultery. From the AAA testified that in 2003, XXX forced her to
NOTE: See also discussion on Acts of lascivious acts were committed on him or her moment the offender performs all elements touch his private parts. After that, the act was
Lasciviousness in relation to Rape and R.A. No. through violence or intimidation, or while necessary for the existence of the felony, he cut short since her mother timely arrived. She
7610 under Title VIII: Crimes Against Persons – the offender party was deprived of reason, or actually attains his purpose and, from that added that in 2007, XXX again tried to rape
pages 302-310. otherwise unconscious. moment, all the essential elements of the offense her and succeeded in doing so. XXX admitted
have been accomplished. that he engaged in sexual intercourse with
Elements of Acts of Lasciviousness (A-P-C- Q: X was convicted for the crime of Acts of AAA in 2007, but claimed that it was
FDFU) Lasciviousness against AAA. He contests that Q: BBB is AAA’s Grade VI teacher. An consensual.
since the prosecution was not able to prove information was filed against BBB for
1. Offender commits any Act of lasciviousness the victim’s age, he is entitled to an acquittal. attempted rape, viz: “BBB, with deliberate The RTC convicted XXX of rape despite the
or lewdness; Is the argument tenable? intent, with lewd and prurient desires, laid on discrepancy of the dates, ruling that the exact
2. Act of lasciviousness is committed against a top of 11-year old AAA upon whom he date or time of the commission is not an
Person of either sex; and A: NO. To convict X of the crime of Acts of exercised moral ascendancy she being his element of the offense. The CA affirmed the
3. It is done under any of the following Lasciviousness under the RPC, the prosecution, in grade sixth pupil, after he pulled down her conviction. On appeal, XXX argues that he
Circumstances: turn, had to prove the following elements, to wit: underwear up to below her knee, and could not be convicted for a crime that
(1) that the offender commits any act of executed some pumping acts and motions happened in 2007, since the information
a. By using Force or intimidation; lasciviousness or lewdness; (2) that it is done: (a) with his male organ on her pubic area while at charged him for rape in 2003. Is XXX correct?
b. When the offended party is Deprived by using force and intimidation or (b) when the the same time embracing and kissing her, but
of reason or otherwise unconscious; offended party is deprived of reason or otherwise accused's male organ was not able to A: YES. XXX cannot be convicted through his
c. By means of Fraudulent machination unconscious, or (c) when the offended party is penetrate nor touch the labia of the admission that he had sexual intercourse with
or grave abuse of authority; or under 12 years of age; and (3) that the offended pudendum, accused performed overt acts but AAA in 2007. This is because the Information filed
d. When the offended party is Under 12 party is another person of either sex. The third did not perform all the acts of execution which in this case accused XXX of having sexual
years of age or is demented. element is immediately satisfied for the offended constitute the crime of rape due to the fact intercourse with AAA "sometime in July 2003."
party is, naturally, a person of either sex. that the victim's thighs remained close While it is true, as the RTC and the CA held, that
Under Art. 336, acts of lasciviousness is together thereby protecting her female organ, the exact place and time of the commission of the
committed when the act performed with lewd Despite failure to prove the victim’s age, the although accused ejaculated by reason of the crime is not an element of the crime of Rape, XXX
design was perpetrated under circumstances prosecution was able to prove all the elements of excitement at the moment. Contrary to law.” still could not be convicted of the crime for to do
which would have brought about the crime of the crime. The first element — that the offender so would be to offend the basic tenets of due
rape if sexual intercourse was effected. Where commits any act of lasciviousness or lewdness — When adjudged by the Court, the process in criminal prosecutions. XXX can only be
circumstances however are indicative of a clear was sufficiently proved by the testimony of AAA Court convicted BBB of Acts of convicted of the crime of Acts of Lasciviousness
intention to lie with the offended party, the crime as regards the incident complained of. The third Lasciviousness under Art. 336 of the RPC in for what transpired in 2003. (People v. XXX, G.R.
committed is Attempted Rape. element was, in turn, immediately satisfied as the relation to Sec. 5(b) of RA 7610. BBB insists No. 226467, 17 Oct. 2018, J. Caguioa)

Acts of Lasciviousness vs. Attempted Rape c. The above acts would result in an use of force. "The penalty next higher in degree shall be
intimidating, hostile, or offensive imposed upon any person who shall seduce his
ACTS OF environment for the employee. QUALIFIED SEDUCTION sister or descendant, whether or not she be a
ATTEMPTED RAPE virgin or over eighteen years of age.”
LASCIVIOUSNESS ART. 337, RPC
Purpose is only to 2. In an educational or training (Disclaimer: This law is not covered under the
Purpose is to lie with environment, sexual harassment is 2022 Bar Syllabus for Criminal Law)
commit acts of Acts that Constitute Qualified Seduction
the offended woman. committed:
lewdness.
1. Seduction of a virgin over twelve (12) years 2. Seduction of a sister by her brother, or
Lascivious acts are Lascivious acts are
a. Against one who is under the care, and under eighteen (18) years of age by descendant by her ascendant, regardless of
themselves the final but the preparatory
custody or supervision of the offender; certain persons, such as, a person in public her age or reputation. In this case, it is not
objective sought by acts to the
authority, priest, home servant, domestic, necessary that the offended party is still a
the offender. commission of rape.
b. Against one whose education, training, guardian, teacher, or any person who, in any virgin.
apprenticeship or tutorship is entrusted capacity shall be entrusted with the
Illustration: When the accused lifted the dress of
to the offender; education or custody of the woman seduced; Persons Liable for Qualified Seduction
the offended party, and placed himself on top of
her but the woman awoke and screamed for help
c. When the sexual favor is made a Elements: (2007 BAR) 1. Those who abused their authority:
and despite that, the accused persisted in his
condition to the giving of a passing grade, a. Offended party is a virgin which is a. Person in public authority;
purpose, tearing the drawers, kissing and
or the granting of honors and presumed if she is unmarried and of b. Guardian;
fondling her breasts, the crime is not only acts of
scholarships, or the payment of a good reputation; c. Teacher; or
lasciviousness but that of attempted rape.
stipend, allowance or other benefits, d. Person who, in any capacity, is
privileges, or considerations; or b. She is over 12 and under 18 years of entrusted with the education or
NOTE: Mere words can constitute sexual
age; custody of the woman seduced.
harassment unlike in acts of lasciviousness,
d. When the sexual advances result in an
where there must be overt acts.
intimidating, hostile or offensive c. Offender has sexual intercourse with NOTE: In the case of a teacher, it is not
environment for the student, trainee or her; necessary that the girl be his student. It is
Punishable Acts under the Anti-Sexual
apprentice. enough that she is enrolled in the same
Harassment Act (R.A. No. 7877)
d. There is abuse of authority, confidence, school.
NOTE: Any person who directs or induces or relationship on the part of the
1. In a work-related or employment 2. Those who abused the confidence reposed in
another to commit any act of sexual harassment offender; and
environment, sexual harassment is them:
as herein defined, or who cooperates in the
committed when: a. Priest;
commission thereof by another without which it e. Offender is a public officer, a domestic
would not have been committed, shall also be servant, priest, teacher, guardian, or b. Home servant; or
a. The sexual favor is made as a condition c. Domestic.
held liable under this Act. (Sec. 3, R.A. No. 7877) any person who has custody of the
in the hiring or in the employment, re-
woman seduced.
employment or continued employment 3. Those who abused their relationship:
Q: Will administrative sanctions bar
of said individual, or in granting said a. Brother who seduced his sister; or
prosecution of the offense? NOTE: The provision on Qualified Seduction has
individual favorable compensation, b. Ascendant who seduced his
been amended by R.A. No. 11648 which was
terms, conditions, promotions, or descendant.
A: NO. It shall not be a bar to prosecution in signed into law on March 4, 2022. Sec. 2, R.A. No.
privileges; or the refusal to grant the
proper courts for unlawful acts of sexual 11648 provides:
sexual favor results in limiting, NOTE: If the offended party is a descendant or a
harassment.
segregating or classifying the employee sister of the offender – no matter how old she is
“Article 337. Qualified seduction. – The seduction
which in a way would discriminate, or whether she is a prostitute – the crime of
CHAPTER 3: SEDUCTION, CORRUPTION OF of a minor, sixteen and over but under eighteen
deprive or diminish employment qualified seduction is committed.
MINORS AND WHITE SLAVE TRADE years of age, committed by any person in public
opportunities or otherwise adversely
affect said employee; authority, priest, home-servant, domestic,
guardian, teacher, or any person who, in any Virginity for Purposes of Qualified Seduction
Commission of Seduction
capacity, shall be entrusted with the education or
b. The above acts would impair the Virginity does not mean physical virginity. It
Seduction is committed by enticing a woman to custody of the minor seduced, shall be punished
employee’s rights or privileges under refers to a woman of chaste character or virtuous
unlawful sexual intercourse by promise of by prision correccional in its minimum and
existing labor laws; or woman of good reputation.
marriage or other means of persuasion without medium periods.

NOTE: Virginity is not to be understood in a 2. Acts are committed upon a Woman who is proposal would consummate the crime. But it 2. Consented abduction (Art 343, RPC)
material sense as to exclude the idea of abduction virgin or single or widow of good reputation, must be to satisfy the lust of another, not the
of a virtuous woman of a good reputation. Thus, under eighteen (18) years of age but over proponent’s. The victim must be below eighteen FORCIBLE ABDUCTION
when the accused claims he had prior sexual twelve (12) years, or a sister or descendant (18) years of age. ART. 342, RPC
intercourse with the complainant, the latter is regardless of her reputation or age; and
still to be considered a virgin. Doing Unchaste Acts are Unnecessary Elements of Forcible Abduction (W-A-L)
3. Offender accomplishes the acts by Abuse of
SIMPLE SEDUCTION authority, confidence, relationship, or deceit. It is NOT necessary that unchaste acts are done; 1. Person abducted is any Woman, regardless
ART. 338, RPC mere proposal consummates the offense. Victim of her age, civil status, or reputation;
Acts of Lasciviousness without Consent vs. must be of good reputation, not a prostitute or
Acts of Lasciviousness with Consent corrupted person.
Elements of Simple Seduction 2. Abduction is Against her will; and
ACTS OF ACTS OF
1. Offended party is over twelve (12) and WHITE SLAVE TRADE NOTE: If the female is below twelve (12)
LASCIVIOUSNESS LASCIVIOUSNESS ART. 341, RPC, as amended by B.P. 186
under eighteen (18) years of age; years of age, there need not be any force or
WITHOUT WITH
2. She must be of good reputation, single or intimidation to constitute Forcible
CONSENT CONSENT
widow; Punishable Acts Abduction. In fact, the abduction may be with
3. Offender has sexual intercourse with her; her consent and the reason is because she
The acts of
and 1. Engaging in the business of prostitution; has no will of her own, and therefore is
The acts are lasciviousness are
4. It is committed by means of deceit. 2. Profiting by prostitution; and incapable of giving consent.
committed under committed under the
3. Enlisting the service of any other for the
circumstances circumstances which,
NOTE: The provision on Qualified Seduction has purpose of prostitution. 3. Abduction is with Lewd designs
which, had there had there been carnal
been amended by R.A. No. 11648 which was
been carnal knowledge, would
signed into law on 04 March 2022. Sec. 2, R.A. No. NOTE: Mere enlisting of the services of women NOTE: Where lewd design was not proved or
knowledge, would amount to either
11648 provides: for the purpose of prostitution, whether the shown, and the victim was deprived of her
amount to rape. qualified seduction or
offender profits or not, is punishable. liberty, the crime is kidnapping with serious
simple seduction.
"Article 338. Simple seduction. – The seduction of illegal detention under Art. 267.
The offended party is The offended party
a minor, sixteen and over but under eighteen Corruption of Minors vs. White Slave Trade
a female or a male. could only be female.
years of age, committed by means of deceit, shall Illustration: If the accused carried or took
be punished by arresto mayor." (Disclaimer: If the offended party
The offended party away the victim by means of force and with
is a woman, she need CORRUPTION OF
This law is not covered under the 2022 Bar must be a virgin. WHITE SLAVE TRADE lewd design and thereafter raped her, the
not be a virgin. MINORS
Syllabus for Criminal Law) crime is forcible abduction with rape, the
It is essential that Minority need not be former being a necessary means to commit
The deceit usually takes the form of promise to CORRUPTION OF MINORS victims are minors. established. the latter. The subsequent two other sexual
marry. If the promise to marry is made after the ART. 340, RPC, as amended by B.P. 92 Not necessarily for intercourses committed against the will of
Generally for profit.
sexual intercourse, there is no deceit. Neither is profit. the complainant would be treated as two
there deceit if the promise is made by a married Persons Liable Committed by a Generally, committed separate counts of Rape. (People v. Bacalso,
man, the woman knowing him to be married. single act. habitually. G.R. No. 94531-32, 22 June 1992)
Any person who shall promote or facilitate the
NOTE: Virginity of the offended party is not prostitution or corruption of persons underage to CHAPTER 4: ABDUCTION Nature of the Crime of Forcible Abduction
required. satisfy the lust of another.
The act of the offender is violative of the
Abduction
ACTS OF LASCIVIOUSNESS WITH THE NOTE: Under the present wordings of the law, a individual liberty of the abducted, her honor and
CONSENT OF THE OFFENDED PARTY single act of promoting or facilitating the reputation, and of public order.
It is the taking away of a woman from her house
ART. 339, RPC corruption or prostitution of minor is sufficient to
or the place where she may be for the purpose of
constitute violation of this article. Sexual Intercourse is NOT Necessary
carrying her to another place with intent to marry
Elements (A-W-A) or to corrupt her. (People v. Crisostomo, 46 Phil.
Illustration: This is usually the act of a pimp who Sexual intercourse is not necessary in forcible
775, G.R. No. 19034, 17 Feb. 1923)
1. Offender commits Acts of lasciviousness or offers to pleasure seekers, women for the abduction, the intent to seduce a girl is sufficient.
lewdness; satisfaction of their lustful desires. A mere
1. Forcible abduction (Art. 342, RPC)

NOTE: Rape may absorb forcible abduction if the NOTE: The virginity mentioned in this Article CHAPTER 5: PROVISIONS RELATIVE TO THE PRECEDING CHAPTERS OF TITLE ELEVEN
main objective was to rape the victim. should not be understood in its material
sense and does not exclude the idea of
PROSECUTION OF THE CRIMES OF ADULTERY, CONCUBINAGE, SEDUCTION,
Crimes against Chastity where Age and abduction of a virtuous woman of good
ABDUCTION, RAPE, AND ACTS OF LASCIVIOUSNESS
Reputation of the Victim are Immaterial reputation because the essence of the offense
ART. 344, RPC
is not the wrong done to the woman but the
1. Rape; outrage to the family and the alarm produced
2. Acts of lasciviousness against the will or in it by the disappearance of one of its Adultery and Concubinage vs. Seduction, Abduction, and Acts of Lasciviousness
without the consent of the offended party; members. (Valdepeñas v. People, G.R. No. L-
3. Qualified seduction of a sister or descendant; 20687, April 30, 1966) SEDUCTION, ABDUCTION. AND
ADULTERY AND CONCUBINAGE
or ACTS OF LASCIVIOUSNESS
4. Forcible abduction. 2. She must be over twelve (12) and under Prosecution
eighteen (18) years of age; Must be prosecuted upon complaint signed by:
Q: AAA was about to enter the school campus 1. Offended party
with her friend when Cayanan, her brother- 3. Taking away of the offended party must be 2. Her parents
in-law, arrived on a tricycle and pulled AAA with her Consent, after solicitation or 3. Grandparents, or
towards the tricycle. She tried shouting but cajolery from the offender; and 4. Guardians in the order named above.
Cayanan covered her mouth. Cayanan Must be prosecuted upon complaint filed by the
brought AAA to a dress shop to change her 4. Taking away of the offended party must be GR: Offended party, even if a minor, has the right to
offended spouse. (1991 BAR)
clothes since she was in her school uniform, with Lewd designs. institute the prosecution for the above mentioned
and later to a Jollibee outlet. Afterwards, he offenses, independently of her parents,
Both the guilty parties, if alive, must be included in
brought her to his sister’s house and raped NOTE: In consented abduction, it is not necessary grandparents or guardian.
the complaint for adultery or concubinage.
her inside a bedroom. AAA told her mother that the young victim (a virgin over twelve (12)
and brother of the incident and she was and under eighteen (18)) be personally taken XPN: If she is incompetent or incapable of doing so
shown to be suffering from depressive from her parent’s home by the accused; it is upon grounds other than her minority.
symptoms and presence of sexual abuse. sufficient that she was instrumental in leaving the
house. The accused must however use NOTE: If the offended woman is of age, she should
Cayanan interposed the sweetheart defense solicitation, cajolery or deceit, or honeyed be the one to file the complaint.
and presented two love letters supposedly promises of marriage to induce the girl to escape Pardon
written by AAA. The RTC and CA convicted from her home. An express pardon by the offended party or other
Cayanan of Forcible Abduction with Qualified persons named in the law to the offender, as the
Rape. Is Cayanan guilty for the crime of Q: Kim, who is barely sixteen (16) years of age, case may be, bars prosecution.
forcible abduction with qualified rape? went home late one evening. Her mother
scolded her. Kim went out of their house and GR: Parent cannot validly grant pardon to the
Must be made by the offended party to both the
A: NO. Cayanan should only be liable for qualified went to the house of her boyfriend Tristan. offender without the express pardon of the
offenders
rape. Forcible abduction is absorbed in the crime The mother of Tristan tried her best to send offended party.
of rape if the real objective of the accused is to Kim home but the latter refused to do so. That
May be a bar to prosecution if made before the
rape the victim. In this case, circumstances show night, Kim slept in the room of Tristan and XPN: When she is dead or otherwise incapacitated
institution of the criminal action
that AAA’s abduction was with the purpose of they had sexual intercourse. The mother of to grant it, her parents, grandparents or guardian
raping her. (People v. Cayanan, G.R. No. 200080, 18 Kim filed a case of Consented Abduction may do so for her.
May be express or implied
July 2014) against Tristan. Will the charge prosper?
GR: Pardon by the offended party who is a minor
CONSENTED ABDUCTION A: NO. Kim was not taken away after solicitation must have the concurrence of the parents.
ART. 343, RPC or cajolery. Kim was the one who went to the
house of Tristan. XPN: When the offended girl has no parents who
Elements of Consented Abduction (2002 BAR) could concur in the pardon.
(V-12-C-L)
1. Offended party must be a Virgin;

Crimes under the RPC – Book 2 CRIMINAL LAW
the registration of the child with the Registry of
Parties who may File the Complaint where Civil Liability of the Adulterer and the K. CRIMES AGAINST THE CIVIL Births or that in so doing they were motivated by
Offended Minor Fails to File the Same Concubine STATUS OF PERSONS a desire to cause the loss of any trace as to the
ARTS. 347-352, RPC, TITLE XII child’s filiation to his prejudice.
1. Parents; To indemnify for damages caused to the offended
2. Grandparents; or spouse. When Substitution Takes Place
3. Guardian.
CHAPTER 1: SIMULATION OF BIRTHS AND Substitution takes place when X is born of A and
NOTE: No civil liability is incurred for acts of
USURPATION OF CIVIL STATUS B; Y is born of C and D; and the offender with
NOTE: The right to file the action granted to the lasciviousness.
parents, grandparents or guardian is exclusive intent to cause the loss of any trace of their
and successive in the order provided. LIABILITY OF ASCENDANTS, GUARDIANS, SIMULATION OF BIRTHS, SUBSTITUTION OF filiation, exchanges X and Y without the
TEACHERS OR OTHER PERSONS ONE CHILD FOR ANOTHER, AND knowledge of their respective parents.
Legal Effect of the Marriage of the Offender ENTRUSTED WITH THE CUSTODY CONCEALMENT OR ABANDONMENT
and the Offended Party OF THE OFFENDED PARTY OF A LEGITIMATE CHILD The substitution may be effected by placing a live
ART. 346, RPC ART. 347, RPC child of a woman in place of a dead one of another
Marriage of the offender with the offended party woman. (Reyes, 2017)
in seduction, abduction, acts of lasciviousness, Crimes Covered Punishable Acts (Si-Su-Co)
and rape extinguishes criminal action or remits Elements of the Third Way of Committing the
the penalty already imposed. 1. Simulation of births; Crime
1. Rape;
2. Acts of lasciviousness; 2. Substitution of one child for another; and
The extinguishment of criminal action by reason 3. Concealing or abandoning any legitimate 1. The child must be legitimate;
3. Qualified seduction;
of marriage of the offended party with the child with intent to cause such child to lose 2. The offender conceals or abandons such
4. Simple seduction;
offended in the crimes of seduction, abduction, its civil status. child; and
5. Acts of lasciviousness with the consent of the
and acts of lasciviousness shall extend to co- 3. The offender has the intent to cause the child
offended party;
principals, accomplices, and accessories. The commission of any of the acts defined in this to lose its civil status.
6. Corruption of minors;
However, in the case of rape, it is only the liability 7. White slave trade; Article must have, for its object, the creation of a
of the principal which will be extinguished. false civil status. The purpose is to cause the loss Abandoning a Minor vs. Simulation of Births,
8. Forcible abduction; and
of any trace as to the filiation of the child. (Reyes, Substitution of One Child for Another, and
9. Consented Abduction.
Rule on Extinction of Criminal Liability if the 2012) Concealment of a Legitimate Child
Rape was committed by the husband Liability of Ascendants, Guardians, Teachers
When Simulation of Birth Takes Place (2002 SIMULATION OF
or Other Persons Entrusted with the Custody
GR: The subsequent forgiveness of the wife BAR) BIRTHS,
of the Offended Party
extinguishes the criminal action against the SUBSTITUTION OF
ABANDONING A
husband. Simulation of birth takes place when the woman ONE CHILD FOR
Persons who cooperate as accomplices in the MINOR
pretends to be pregnant when in fact she is not, ANOTHER, AND
perpetration of the crimes covered are punished ART. 276, RPC
XPN: The crime shall not be extinguished if the and on the day of the supposed delivery, takes the CONCEALMENT OF A
as principals. They are:
marriage is void ab initio. child of another as her own. LEGITIMATE CHILD
ART. 347, RPC
1. Ascendants;
CIVIL LIABILITY OF PERSONS GUILTY OF 2. Guardians; The woman is liable together with the person Crime against Crime against the civil
CRIMES AGAINST CHASTITY 3. Curators; who furnishes the child. (Guevara, as cited in security status of a person
ART. 345, RPC 4. Teachers; or Reyes, 2008) The offender must be
The offender is any
5. Any other person who cooperates as the one who has the
NOTE: The fact that the child will be benefited by person
Civil Liability of Persons Guilty of Rape, accomplice with abuse of authority or custody of the child
Seduction or Abduction confidential relationship. simulation of birth is not a defense since it creates The purpose of the
a false status detriment of members of the family offender is to avoid The offender is to
1. To indemnify the offended woman; to which the child is introduced. the obligation of cause the child to lose
2. To acknowledge the offspring, unless the law rearing and caring its civil status
should prevent him from doing so; or In People v. Sangalang (74 O.G. 5983), it was ruled the child
3. In every case to support the offspring. that for the crime to exist, it must be shown that
the pretending parents have registered or caused

USURPATION OF CIVIL STATUS NOTE: The second husband or wife who knew of Generally, a Judicial Declaration of Nullity of bigamy. As long as a marriage is contracted
ART. 348, RPC the first marriage is an accomplice. The witness Marriage is Necessary during the subsistence of a valid first marriage
who falsely vouched for the capacity of either of the second marriage is automatically VOID, the
How Crime is Committed the contracting parties is also an accomplice. GR: A judicial declaration of nullity of a previous nullity of the second marriage is NOT a defense
(Reyes, 2008) marriage is necessary before a subsequent one for the avoidance of criminal liability. (Tenebro v.
It is committed when a person represents can be legally contracted. One who enters into a CA, G.R. No. 150758, 18 Feb. 2004)
himself to be another and assumes the filiation The second or subsequent marriage should be subsequent marriage without first obtaining such
or the parental or conjugal rights of such another valid were it not for the first marriage. Otherwise, judicial declaration is guilty of bigamy. This Q: Can a person convicted of Bigamy still be
person. There must be intent to enjoy the rights the charge of Bigamy will not materialize. (People principle applies even if the earlier union is prosecuted for concubinage?
arising from the civil status of another. v. Mendoza, G.R. No. L-5877, 28 Sept. 1954) characterized by statutes as "void." (Mercado v.
Tan, G.R. No. 137110, 01 Aug. 2000) A: YES, if he or she continues to cohabit with the
Inclusion in Civil Status Bigamy is NOT a Private Crime live-in partner for which he was accused and
XPN: Where no marriage ceremony at all was tried for Bigamy. (People v. Cabrera, G.R. No.
Civil status includes one’s public station or the In the crime of Bigamy, it is immaterial whether performed by a duly authorized solemnizing 17855, 04 Mar. 1922)
rights, duties, capacities, and incapacities which it is the first or the second wife who initiates the officer.
determine a person to a given class. action, for it is a public crime which can be NOTE: Bigamy is an offense against civil status
denounced not only by the person affected The mere private act of signing a marriage which may be prosecuted only at the instance of
Qualification of this Crime thereby but even by a civic-spirited citizen who contract bears no semblance to a valid marriage the State. Concubinage is an offense against
may come to know the same. (People v. Belen, C.A., and thus, needs no judicial declaration of nullity. chastity and may be prosecuted only at the
If the purpose is to defraud offended parties and 45 O.G., Supp. 5, 88) Such act alone, without more, cannot be deemed instance of the offended party. (Reyes, 2017)
heirs. to constitute an ostensibly valid marriage for
Bigamy vs. Illegal Marriage which petitioner might be held liable for bigamy. Commencement of Prescriptive Period
Illustration: Where a person impersonates (Morigo v. People, G.R. No. 145226, 06 Feb. 2004)
another and assumes the latter's right as the son Bigamy is a form of illegal marriage. Illegal The prescriptive period does not commence from
of wealthy parents, the former commits a marriage also includes such other marriages NOTE: The death of the first spouse during the the commission thereof but from the time of its
violation of this article. which are performed without complying with the pendency of the case does not extinguish the discovery by the complainant spouse.
requirements of law, or such premature crime because when the offender married the
marriages, or such marriages which was second spouse, the first marriage was still Q: Vitangcol married Alice Eduardo and begot
CHAPTER 2: ILLEGAL MARRIAGES
solemnized by one who is not authorized to subsisting. 3 children. After some time, Alice began
solemnize the same. hearing rumors that her husband was
BIGAMY Q: May the declaration of nullity of the second previously married to another woman named
ART. 349, RPC Q: A was legally married to B on November 26, marriage on the ground of psychological Gina Gaerlan. Such marriage was supported
1992. He later filed a petition seeking the incapacity be raised as a defense in the crime by a marriage contract registered with the
Elements of Bigamy (1996, 2004, 2008, 2012 declaration of nullity of their marriage. On 10 of bigamy? NSO. This prompted Alice to file a criminal
BAR) (M-N-S-E) December 2001, he contracted a second or complaint for bigamy against Vitangcol.
subsequent marriage with C. The court later A: NO. Although the judicial declaration of the
1. That the offender has been legally Married; declared the nullity of the marriage of A and B nullity of a marriage on the ground of In his defense, Vitangcol alleges that he
on June 27, 2006. Did A commit bigamy? psychological incapacity retroacts to the date of already revealed to Alice that he had a “fake
2. That the marriage has Not been legally the celebration of the marriage insofar as the marriage” with his college girlfriend Gina and
dissolved or, in case his or her spouse is A: YES. At the time of his second marriage with vinculum between the spouses is concerned, it is that there is a Certification from the Office of
absent, the absent spouse could not yet be C, his marriage with B was legally subsisting. It is significant to note that said marriage is not the Civil Registrar that there is no record of
presumed dead according to the Civil Code; noted that the finality of the decision declaring without legal effects. Among these effects is that the marriage license issued to Vitangcol and
the nullity of his first marriage with B was only on the children conceived or born before the his first wife Gina which makes his first
3. That he contracts a Second or subsequent June 27, 2006 or about five (5) years after his judgment of absolute nullity of the marriage shall marriage as void. Is Vitangcol liable of the
marriage; and second marriage to C. The second or subsequent be considered legitimate. There is, therefore, a crime of bigamy?
marriage of petitioner with C has all the essential recognition written into the law itself that such
4. That the second or subsequent marriage has requisites for validity. (Teves v. People, G.R. No. marriage, although void ab initio, may still A: YES, Vitangcol is liable of the crime of bigamy.
all the Essential requisites for validity, except 188775, 24 Aug. 2011) produce legal consequences. Among these legal Bigamy consists of the following elements: (1)
for the existence of the first marriage. consequences is incurring criminal liability for that the offender has been legally married; (2)

that the first marriage had not yet been legally prove the nonexistence of all the elements of (Villasanta v. Peralta, G.R. AC-UNAV. 30 Apr. 1957)
dissolved or in case his or her spouse is absent, bigamy. The trial court was able to show that the
the absent spouse could not yet be presumed four elements were present being: (1) the PREMATURE MARRIAGES
dead according to the Civil Code; (3) that he marriage between the appellant and the private ART. 351, RPC
contracts a second or subsequent marriage; and complainant is still existing; (2) the same has not
(4) that the second or subsequent marriage has been legally declared to be dissolved; (3) NOTE: Art. 351 of the RPC was repealed by R.A. No.
all the essential requisites for validity. appellant contracted a subsequent marriage with 10655, approved on March 13, 2015.
a certain Jean Basan while his first marriage with
In this case, all the elements of bigamy are the private complainant is still subsisting; and (4) R.A. No. 10655 Decriminalized the Act of
present, since Vitangcol was still legally married the second marriage has all the Premature Marriage
to Gina when he married Alice. His defense of essential requisites for its validity. An admission
Certification from the Office of the Civil Registrar of misunderstanding and subsequent Without prejudice to the provisions of the Family
implying that there is no record of the marriage reconciliation does not prove the nonexistence of Code on paternity and filiation, Art. 351 of RPC,
license issued to Vitangcol and his first wife Gina any of the elements provided. Thus, Prudencio punishing the crime of premature marriage
will not lie because marriages are not dissolved should still be held guilty of bigamy. (De Guzman committed by a woman is hereby repealed. (Sec.
through mere certifications by the civil registrar. v. People, G.R. No. 224742, 07 Aug. 2018) 1, R.A. No. 10655)
Hence, Vitangcol is still considered to be legally MARRIAGE CONTRACTED AGAINST PERFORMANCE OF ILLEGAL
married to Gina when he married Alice and is not PROVISIONS OF LAWS MARRIAGE CEREMONY
exculpated from the bigamy charged. (Vitangcol ART. 350, RPC ART. 352, RPC
v. People, G.R. No. 207406, 13 Jan. 2016)
Elements (1993, 2004 BAR) Persons Liable
Effect of Execution of an Affidavit of
Desistance During the Pendency of the Appeal 1. Offender contracted marriage; Art. 352 punishes priests or ministers of any
in a Bigamy Case
religious denomination or sect, or civil
2. He knew at the time that the: authorities who shall perform or authorize any
Q: Prudencio married Arlene in 1994. In a. Requirements of the law were not illegal marriage ceremony.
2007, Prudencio abandoned his wife and complied with; or
children and contracted a subsequent b. Marriage was in disregard of a legal NOTE: Art. 352 presupposes that the priest or
marriage with Basan in 2010. He was charged impediment. minister or civil authority is authorized to
for bigamy under Art. 349 of the RPC. The trial
solemnize marriages. If the priest or ministers
court convicted him of the crime charged. 3. The act of the offender does not constitute are not authorized to solemnize marriage under
During the pendency of his appeal in the Court bigamy. the law, and shall perform the marriage
of Appeals, Arlene executed an Affidavit of
ceremony, they may be prosecuted for
Desistance praying that the case be dismissed Illustration: Where the parties secured a Usurpation of Authority or Official Functions
after she had reconciled with Prudencio. Is falsified marriage contract complete with the under Art. 177 and not under this article.
Prudencio still guilty for bigamy despite the supposed signature of a mayor and which they
Affidavit of Desistance? presented to the priest who solemnized the
marriage, they committed Illegal Marriage.
A: YES. Prudencio should still be convicted for
bigamy. Affidavits of desistance that were Qualification of this Crime
executed after judgments of conviction had been
promulgated by trial courts are generally If either of the contracting parties obtains the
received with extensive caution. consent of the other by means of violence,
intimidation, or fraud.
Arlene’s Affidavit of Desistance provides that she
filed the Complaint due to a misunderstanding, Conviction of a violation of Art. 350 of the RPC
which both she and Prudencio had agreed to involves moral turpitude. The respondent is
reconcile. This Affidavit of Desistance cannot disqualified from being admitted to the bar.

BAR) reasonable understanding, discretion, and the libelous statement - for a man’s reputation is
L. CRIMES AGAINST HONOR 3. It must be Malicious; candor which should be considered. the estimate in which others hold him, not the
ARTS. 353-364, RPC, TITLE XIII 4. It must be Directed at a natural or juridical good opinion which he has of himself.
person, or one who is dead; (2002 BAR) and Q: Rima and Alegre exposed various alleged
5. It must tend to cause the Dishonor, discredit complaints from students, teachers and Illustration: The delivery of the libelous article
or contempt of the person defamed. parents against Ago Medical and Educational to the typesetter is sufficient publication. (U.S. v.
CHAPTER 1: LIBEL Center-Bicol Christian College of Medicine Crame, G.R. No. 4328, 13 Feb. 1908)
No Necessity in Naming the Person Accused and its administrators. Rima and Alegre
Sec. 1: Definition, Forms, and Punishment remarked that “AMEC is a dumping ground, The sending of a letter to wife which maligns the
of this Crime In order to maintain a libel suit, it is essential that garbage of moral and physical misfits”; and husband was considered sufficient publication,
the victim be identifiable although it is not AMEC students who graduate “will be for the spouse is a third person to the victim
necessary that he be named. It must be shown liabilities rather than assets” of the society. defamed. (U.S. v. Urbinana, G.R. No. 927, 08 Nov.
DEFINITION OF LIBEL
that at least a third person could identify him as Claiming that the broadcasts were 1902)
ART. 353, RPC
the object of the libelous publication. (Borjal v. CA, defamatory, AMEC filed a complaint for
G.R. No. 126466, 14 Jan. 1999) damages against FBNI, Rima and Alegre. Are Q: Dolores Magno was charged and convicted
Libel
the aforementioned remarks or broadcasts of libel for the writings on the wall and for the
It is enough if by intrinsic reference the allusion libelous? unsigned letter addressed to the Alejandro
A public and malicious imputation of a crime, or
is apparent or if the publication contains matters spouses, containing invectives directed
of a vice or defect, real or imaginary, or any act,
of description or reference to facts and A: YES. There is no question that the broadcasts against Cerelito Alejandro. Dolores contends
omission, condition, status, or circumstance
circumstances from which others reading the were made public and imputed to AMEC defects that the prosecution failed to establish the
tending to cause the dishonor, discredit, or
article may know the person alluded to, or if the or circumstances tending to cause it dishonor, presence of the elements of authorship and
contempt of a natural or juridical person, or to
latter is pointed out by extraneous circumstances discredit and contempt. Rima and Alegre’s publication of the malicious writings on the
blacken the memory of one who is dead.
so that those knowing such person could and did remarks are libelous per se. Taken as a whole, the wall, as well as the unsigned letter addressed
that he was the person referred to. (Diaz v. People, broadcasts suggest that AMEC is a money-making to the Alejandro spouses. She argues that
Commission of Libel
G.R. No. 159787, 25 May 2007) institution where physically and morally unfit since the letter was addressed to the spouses,
teachers abound. Every defamatory imputation is Fe (Cerelito’s wife) was, insofar as Cerelito is
Libel is a defamation committed by means of
Test to Determine whether a Statement is presumed malicious. Rima and Alegre failed to concerned, not a third person for purposes of
writing, printing, lithography, engraving, radio,
Defamatory show adequately their good intention and publication. Is she liable?
phonograph, painting or theatrical or
justifiable motive in airing the supposed gripes of
cinematographic exhibition, or any similar
To determine “whether a statement is the students. As hosts of a documentary or public A: To be liable for libel under Art. 353 of the RPC,
means.
defamatory, the words used are to be construed affairs program, Rima and Alegre should have the following elements must be shown to exist:
in their entirety and should be taken in their presented the public issues free from inaccurate
Persons Liable for Libel
plain, natural, and ordinary meaning as they and misleading information. (Filipinas 1. The allegation of a discreditable act or
would naturally be understood by persons Broadcasting Network, Inc. v. Ago Medical and condition concerning another;
1. Any person who shall publish, exhibit or
reading them, unless it appears that they were Educational Center-Bicol Christian College of 2. Publication of the charge;
cause the publication or exhibition of any
used and understood in another Medicine, G.R. No. 14199, 17 Jan. 2005) 3. Identity of the person defamed; and
defamation in writing or by similar means; or
sense.” Moreover, charge is sufficient if the 4. Existence of malice.
words are calculated to induce the hearers to REQUIREMENT FOR PUBLICITY
2. The author or editor of a book or pamphlet, The element of publication is satisfied when, after
suppose and understand that the person or ART. 354, RPC
or the editor or business manager of a daily writing the defamatory matter, the same is made
persons against whom they were uttered were
newspaper, magazine or serial publication, known to someone other than the person to
guilty of certain offenses or are sufficient to Publication of the Libelous Article is NOT
for defamation contained therein to the same whom it is being pertained to. If the statement is
impeach the honesty, virtue, or reputation, or to Necessary
extent as if he were the author thereof. sent straight to a person for whom it is written
hold the person or persons up to public ridicule.
(Lopez v. People and Escalante, G.R. No. 172203, 14 there is no publication of it. It could not be said,
Elements (D-I-D-P-M) (2005, 2010 BAR) It is not necessary that the libelous article must
Feb. 2011) however, that there was no publication with
be published; communication of the defamatory
respect to Fe. While the letter in question was
1. There must be an Imputation of a crime, or of matter to some third persons is sufficient. It is not
NOTE: The intention or meaning of the writer is addressed to “Mr. Cerelito & Fe Alejandro,” the
a vice or defect, real or imaginary, or any act, required that the person defamed has read or
immaterial. It is the meaning that the words in invectives contained therein were directed
omission, condition, status or circumstance; heard about the libelous remark. What is
fact conveyed on the minds of persons of against Cerelito only. Writing to a person other
2. Imputation must be made Publicly; (2003 material is that a third person has read or heard
than the person defamed is sufficient to constitute

publication for the person to whom the letter is words attributed against her. In response, malice. The onus of proving actual malice then b. That it is made in good faith; and
addressed is a third person in relation to its writer Commissioner Yorac issued a Letter denying lies on Enrile. The Court, however, holds that c. That it is without any comments or
and the person defamed therein. (Magno v. the statements attributed to her by the Enrile failed to discharge the said burden. remarks.
People, G.R. No. 133896, 27 Jan. 2006) Inquirer. Enrile repeatedly demanded
Inquirer to correct the said news article but What constitutes malice is not the fact that the NOTE: The instances when malice is not
Malice his demands proved futile as no correction articles contain matters which are false. For there presumed are examples of malice in fact.
was made. Left with no recourse, he filed a to be malice, it must be that the articles were
A term used to indicate the fact that the offender Complaint for Damages against Defendants- published with the knowledge that the matters in Q: Do the defamatory remarks and comments
is prompted by personal ill-will or spite and Appellants alleging that the news article the article were false. It could not be said, on the conduct or acts of public officers which
speaks not in response to duty but merely to imputed upon him defamatory acts of (a) however, that at the time of the article's are related to the discharge of their official
injure the reputation of the person defamed. having benefited from the coco levy fund, (b) publication that petitioners already knew that duties constitute libel?
accumulating ill-gotten wealth, and (c) being the statement did not, in fact, come from Yorac.
NOTE: Malice is presumed and the test is the a Marcos crony. Will the case filed by Enrile (PDI v. Enrile, G.R. No. 229440, 14 July 2021, J. A: NO. It will not constitute libel if the accused
character of the words used. The meaning of the prosper? Caguioa) proves the truth of the imputation. But any attack
writer or author is immaterial. upon the private character of the public officers
A: NO. Like "fair commentaries on matters of Instances when Malice is NOT Presumed on matters which are not related to the discharge
Kinds of Malice public interest, " fair reports on matters of of their official functions may constitute libel.
public interest is also included in the list of 1. Private communication made by any person
1. Malice in fact may be shown by proof of ill- qualifiedly privileged communications, and are to another in the performance of any legal, A written letter containing libelous matter cannot
will, hatred, or purpose to injure. thus included under the protective mantle of moral, or social duty. be classified as privileged when publicly
privileged communications. In order to published and circulated. (Sazon v. CA, G.R. No.
2. Malice in law is presumed from a defamatory successfully claim that an utterance covered Requisites: 120715, 29 Mar. 1996)
imputation. However, presumption is under qualifiedly privileged communications is a. Person who made the communication
rebutted if it is shown by the accused that: libelous, the plaintiff must prove the existence had a legal moral or social duty to make Invocation of Freedom of Speech
of malice in fact. the communication or at least, he had
a. Defamatory imputation is true, in case an interest to be upheld; Although a wide latitude is given to critical
the law allows proof of the truth of the The subject matter of the article is undoubtedly a b. Communication is addressed to an utterances made against public officials in the
imputation; matter of public interest. As the RTC itself officer, or a board, or superior, having performance of their official duties, or against
b. It is published with good intention; and correctly observed, "these are matters about some interest or duty in the matter; and public figures on matters of public interest, such
c. There is justifiable motive for making it. which the public has the right to be informed, c. Statements in the communication are criticism does not automatically fall within the
talcing into account the public character of the made in good faith without malice (in ambit of constitutionally protected speech.
Q: The Philippine Daily Inquirer published on funds involved." Enrile is likewise fact).
its front page a news article with the heading: unquestionably a public figure. A public figure If the utterances are false, malicious, or unrelated
"PCGG: no to coconut levy agreement" co- has been defined as a person who, by his 2. Fair and true report made in good faith, to a public officer’s performance of his duties or
written by Cueto and Pazzibugan. In the said accomplishments, fame, or mode of living, or by without any comments or remarks, of any irrelevant to matters of public interest involving
news article, the following statements were adopting a profession or calling which gives the judicial, legislative, or other official public figures, the same may give rise to criminal
made: “In her public statement since the public a legitimate interest in his doings, his proceedings which are not of confidential and civil liability. (Fermin v. People, G.R. No.
controversy on the settlement erupted last affairs, and his character, has become a "public nature, or of any statement, report, or speech 157643, 28 Mar. 2008)
week, Yorac said the settlement would allow personage." He is, in other words, a celebrity. delivered in the exercise of their functions.
Marcos cronies, who had benefited from the Doctrine of Fair Comment
coco levy fund, particularly businessman From the foregoing, it could be indisputably Requisites:
Eduardo "Danding" [Cojuangco], Jr., inferred, therefore, that the presumption of a. That it is a fair and true report of a While in general every discreditable imputation
Zamboanga City Mayor Maria Clara Lobregat existence of malice does not arise for the article, judicial, legislative or other official publicly made is deemed false, because every
and former Sen. Juan Ponce Enrile, to keep as the same is considered a "fair report on proceedings which are not of man is presumed innocent until his guilt is
their plundered loot.” matters of public interest" — and thus a confidential nature, or of any judicially proved, and every false imputation is
qualifiedly privileged communication. While, statement, report or speech delivered deemed malicious, nevertheless, when the
After reading the news article, Enrile through generally, malice can be presumed from in said proceedings, or of any other act discreditable imputation is directed against a
his counsel, wrote to Commissioner Yorac to defamatory words, the privileged character of a performed by public officers in the public person in his public capacity, it is not
confirm whether she uttered the defamatory communication destroys the presumption of exercise of their functions; necessarily actionable. In order that such

discreditable imputation to a public official may 2. Conditional or qualified – like a private Iligan Cement Corporation. 2. Printing;
be actionable, it must either be a false allegation communication made by any person to 3. Lithography;
of fact or a comment based on a false supposition. another in the performance of any legal, Claiming that the statements in the newsletter 4. Engraving;
If the comment is an expression of opinion, based moral, or social duty, and a fair and true were defamatory, Alcantara filed a complaint 5. Radio; (2002 BAR)
on established facts, then it is immaterial that the report, made in good faith, without any for libel. Ponce, on the other hand, raised 6. Phonograph;
opinion happens to be mistaken, as long as it comments or remarks, of any judicial, privileged communication as a defense. Is the 7. Painting;
might reasonably be inferred from the facts. legislative or other official proceedings defense tenable? 8. Theatrical exhibition;
(Borjal v. CA, G.R. No. 126466, 14 Jan. 1999) which are not of confidential nature. Here, 9. Cinematographic exhibition; or
even if the statements are defamatory, there A: YES. It is a settled principle in this jurisdiction 10. Any similar means. (2005 BAR)
Privileged Communication is no presumption of malice. The prosecution that statements made in the course of judicial
must prove malice in fact to convict the proceedings are absolutely privileged. This Defamation through amplifiers is not libel, but
It is a communication made bona fide upon any accused. absolute privilege remains regardless of the oral defamation. (People v. Santiago, G.R. No. L-
subject matter in which the party communicating defamatory tenor and the presence of malice if 17663, 30 May 1962)
has an interest, or in reference to which he has a Q: In a judicial proceeding, when can a the same are relevant, pertinent, or material to
duty and the person to whom the communication defamatory imputation be said to be a the cause in hand or subject of the inquiry. “In addition to the civil action which may be
is given has a corresponding interest. privileged communication? Furthermore, the newsletter qualified as a brought by the offended party”
communication made bona fide upon any subject
Criticism A: The one obstacle that those pleading the matter in which the party communicating has an Notwithstanding this clause in Art. 355, civil
defense of privileged communication must interest. The controversial statements were action for damages may be filed simultaneously or
It deals only with such things as shall invite public hurdle is the test of relevancy. Under this test, a made in the context of a criminal complaint separately with the criminal action. (Reyes, 2017)
attention or call for public comment. It does not matter alleged in the course of the proceedings against Alcantara, albeit for other, separate acts
follow a public man into his private life nor pry need not be in every case material to the issues involving greed and deceit, and were disclosed THREATENING TO PUBLISH AND OFFER TO
into his domestic concerns. presented but should be legitimately related to only to the official investigating the complaint. PREVENT SUCH PUBLICATION FOR A
the issues or be so pertinent to the controversy Liberally applying the privileged communication COMPENSATION
Common Defense in Libel that it may become the subject of inquiry in the doctrine, these statements were still relevant to ART. 356, RPC
course of trial. (Alcantara v. Ponce, G.R. No. the complaint under investigation because, like
That it is covered by privileged communication. 156183, 28 Feb. 2007) the averments therein, they also involved Punishable Acts
Alcantara’s alleged deceitfulness. (Alcantara v.
1. Absolute – not actionable even if the author Q: Ponce filed a string of criminal complaints Ponce, G.R. No. 156183, 28 Feb. 2007) 1. Threatening another to publish a libel
has acted in bad faith: against Alcantara and his family, including concerning him, or his parents, spouse, child,
one for estafa. In essence, Ponce alleged that Multiple Publication Rule in Libel or other members of his family; and
a. Statements made by members of Alcantara had swindled him out of 3,000,000
Congress in the discharge of their official shares of Floro Cement Corporation. It was in A single defamatory statement, if published 2. Offering to prevent the publication of such
functions; the course of the preliminary investigation of several times, gives rise to as many offenses as libel for compensation, or money
the complaint for estafa that Ponce, shortly there are publications. For purposes of Art. 360 of consideration.
b. Allegations or statements made by the after giving his sur-rejoinder affidavit, RPC, as amended, every time the same written
parties or their counsel in their pleadings submitted to the investigating prosecutor a matter is communicated such communication is Illustration: The accused threatened to publish
or motions or during the hearing of newsletter purporting to be a belated annex considered a distinct and separate publication of in a weekly periodical, certain letters, amorous in
judicial proceedings; to the affidavit. libel. (Soriano v. IAC, G.R. No. 72383, 09 Nov. 1988) nature, written by a married woman and
addressed by her to a man, not her husband,
c. Answers given by witnesses in reply to It was prefaced with the quotation “For every LIBEL BY MEANS OF WRITING unless paid P4,000 to them. (U.S. v. Eguia, et al.,
questions propounded to them, in the extraordinary fortune there is a great crime” OR SIMILAR MEANS G.R. No. L013540, 24 Oct. 1917)
course of said proceedings, provided that and the text: An example is Marcos. We need ART. 355, RPC
said allegations or statements are not discuss this. Second example is the Blackmail
relevant to the issues, and the answers Alcantaras. Commission of Libel (W-PLERPP-TCA)
are responsive or pertinent to the Any unlawful extortion of money by an appeal to
questions propounded to said witnesses. The newsletter then went on to discuss SEC Libel may be committed by: the fears of the victim, especially extortion of
(Alcantara v. Ponce, G.R. No. 156183, 28 Case No. 2507 in which Ponce accused the money by threats of accusation or exposure. (U.S.
Feb. 2007) Alcantaras of defrauding him of his shares in 1. Writing; v. Eguia, supra)

Felonies where Blackmail is Committed Elements of Oral Defamation A: NO. Marco cannot file a case for grave oral Slander by Deed vs. Acts of Lasciviousness
defamation. If at all, he may file a case for light
1. Light threats (Art. 283, RPC); and 1. There must be an imputation of a crime, or a slander. In the case of People v. Laroga (40 O.G. Kissing a girl in public and touching her breast
2. Threatening to publish, or offering to prevent vice or defect, real or imaginary, or any act, 123), it was held that defamation in political without lewd designs, committed by a reject
the publication of, a libel for compensation. omission, condition, status, or meeting, when feelings are running high and suitor to cast dishonor on the girl was held to be
(Art. 356, RPC) circumstances; people could not think clearly, shall only amount slander by deed and not acts of lasciviousness.
to light slander. (People v. Valencia, G.R. No. 4136-R, 29 May 1950)
PROHIBITED PUBLICATION OF ACTS 2. Imputation must be made publicly;
REFERRED TO IN THE COURSE SLANDER BY DEED Sec. 2: General Provisions
OF OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 3. The imputation must be malicious; ART. 359, RPC
ART. 357, RPC
PERSONS RESPONSIBLE
4. The imputation must be directed at a natural Slander by Deed (1994 BAR) ART. 360, RPC
Elements (Rem-P-O) or juridical person, or one who is dead; and
A crime against honor which is committed by
5. The imputation must tend to cause dishonor, Persons Liable for Libel
1. That the offender is a Reporter, editor, or performing any act which casts dishonor,
manager of a newspaper daily or magazine; discredit, or contempt of the person discredit, or contempt upon another person.
defamed. (People v. Maratas, 11 Apr. 1980) 1. Person who publishes, exhibits, or causes the
2. That he publishes facts connected with the
publication or exhibition of any defamation
Private life of another; and Elements of Slander by Deed
NOTE: The imputation must be verbally made or in writing or similar means;
3. That such facts are Offensive to the honor, 2. Author or editor of a book or pamphlet;
virtue and reputation of said person. uttered. The slanderous remarks need not to be 1. Offender performs any act not included in
heard by the offended party as long as they are 3. Editor or business manager of a daily
any other crime against honor;
uttered in the presence of a third person. newspaper magazine or serial publication; or
The prohibition applies, even though said 2. Such act is performed in the presence of 4. Owner of the printing plant which publishes
publication be made in connection with or under other person or persons; and
Slander a libelous article with his consent and all
the pretext that it is necessary in the narration of 3. Such act casts dishonor, discredit, or
other persons who in any way participate in
any judicial or administrative proceedings contempt upon the offended party.
It is a libel committed by oral (spoken) means, or have connection with its publication.
wherein such facts have been mentioned.
instead of in writing. It is also defined as the Kinds of Slander by Deed
speaking base and defamatory words which tend Where to File a Complaint for Libel
Gag Law
to prejudice another in his reputation. 1. Simple slander by deed – performance of an
Criminal and civil actions for damages in case of
Newspaper reports on cases pertaining to act, not use of words. written defamations shall be filed simultaneously
adultery, divorce, issues about the legitimacy of Factors that Determine the Gravity of Oral 2. Grave slander by deed – that is which is of a
Defamation or separately with the court of first instance of the
children, etc., will necessarily be barred from serious crime.
province or city:
publication. (Reyes, 2012)
1. Expressions used; How to Determine Whether an Act is Slander
2. Personal relations of the accused and the 1. Where the libelous article is printed and first
Under R.A No. 1477, a newspaper reporter by Deed or Not
offended party; and published; or
cannot be compelled to reveal the source of the
news report he made, unless the court or a House 3. Circumstances surrounding the case. Whether a certain slanderous act constitutes
2. Where any of the offended parties actually
or committee of Congress finds that such slander by deed of a serious nature or not,
NOTE: Social standing and the position of the resides at the time of the commission of the
revelation is demanded by the security of the depends on the social standing of the offended offense.
state. (Reyes, 2012) offended party are also taken into account. party, the circumstances under which the act was
committed, the occasion, etc.
Q: Lando and Marco are candidates in the NOTE: The court where the criminal action or
SLANDER civil action for damages is first filed shall acquire
local elections. In his speeches Lando Illustration: Thus, slapping a lady in a dance not
ART. 358, RPC jurisdiction to the exclusion of other courts.
attacked his opponent Marco alleging that he for the purpose of hurting her but to cause her
is the son of Nanding, a robber and a thief, who shame and humiliation for refusing to dance with
Kinds of Oral Defamation Q: Is the author of a libelous article the only
amassed his wealth through shady deals. May the accused is slander by deed.
Marco file a case against Lando for grave oral one liable for libel?
1. Simple slander; and
defamation? (1990 BAR) This crime involves an act, while libel or slander
2. Grave slander, when it is of a serious and A: NO. Art. 360 includes not only the author or the
insulting nature. involves words written or uttered.
person who causes the libelous matter to be

published, but also the person who prints or statements against the owners of Pacific offended party is a private individual or a privileged matter. (U.S. v. Dorr, G.R. No. 1049, 16
publishes it. Proof of knowledge of and Plans, Inc. The libel suit was filed before the public officer. May 1903; Reyes, 2008)
participation in the publication of the offending Regional Trial Court of Makati alleging that it
article is not required, if the accused has been is in Makati where the website was first 2. When the offended party is a government Guidelines in the Observance of a Rule of
specifically identified as “author, editor, or accessed; hence, it is in Makati where it was employee, even if the act or omission Preference in the Imposition of Penalties in
proprietor” or “printer/publisher” of the first published. Does the RTC Makati has imputed does not constitute a crime, Libel Cases
publication. (Fermin v. People, G.R. No. 157643, 28 jurisdiction over the libel case? provided, it is related to the discharge of his
Mar. 2008) official duties. All courts and judges concerned should
A: NO. The venue of libel cases where the henceforth take note of the foregoing rule of
Rationale for the Criminal Liability of Persons complainant is a private individual is limited to NOTE: Proof of truth must rest upon positive, preference set by the Supreme Court on the
enumerated in Art. 360 of the RPC (2013 BAR) only either of two places, namely: 1) where the direct evidence upon which a definite finding matter of the imposition of penalties for the crime
complainant actually resides at the time of the may be made by the court, but probable cause for of libel bearing in mind the following principles:
It was enunciated in U.S. v. Ocampo, that commission of the offense; or 2) where the belief in the truth of the statement is sufficient.
according to the legal doctrines and alleged defamatory article was printed and first (2009 BAR) 1. This Administrative Circular does not
jurisprudence of the United States, the printer of published. remove imprisonment as an alternative
a publication containing libelous matter is liable Proof of Truth is NOT Sufficient penalty for the crime of libel under Art. 355
for the same by reason of his direct connection If the circumstances as to where the libel was of the RPC.
therewith and his cognizance of the contents printed and first published are used by the Proof of truth is not enough since it is also
thereof. With regard to a publication in which a offended party as basis for the venue in the required that the matter charged as libelous was 2. The Judges concerned may, in the exercise of
libel is printed, not only is the publisher but also criminal action, the Information must allege with published with good motives and for justifiable sound discretion, and taking into
all other persons who in any way participate in or particularity where the defamatory article was ends. consideration the peculiar circumstances of
have any connection with its publication are printed and first published, as evidenced or each case, determine whether the imposition
liable as publishers. (Fermin v. People, supra) supported by, for instance, the address of their Possible Defenses in the Crime of Libel of a fine alone would best serve the interests
editorial or business offices in the case of of justice or whether forbearing to impose
Q: The COMELEC Chairman was sued for libel newspapers, magazines, or serial publications. 1. It appears that the matters charged as imprisonment would depreciate the
due to his defamatory statements against This pre-condition becomes necessary in order to libelous is true; seriousness of the offense, work violence on
Photokina Marketing Corporation. The forestall any inclination to harass. The same 2. It was published with good motives; and the social order, or otherwise be contrary to
Chairman raised as a defense the lack of measure cannot be reasonably expected when it 3. For a justifiable end. the imperative of justice.
jurisdiction of the RTC since he delivered the pertains to defamatory material appearing on a
speech in his official capacity as COMELEC website on the internet as there would be no way LIBELOUS REMARKS 3. Should only a fine be imposed and the
Chair. The RTC ruled that it was of determining the situs of its printing and first ART. 362, RPC accused be unable to pay the fine, there is no
Sandiganbayan and not RTC which has publication. To credit the premise of equating his legal obstacle to the application of the RPC
jurisdiction over the case. Is the RTC correct? first access to the defamatory article on the Libelous remarks or comments connected with provision on subsidiary imprisonment.
website in Makati with “printing and first the matter privileged under the provisions of Art.
A: NO. Art. 360 of the RPC, as amended by R.A. No. publication” would spawn the very ills that the 354, if made with malice, shall not exempt the Prescriptive Periods
4363, is explicit on which court has jurisdiction to amendment to Art. 360 of the RPC sought to author thereof nor the editor or managing editor
try cases of written defamations: The grant to the discourage and prevent. (Bonifacio et al v. RTC of a newspaper from criminal liability. In relation to Art. 90 of the RPC, the prescriptive
Sandiganbayan of jurisdiction over offenses Makati, G.R. No. 184800, 05 May 2010) periods for the filing of the complaint for the
committed in relation to public office, similar to Q: What is the liability of newspaper reporter offenses enumerated under Crimes against
the expansion of the jurisdiction of the MTCs, did PROOF OF TRUTH for distorting facts connected with official Honor are:
not divest the RTC of its exclusive and original ART. 361, RPC proceedings?
jurisdiction to try written defamation cases 1. Libel and similar offenses – one (1) year;
regardless of whether the offense is committed in Admissibility of Proof of Truth A: The author or the editor of a publication who 2. Oral defamation and slander by deed – six (6)
relation to office. (People v. Benipayo, G.R. No. distorts, mutilates, or discolors the official months.
154473, 24 Apr. 2009) Proof of truth is admissible in any of the proceedings reported by him, add comments
following: thereon to cast aspersion on the character of the
Q: A large group of disgruntled plan holders of parties concerned, is guilty of libel,
Pacific Plans, Inc. was sued for libel for 1. When the act or omission imputed notwithstanding the fact that the defamatory
publishing in a website defamatory constitutes a crime regardless of whether the matter is published in connection with a

ADMINISTRATIVE CIRCULAR 08-2008 communication should be appreciated in favor of Giving of false another, as long as the
RE: GUIDELINES IN THE OBSERVANCE OF A petitioner, especially considering the wide Limited to the act of statement under oath source is identified.
RULE OF PREFERENCE IN THE IMPOSITION latitude traditionally given to defamatory planting evidence and or the making of a
OF PENALTIES IN LIBEL CASES utterances against public officials in connection the like in order to false affidavit Intriguing against Honor vs. Incriminating an
with or relevant to their performance of official incriminate an imputing to a person Innocent Person
Preference of Imposition of Fine duties or against public figures in relation to innocent person the commission of a
matters of public interest involving them. crime INTRIGUING INCRIMINATING AN
NOTE: Art. 355 of the RPC penalizes libel AGAINST HONOR INNOCENT PERSON
with prision correctional in its minimum and In Buatis, Jr. v. People (G.R No. 142509, 24 Mar. Incriminatory Machination vs. Defamation The offender resorts The offender performs
medium periods or fine ranging from P200.00 to 2006), the Court opted to impose upon petitioner,
or gossips for the an act that would
P6,000.00 or both, in addition to the civil action a lawyer, the penalty of fine only for the crime of INCRIMINATORY
DEFAMATION purpose of incriminate or impute
which may be brought by the offended party. In libel considering that it was his first offense and MACHINATION disparaging the to an innocent person
the following cases, the Court opted to impose he was motivated purely by his belief that he was
Offender performs honor or reputation the commission of a
only a fine on the person convicted of the crime merely exercising a civic or moral duty to his Offender avails
acts to directly of another. crime.
of libel: client when he wrote the defamatory letter to himself of written or
impute to an
private complainant. spoken words in
innocent person the
In Sazon v. CA (G.R No. 120715, 29 Mar. 1996), the besmirching the
commission of the
Court modified the penalty imposed upon CHAPTER 2: INCRIMINATORY victim’s reputation.
crime.
petitioner, an officer of a homeowners’ MACHINATIONS
association, for the crime of libel from
INTRIGUING AGAINST HONOR
imprisonment and fine in the amount of P200.00,
INCRIMINATING INNOCENT PERSON ART. 364, RPC
to fine only of P3,000.00, with subsidiary
ART. 363, RPC
imprisonment in case of insolvency, for the
reason that he wrote the libelous article merely Intriguing against Honor
Elements (A-I-NotP)
to defend his honor against the malicious
messages that earlier circulated around the Any scheme or plot which may consists of some
1. Offender performs an Act; trickery.
subdivision, which he thought was the handiwork
2. By such act he directly Incriminates or
of the private complainant.
imputes to an innocent person the Persons Liable
commission of a crime; and
In Mari v. CA (G.R No. 127694, 31 May 2000),
3. Such act does Not constitute Perjury. Any person who shall make any intrigue which
where the crime involved is slander by deed, the
Court modified the penalty imposed on the has, for its principal purpose, to blemish the
NOTE: The crime of incriminatory machinations honor or reputation of another person.
petitioner, an ordinary government employee,
is limited to planting evidence and the like, which
from imprisonment to fine of P1,000.00, with
tend directly to cause false prosecution. Intriguing against Honor vs. Slander
subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency,
on the ground that the latter committed the
Incriminating an Innocent Person vs. Perjury INTRIGUING
offense in the heat of anger and in reaction to a SLANDER
by Making False Accusation AGAINST HONOR
perceived provocation.
Offender made the
PERJURY BY The source of the
In Brillante v. CA (G.R. Nos. 118757 & 12157, 11 INCRIMINATING AN utterance, where the
MAKING FALSE defamatory
Nov. 2005), the Court deleted the penalty of INNOCENT PERSON source of the
ACCUSATION utterance is
imprisonment imposed upon petitioner, a local defamatory nature of
unknown and the
politician, but maintained the penalty of fine of Committed by the utterance is known,
offender simply
P4,0000.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in performing an act by The gravamen of the and offender makes a
repeats or passes the
case of insolvency, in each of the five (5) cases of which the offender offense is the republication thereof,
same, without
libel, on the ground that the intensely feverish directly incriminates imputation itself, even though he repeats
subscribing to the
passions evoked during the election period in or imputes to an falsely made, before the libelous statement
truth thereof.
1988 must have agitated petitioner into writing innocent person the an officer qualified to as coming from
his open letter; and that incomplete privileged commission of a take an oath
crime

Elements of Simple Imprudence (D-P) Effect of Accident in Art. 275(2) vs. Art. 365 Illustration: An automobile driver who, by the
M. QUASI-OFFENSES negligence of another and not by his own
ART. 365, RPC, TITLE XIV 1. There is lack of Precaution on the part of the EFFECT OF ACCIDENT negligence, is suddenly placed in an emergency
offender; (BAR 2008) and IN FAILURE TO HELP and compelled to act instantly to avoid a collision
EFFECT OF ACCIDENT
OR RENDER or injury is not guilty of negligence if he makes
IN IMPRUDENCE AND
2. Damage impending to be caused is not ASSISTANCE TO such a choice which a person of ordinary
SOLE CHAPTER: CRIMINAL NEGLIGENCE NEGLIGENCE
immediate nor the danger clearly ANOTHER WHOM HE prudence placed in such a position might make
ART. 365
manifested. HAS ACCIDENTALLY even though he did not make the wisest choice
IMPRUDENCE AND NEGLIGENCE INJURED
ART. 365, RPC NOTE: Art. 64 of the RPC, relative to mitigating ART. 275(2) Doctrine of Res Ipsa Loquitur
and aggravating circumstances, is not applicable Falls under Crimes Falls under Criminal
Punishable Acts (1993, 2001, 2008, 2009 in quasi-offenses. Against Security Negligence “The thing speaks for itself.” Where the thing
BAR) Committed by means Committed by means which causes injury is shown to be under the
Imprudence vs. Negligence of dolo of culpa management of the defendant, and the accident is
1. Committing through reckless imprudence Failure to lend help such as in the ordinary course of things does not
any act which, had it been intentional, would IMPRUDENCE NEGLIGENCE to one's victim is happen if those who have the management use
constitute a grave or less grave felony or light neither an offense by proper care, it affords reasonable evidence, in the
Deficiency of
felony; Deficiency of action itself nor an element absence of an explanation by the defendant, that
perception Failure to help or
of the offense therein the accident arose from want of care. (Jarcia v.
Failure in precaution Failure in advertence render assistance to People, G.R. No. 187926, 15 Feb. 2012)
2. Committing through simple imprudence or penalized. Its
To avoid wrongful another whom one has
negligence an act which would otherwise To avoid wrongful presence merely
acts, paying proper accidentally wounded Elements of Res Ipsa Loquitur
constitute a grave or a less serious felony; acts, one must take the increases the penalty
attention and using or injured is an offense
necessary precaution by one degree. It
3. Causing damage to the property of another due diligence in must be specifically 1. The accident was of a kind which does not
once they are foreseen
through reckless imprudence or simple foreseeing them alleged in the ordinarily occur unless someone is negligent;
imprudence or negligence; and information 2. The instrumentality or agency which caused
NOTE: The RPC does not draw a well-defined the injury was under the exclusive control of
4. Causing through simple imprudence or demarcation line between negligent acts that are Doctrine of Last Clear Chance the person in charge; and
negligence some wrong which, if done delictual and those which are quasi-delictual. It is 3. The injury suffered must not have been due
maliciously, would have constituted a light possible that a negligent act may be delictual and This states that the contributory negligence of the to any voluntary action or contribution of the
felony. quasi-delictual at the same time. party injured will not defeat the action if it be person injured.
shown that the accused might, by the exercise of
Elements of Reckless Imprudence Failing to Lend Help as a Qualifying reasonable care and prudence, have avoided the NOTE: Under the res ipsa loquitur rule in its
(Da-V-A-M-P) Circumstance consequences of the negligence of the injured broad sense, the fact of the occurrence of an
party. injury, taken with the surrounding
1. Offender does or fails to do an Act; GR: Failing to lend help is a qualifying circumstances, may permit an inference or raise
2. The doing of or the failure to do that act is circumstance; it raises the penalty one degree Emergency Rule a presumption of negligence, or make out a
Voluntary; higher. plaintiff’s prima facie case, and present a
3. It be without Malice; This provides that a person confronted with question of fact for defendant to meet with an
4. Material Damage results; and XPN: The driver can leave his vehicle without emergency may be left with no time for thought, explanation. It is not a rule of substantive law but
5. There is an inexcusable lack of Precaution on aiding the victims if he: must make speedy decision based on impulse or more a procedural rule. Its mere invocation does
the part of the person performing or failing to instinct, and cannot be held liable for the same not exempt the plaintiff with the requirement of
perform such act taken into consideration: a. Is in imminent danger of being harmed conduct as one who had the opportunity to proof to prove negligence. It merely allows the
(2007 BAR) b. Wants to report to the nearest officer of the reflect. plaintiff to present, along with the proof of the
a. Employment or occupation; law; or accident, enough of the attending circumstances
b. Degree of intelligence; c. Desires to summon a physician or a nurse The emergency rule is applicable only when the to invoke the doctrine creating an inference or
c. Physical condition; or for medical assistance to the injured (Sec. situation that arises is sudden and unexpected, presumption of negligence and to thereby place
d. Other circumstances regarding 55, R.A. No. 4136). and is such to deprive him of all opportunity for on the defendant the burden of going forward
persons, time and place. deliberation. with the proof. (Estrada v. Desierto, G.R. Nos.

146710-15, 03 Apr. 2001) A: NO. The contention of X is wrong. To constitute higher in degree upon the offender who “fails to Reckless Imprudence is a Single Crime, its
the offense of reckless driving, the act must be lend on the spot to the injured parties such help Consequences on Persons and Property are
Effect of Contributory Negligence on the Part something more than a mere negligence in the as may be in his hands to give.”, according to case Material Only to Determine the Penalty
of the Victim operation of the motor vehicle. The act is law, (a) is dependent on the means in the hands
required to be of willful and wanton disregard of of the offender, i.e., the type and degree of The two charges against petitioner, arising from
Contributory negligence on the part of the victim the consequences. The fact that Y’s body was assistance that he/she, at the time and place of the same facts, were prosecuted under the same
is not a valid defense to exculpate one from thrown four (4) meters away from his jeep the incident, is capable of giving; and (b) requires provision of the RPC, as amended, namely, Art.
criminal liability although it could be mitigated. showed that X was driving his pick-up at a fast adequate proof. X was able to supply the help 365 defining and penalizing quasi-offenses.
(Addenbrook v. People, G.R. No. L-22995, 29 June speed when he overtook the jeep of Y. according to the extent of capabilities. (Gonzaga
1967) v. People, G.R. No. 195671, 21 Jan. 2015) Conceptually, quasi-offenses penalize "the
The mitigating circumstance of voluntary mental attitude or condition behind the act, the
NOTE: Reckless imprudence is not only a mode surrender cannot be appreciated in his favor. Q: While X was driving his car, he noticed that dangerous recklessness, lack of care or foresight,
or means of committing a crime. It is a crime by Paragraph 5 of Art. 365, RPC, expressly states that something was wrong in the accelerator. He the imprudencia punible," unlike willful offenses
itself. Thus, when a person drove his car in the imposition of the penalties, the courts shall drove his car under the house of A which is which punish the intentional criminal act. These
recklessly hitting a pedestrian who was killed, the exercise their sound discretion, without regard to made of light materials. Upon opening the structural and conceptual features of quasi-
crime is reckless imprudence resulting in the rules prescribed in Art. 64 of the RPC. hood of his car, he smelled gasoline from offenses set them apart from the mass of
homicide NOT homicide through reckless (Mariano v. People, G.R. No. 178145, 07 July 2014) under the car. He lighted his lighter to see intentional crimes under the first 13 Titles of
imprudence. what was wrong. All of a sudden, the car was Book II of the as amended.
Q: X, while descending from a curved path, set aflame. The fire spread to the house of A.
The essence of the quasi offense of criminal collided with a motorcycle, killing Y, one of its Prior Conviction or Acquittal of Reckless
negligence under Art. 365 of the RPC lies in the passengers, and causing serious physical To save himself, A jumped from the window Imprudence Bars Subsequent Prosecution for
execution of an imprudent or negligent act that, if injuries to the two other victims. The body of and suffered serious physical injuries. B, wife the Same Quasi-Offense
intentionally done, would be punishable as a Y was loaded to the vehicle of X but the latter’s of A, failed to get out of the house and was
felony. The law penalizes the negligent or engine would not start; thus, the body was burnt to death. C, the son of A and B, suffered The doctrine that reckless imprudence under Art.
careless act, not the result thereof. The gravity of loaded in a different vehicle. The jack of X was slight physical injuries when he got out of the 365 is a single quasi-offense by itself and not
the consequence is only taken into account to used to extricate the body of Y from being house. The motorcycle of C was destroyed. merely a means to commit other crimes such that
determine the penalty, it does not qualify the pinned under the vehicle of X. X, in his What crime did X commit? conviction or acquittal of such quasi-offense bars
substance of the offense. And, as the careless act defense, claimed that it was not his fault that subsequent prosecution for the same quasi-
is single, whether the injurious result should the tricycle swerved in his direction. A: X committed Reckless Imprudence resulting to offense, regardless of its various resulting acts,
affect one person or several persons, the offense Homicide (for the death of B), Arson (for the undergirded this Court's unbroken chain of
(criminal negligence) remains one and the same, X was charged with Reckless Imprudence burning of the house), Serious Physical Injuries jurisprudence on double jeopardy as applied to
and cannot be split into different crimes and Resulting to Homicide with Double Serious (for the injuries sustained by A), and Damage to Art. 365.
prosecutions. (Ivler v. San Pedro, G.R. No. 172716, Physical Injuries and Damage to Property property (for the destruction of motorcycle of C).
17 Nov. 2010) under Art. 365 in relation to Art. 263 of the There is only one criminal information to be filed For the essence of the quasi offense of criminal
RPC “with the aggravating circumstance that because grave or less grave felonies resulted negligence under Art. 365 of the RPC lies in the
Q: Y while alighting from his vehicle was hit by accused failed to lend on the spot to the from single act of imprudence. When X lighted his execution of an imprudent or negligent act that, if
X with his car. This caused Y to be thrown four injured party such help that was in his hands lighter despite smelling gasoline, he omitted that intentionally done, would be punishable as a
meters away from his jeepney. X was charged to give”. Should the court appreciate the degree of care or caution to prevent injury or felony. The law penalizes thus the negligent or
with frustrated murder and convicted in the alleged aggravating circumstance? damage to another. The several crimes must be careless act, not the result thereof. The gravity of
RTC of frustrated homicide. Upon appeal in included in one information for Reckless the consequence is only taken into account to
the CA, the crime was modified to reckless A: NO. The aggravating circumstance “that Imprudence. determine the penalty, it does not qualify the
imprudence resulting in serious physical accused failed to lend on the spot to the injured substance of the offense. And, as the careless act
injuries. X contends that he is not liable for party such help that was in his hands to give” However, with respect to the slight physical is single, whether the injurious result should
such crime because he lacked criminal intent; should not be appreciated. Verily, it is the injuries sustained by C, resulting from the single affect one person or several persons, the offense
that he was not negligent in driving his pick- inexcusable lack of precaution or conscious act of imprudence does not constitute a complex (criminal negligence) remains one and the same,
up truck; and that the CA should have indifference to the consequences of the conduct crime. Another information for Reckless and can not be split into different crimes and
appreciated voluntary surrender as a which supplies the criminal intent in Art. 365. Imprudence resulting in Slight Physical Injuries prosecutions.
mitigating circumstance in his favor. Is X’s The limiting element in the last paragraph of Art. must be filed against X. (Reodica v. CA, G.R. No.
contention correct? 365 of the RPC, which imposes the penalty next 125066, 08 July 1998)

Art. 48 Does not Apply to Acts Penalized Resulting to Homicide. It held that Rogelio’s under control and avoid injury to others using the
Under Art. 365 of the RPC act of driving very fast on the wrong side of highway.
the road was the proximate cause of the
It is conceptually impossible for a quasi- collision, resulting to the death of Y and Here, X was charged with the offense of Reckless
offense to stand for (1) a single act constituting serious physical injuries to the two children. Imprudence Resulting to Homicide with Double
two or more grave or less grave felonies; or (2) The CA affirmed the decision of the RTC. Is the Serious Physical Injuries and Damage to Property
an offense which is a necessary means for RTC and CA correct holding X liable to under Art. 365 in relation to Art. 263 of the RPC,
committing another. Reckless Imprudence? a complex crime. Art. 48 of the RPC provides that
when a single act constitutes two or more grave
Prosecutions under Art. 365 should proceed from A: YES. Reckless imprudence, as defined in Art. or less grave felonies, or when an offense is a
a single charge regardless of the number or 365 of the RPC, consists in voluntarily, but necessary means for committing the other, the
severity of the consequences. In imposing without malice, doing or failing to do an act from penalty for the most serious crime, in this case,
penalties, the judge will do no more than apply which material damage results by reason of Reckless Imprudence Resulting to Homicide,
the penalties under Art. 365 for each inexcusable lack of precaution on the part of the shall be imposed, the same to be applied in its
consequence alleged and proven. In short, there person performing or failing to perform such act, maximum period. (Rogelio J. Gonzaga v People,
shall be no splitting of charges under Art. 365, taking into consideration his employment or G.R. No. 195671, 21 Jan. 2015, as penned by J.
and only one information shall be filed in the occupation, degree of intelligence, physical Caguioa)
same first level court. condition and other circumstances regarding
persons, time and place.
Q: Y was driving his motorcycle to bring his
two (2) minor children to school. While they In order to establish a motorist’s liability for the
were ascending a curving road on their negligent operation of a vehicle, it must be shown
proper lane on the right side of the road, a that there was a direct causal connection
Toyota Land Cruiser driven by X was swiftly between such negligence and the injuries or
descending the same lane from the opposite damages complained of. To constitute the offense
direction. Y blew the horn of his motorcycle to of reckless driving, the act must be something
signal the Land Cruiser to return to its proper more than a mere negligence in the operation of
lane but the Land Cruiser remained. In order a motor vehicle – a willful and wanton disregard
to avoid collision, Y tried to swerve to the left, of the consequences is required. Verily, it is the
but the Land Cruiser suddenly swerved inexcusable lack of precaution or conscious
towards the same direction and collided indifference to the consequences of the conduct
head-on with the motorcycle. X eventually which supplies the criminal intent and brings an
died in the hospital and his two children were act of mere negligence and imprudence under the
injured. operation of the penal law, without regard to
whether the private offended party may himself
The prosecutor charged X for Reckless be considered likewise at fault.
Imprudence Resulting to Homicide. In his
defense, X claimed that he was driving the In this case, the RTC and the CA uniformly found
Land Cruiser on his proper lane along the that’s act of driving very fast on the wrong side of
descending curving road. According to X, Y the road was the proximate cause of the collision,
was driving his motorcycle in a zigzag manner resulting to the death of Y and serious physical
on the Land Cruiser’s Lane while Rolf was on injuries to the two children. Indeed, the very fact
his proper lane. Undecided which side of the of speeding, under such circumstances, is
road to take to avoid collision, X stopped the indicative of imprudent behavior. As a motorist, X
Land Cruiser but the motorcycle of Y was bound to exercise ordinary care in such affair
nonetheless, bumped into it. by driving at a reasonable rate of speed
commensurate with the conditions encountered,
The RTC found X guilty beyond reasonable as this would enable him to keep the vehicle
doubt of the crime of Reckless Imprudence

Criminal Law Special Penal Laws
anal to genital, or oral to anal, whether visual image or sexual relationship by communicating any
III. SPECIAL PENAL LAWS between persons of the same or opposite sex; iii. Photograph, film, video, picture, form of child pornography (Sec. 3(h), R.A. No.
2. Bestiality; digital image or picture, computer 9775). Grooming includes online enticement or
3. Masturbation; image or picture, whether made or enticement through any other means.
4. Sadistic or masochistic abuse; produced by electronic, mechanical
5. Lascivious exhibition of the genitals, or other means Luring
A. ANTI-CHILD PORNOGRAPHY ACT OF 2009 buttocks, breast, pubic area and/or anus; or iv. Drawings, cartoons, sculptures or
Secs. 3 (a-c), 4, and 5, R.A. No. 9775 6. Use of any object or instrument for lascivious paintings depicting children The act of communicating, by means of a
acts. (Sec. 3(c), R.A. 9775) v. Other analogous visual depiction computer system, with a child or someone who
the offender believes to be a child for the purpose
Child as contemplated under R.A. No. 9775 Primarily Sexual Purposes b. Audio representation of a person who of facilitating the commission of sexual activity or
is or is represented as being a child and production of any form of child pornography.
Child refers to a person: Purposes which will fulfill all the following who is engaged in or is represented as (Sec. 3(i), R.A. No. 9775)
1. BELOW 18 years of age; or conditions: being engaged in explicit sexual activity,
2. OVER 18 years of age but is unable to fully or an audio representation that Pandering
take care of himself/herself from abuse, 1. The average person applying contemporary advocates, encourages or counsels any
neglect, cruelty, exploitation or community standards would find the work sexual activity with children which is an The act of offering, advertising, promoting,
discrimination because of a physical or taken as a whole appealing to prurient offense under this Act. representing, or distributing through any means
mental disability or condition. (Sec. 3(a), interest and satisfying only the market for any material or purported material that is
par. 1, R.A.9775) gratuitous sex and violence; NOTE: Such representation includes intended to cause another to believe that the
audio recordings and live audio material or purported material contains any form
A child shall also refer to: 2. The work depicts or describes sexual transmission conveyed through any of child pornography, regardless of the actual
conduct in a patently offensive way; and medium including real-time internet content of the material or purported material.
1. A person, regardless of age, who is presented, communications. (Sec. 3(j), R.A. No. 9775)
depicted or portrayed as a child as defined 3. The work taken as a whole imbued within its
herein; or context, manner or presentation, intention c. Written text or material that advocates PUNISHABLE ACTS
and culture, lascivious, literary, artistic, or counsels’ explicit sexual activity with
2. Computer-generated, digitally or manually political and scientific value. (Sec. 3(k), R.A. a child and whose dominant 1. To hire, employ, use, persuade, induce or
crafted images or graphics of a person who is No. 9775) characteristic is the description, for a coerce a child to perform in the creation or
represented or who is made to appear to be a sexual purpose, of an explicit sexual production of any form of child pornography;
child as defined herein. (Sec. 3(a)(2), R.A. No. Child Pornography Materials activity with a child. (Sec. 3(c)(1), R.A. No.
9775) 9775) 2. To produce, direct, manufacture or create
It refers to the means and methods by which child any form of child pornography;
Child Pornography pornography is carried out: 2. As to Content – It includes representation of
a person who is, appears to be, or is 3. To publish, offer, transmit, sell, distribute,
Any representation, whether visual, audio, or 1. As to Form – represented as being a child, the dominant broadcast, advertise, promote, export, or
written combination thereof, by electronic, characteristic of which is the depiction, for a import any form of child pornography;
mechanical, digital, optical, magnetic or by any a. Visual depiction – which includes not sexual purpose, of the:
other means, of a child engaged or involved in only images of real children but also 4. To possess any form of child pornography
real or simulated explicit sexual activities. (Sec. digital image, computer image or a. Sexual organ or the anal region, or a with the intent to sell, distribute, publish, or
3(b), R.A. No. 9775) computer-generated image that is representation thereof; or broadcast;
indistinguishable from that of real b. Breasts, or a representation of the
Explicit Sexual Activity children engaging in an explicit sexual breasts, of a female person. (Sec. 3(c)(2), NOTE: Possession of three (3) or more
activity. Visual depiction shall include: R.A. No. 9775) articles of child pornography of the same
Includes actual or simulated: form shall be prima facie evidence of the
i. Undeveloped film and videotapes Grooming intent to sell, distribute, publish or broadcast.
1. Sexual intercourse or lascivious act ii. Data and/or images stored on a
including, but not limited to, contact computer disk or by electronic The act of preparing a child or someone who the 5. To knowingly, willfully and intentionally
involving genital to genital, oral to genital, means capable of conversion into a offender believes to be a child for sexual activity provide a venue for the commission of

prohibited acts as, but not limited to, dens, 9775); buy and sell, or in any other manner deal in any article or object taken” during that robbery
private rooms, cubicles, cinemas, houses or article, item, object or anything of value which he or theft;
in establishments purporting to be a 15. Willfully and knowingly failing to comply knows, or should be known to him, to have been
legitimate business; with the notice requirements by any mall derived from the proceeds of the crime of 3. The accused knows or should have known
owner-operator and owner or lessor of other robbery or theft. (Sec. 2(a), P.D. 1612) that the thing is derived from that crime; and
6. For film distributors, theaters and business establishments (Sec. 10, R.A. No. (1998 BAR)
telecommunication companies, by 9775); NOTE: To be liable for fencing, the offender buys
themselves or in cooperation with other or otherwise acquires and then sells or disposes 4. He intends by the deal he makes to gain for
entities, to distribute any form of child 16. Knowingly, willfully and intentionally of any object of value that he knows or should be himself or for another. (Dimat v. People, G.R.
pornography; violating duties of an internet content host known to him to have been derived from the No. 181184, 25 Jan. 2012)
(Sec. 11, R.A. No. 9775); and proceeds of the robbery or theft. (Caoili v. CA, G.R.
7. For a parent, legal guardian or person having No. 128369, 22 Dec. 1997) NOTE: Fencing under P.D. 1612 is a distinct crime
custody or control of a child to knowingly 17. Violation of the right to privacy of the child at from theft and robbery.
permit the child to engage, participate or any stage of the investigation, prosecution Nature of the Crime of Fencing
assist in any form of child pornography; and trial of an offense under this Act. (Sec. 13, Fencing vs. Robbery and Theft
R.A. No. 9775) Fencing is a crime involving moral turpitude.
8. To engage in the luring or grooming of a Actual knowledge of the fact that the property The law on fencing does not require the accused
child; Child Pornography as a Transnational Crime received is stolen displays the same degree of to have participated in the criminal design to
malicious deprivation of one’s rightful property commit, or to have been in any wise involved in
9. To engage in pandering of any form of child The Department of Justice may execute the as that which animated the robbery or theft the commission of, the crime of robbery or theft.
pornography; request of a foreign state for assistance in the which by their very nature, are crimes of moral Neither is the crime of robbery or theft made to
investigation or prosecution of any form of child turpitude. (Dela Torre v. COMELEC, G.R. No. depend on an act of fencing in order that it can be
10. To willfully access any form of child pornography by: 121592, 05 July 5, 1996) consummated. (People v. Hon. De Guzman, G.R. No.
pornography; 77368, 05 Oct. 1993)
1. Conducting a preliminary investigation Fence
11. To conspire to commit any of the prohibited against the offender and, if appropriate, to Fencing is NOT a Continuing Offense
acts stated in Sec. 4; file the necessary charges in court; It includes any person, firm, association,
2. Giving information needed by the foreign corporation or partnership or other organization Fencing is not a continuing offense. Jurisdiction is
NOTE: Conspiracy to commit any form of state; and who/which commits the act of fencing. (Sec. 2(b), with the court of the place where the personal
child pornography shall be committed when 3. Applying for an order of forfeiture of any P.D. 1612) property subject of the robbery or theft was
two (2) or more persons agree with the proceeds or monetary instrument or possessed, bought, kept, or dealt with. The place
commission of any said prohibited acts and properly located in the Philippines used in Officers of Juridical Persons are Liable under where the theft or robbery was committed is
decide to commit it. connection with child pornography in the this Law inconsequential. (People v. Hon. De Guzman,
court. (Sec. 22, R.A. No. 9775) supra)
12. To possess any form of child pornography If the fence is a partnership, firm, corporation or
(Sec. 4, R.A. No. 9775); NOTE: The principles of mutuality and association, the president or the manager or any Required Proof in the Prosecution of Anti-
reciprocity shall be at all times recognized. (Sec. officers thereof who knows or should have Fencing Law
13. Syndicated child pornography (Sec. 5, R.A. No. 22, R.A. 9775) known the commission of the offense shall be
9775); liable. (Sec. 4, P.D. 1612) Presidential Decree (P.D.) 1612 is a special law
and, therefore, its violation is regarded as malum
NOTE: Syndicated child pornography is B. ANTI-FENCING LAW OF 1979 Elements of Fencing prohibitum, requiring no proof of criminal intent.
committed when it is carried out by a group Secs. 2 – 6, P.D. 1612
of three (3) or more persons conspiring or 1. A robbery or theft has been committed; The prosecution must prove that the offender
confederating with one another. (Sec. 5, R.A. (1990, 1992, 1995, 2009, 2010 BAR) knew or should have known that the subject of
No. 9775) the offense he acquired and later sold was
Fencing (2013, 2014 BAR)
2. The accused, who took no part in the robbery derived from theft or robbery and that he
14. Willfully and knowingly failing to comply or theft, “buys, receives, possesses, keeps, intended to obtain some gain out of his acts.
The act of any person who, with intent to gain for
with the notice and installation requirements acquires, conceals, sells or disposes, or buys (Dimat v. People, supra)
himself or for another, shall buy, receive, possess,
of an internet service provider (Sec. 9, R.A. No. and sells, or in any manner deals in any
keep, acquire, conceal, sell or dispose of, or shall

Presumption of Fencing wanting in this case. The suspect is engaged in the 2. Directly or indirectly requesting or receiving and
buy and sell of used garments, which are in the any gift, present, share, percentage, or c. It was accepted during:
Mere possession of any good, article, item, object, nature of personal property. benefit, for himself or for any other person, in i. The pendency thereof; or
or anything of value which has been the subject of connection with any contract or transaction ii. Within 1 year after its
robbery or thievery shall be prima facie evidence In civil law, possession of personal or movable between the Government and any other termination.
of fencing. property carries a prima facie presumption of party, wherein the public officer in his official
ownership. The presumption of “fencing” arises capacity has to intervene under the law. (Sec. 5. Causing any undue injury to any party,
NOTE: The presumption does not offend the only when the article or item involved is the 3 (b), R.A. 3019; 2010 BAR) including the Government, or giving any
presumption of innocence enshrined in the subject of a robbery or thievery. (Sec. 5, P.D. 1612) private party any unwarranted benefits,
fundamental law. It only shifted the burden of Elements: advantage or preference in the discharge of
evidence to the defense. Burden of proof is upon a. The offender is a public officer; his official, administrative or judicial
the fence to overcome the presumption. b. He requested and/or received, directly functions through manifest partiality,
C. ANTI-GRAFT AND CORRUPT
or indirectly, a gift, present or evident bad faith, or gross inexcusable
PRACTICES ACT
Clearance/Permit to Sell/Use Second-Hand consideration; negligence. (Sec. 3 (e), R.A. 3019) (1990,
R.A. 3019, as amended by R.A. 3047,
Articles c. The gift, present or consideration was 1991, 1997, 2005, 2009 BAR)
P.D. 1288, B.P. Blg. 195, and R.A. 10910
for the benefit of the said public officer
All stores, establishments or entities dealing in or for any other person; Elements:
the buy and sell of any good, article item, object d. It was requested and/or received in a. The accused must be a public officer
Persons Covered under this Act (BAR 2000) discharging administrative, judicial, or
or anything of value obtained from an unlicensed connection with a contract or
dealer or supplier thereof, shall before offering transaction with the Government; and official functions;
All public officers which include elective and b. He must have acted with manifest
the same for sale to the public, secure the e. The public officer has the right to
appointive officials and employees, permanent or partiality, evident bad faith, or
necessary clearance or permit from the station intervene in such contract or
temporary, whether in the classified or inexcusable negligence; and
commander of the Integrated National Police in transaction in his official capacity.
unclassified or exempt service, receiving c. That his action caused:
the town or city where such store, establishment
compensation, even nominal from the i. Any undue injury to any party,
or entity is located. 3. Directly or indirectly requesting or receiving
government. (Sec. 2(b), R.A. No. 3019) including the government; or
any gift, present or other pecuniary or
The Chief of Constabulary/Director General, material benefit, for himself or for another, ii. Giving any private party
Government includes: unwarranted benefits, advantage
Integrated National Police, shall promulgate such from any person for whom the public officer,
1. National government; or preference in the discharge of
rules and regulations to carry out the provisions in any manner or capacity, has secured or
2. Local government; his functions.
of this section. Any person who fails to secure the obtained, or will secure or obtain, any
3. GOCCs;
clearance or permit required by this section or Government permit or license, in
4. Other instrumentalities or agencies; and NOTE: Since bad faith is an element, good
who violates any of the provisions of the rules consideration for the help given or to be
5. Their branches. (Sec. 2(a), R.A. No. 3019) faith or lack of malice is a valid defense.
and regulations promulgated thereunder shall given. (Sec. 3 (c), R.A. No. 3019)
upon conviction be punished as a fence. (Sec. 6,
PUNISHABLE ACTS NOTE: This provision shall apply to officers
P.D. 1612) NOTE: This is a special form of bribery.
and employees of offices or government
1. (a) Persuading, inducing, or influencing corporations charged with the grant of
Q: Arlene is engaged in the buy and sell of used 4. Accepting or having any member of his
another public officer to: licenses or permits or other concessions.
garments, more popularly known as "ukay- family accept employment in a private
ukay." Among the items found by the police in i. Perform an act constituting a enterprise which has pending official
violation of the Rules and Q: Olympic Mines and Platinum Group applied
a raid of her store in Baguio City were brand- business with him during the pendency
Regulations duly promulgated by and granted by the Provincial Mining
new Louis Feraud blazers. Arlene was thereof or within one year after its
competent authority, or Regulatory Board (the Board) a small-scale
charged with "fencing." Will the charge termination. (Sec. 3 (d), R.A. 3019)
ii. An offense in connection with the mining permit which allowed them to extract
prosper? Why or why not? (2010 BAR)
official duties of the latter. 50,000 dry metric tons of laterite ore. The
Elements:
DENR also granted Olympic Mines and
A: NO. The charge of “fencing” will not prosper. a. The public officer accepted, or having
(b) Allowing himself to be persuaded, Platinum Group with their separate
For a charge of fencing to prosper, it must first be any of his family member accept any
induced or influenced to commit such Environmental Compliance Certificate (ECC)
established that the article subject of the alleged employment in a private enterprise;
violation or offense. (Sec 3 (a), R.A. which allows them to extract 50,000 dry
“fencing” has been derived from the proceeds of b. Such private enterprise has a pending
3019) metric tons of nickel/ore mineral per year.
the crime of theft or robbery—a fact which is official business with the public officer;

Platinum Group transported, for itself and on trucks in the total amount of P6,387,500.00 in due demand or request has been made party.” Is the decision correct?
behalf of Olympic Mines, a total of behalf of Quezon. Municipal Mayor Leonardo on him;
203,399.135 dry metric tons of nickel ore. also bid for two (2) small equipment c. Reasonable time has elapsed from such A: YES. In an application for a mayor's permit or
Olympic Mines applied for the renewal of its (hydraulic excavator and front cut unit cabin) demand or request without the public license to do business in a municipality or city,
small-scale mining permit before the Board. amounting to a total of P1,670,000.00, for officer having acted on the matter the procedure is fairly standard and
The Board recommended to Reyes, provincial himself. Quezon was eventually declared the pending before him; and uncomplicated. It requires the submission of the
governor, to grant the renewal, which he did. winning bidder of all seven (7) equipment. d. Such failure to act is for the purpose of: required documents and the payment of the
What crime, if any, did Municipal Mayor i. Obtaining (directly or indirectly) assessed business taxes and fees. In case of failure
Subsequently, Olympic Mines and Platinum Leonardo commit? from any person interested in the to comply with the requirements, the application
Group’s ECC were cancelled due to over- matter some pecuniary or material deserves to be disapproved. If the application is
extraction. Later on, Reyes was charged with A: Municipal Mayor Leonardo violated of Sec. benefit or advantage; compliant, then approval is the action to be taken.
violation of Sec. 3(e) of R.A. 3019 or the Anti- 3(e), R.A. 3019 or the Anti-Graft and Corrupt ii. Favoring his own interest; or An inaction or refusal to act is a course of action
Graft and Corrupt Practices Act when he Practices Act. The elements of the offense are: iii. Giving undue advantage in favor of; anathema to public service with utmost
allegedly gave unwarranted benefits, (1) the accused must be a public officer or responsibility and efficiency. If the deliberate
preference, and advantage to Olympic Mines discharging administrative, judicial or official iv. Discriminating against any other refusal to act or intentional inaction on an
in the renewal of its permit. Is Reyes guilty of functions; (2) he or she must have acted with interested party. (Coronado v. application for mayor's permit is motivated by
violating Sec. 3(e) of R.A. 3019? manifest partiality, evident bad faith or Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 94955, 18 personal conflicts and political considerations, it
inexcusable negligence; and (3) his or her action Aug. 1993) thus becomes discriminatory, and constitutes a
A: YES. Reyes committed gross inexcusable caused injury to any party, including the violation of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices
negligence when he approved Olympic Mines' government, or giving any party unwarranted Q: Fermina owns the Fersan Variety Store Act. (Corazon Lacap v. Sandiganbayan and the
renewal of its small-scale mining permit, benefits, advantage or preference in the engaged in the sale of school supplies, People, G.R. No. 198162, 21 June 2017, J. Caguioa)
considering that Olympic Mines violated the discharge of his or her official functions. furniture and accessories. She usually applies
terms and conditions of the permit. From May 30, for a Mayor's Permit between February and 7. Entering, on behalf of the Government, into
2005 to April 3, 2006, Platinum Group The following facts are undisputed: Municipal March of every year and has been submitting any contract or transaction manifestly and
transported 203,399.135 dry metric tons of Mayor Leonardo, then Quezon's Municipal to the Office of the Mayor for the issuance of grossly disadvantageous to the same,
nickel ore under Olympic Mines' and Platinum Mayor, was expressly authorized to represent Mayor's Permit the required documents. For whether or not the public officer profited or
Group's permit. This is clearly beyond the Quezon at the auction sale of trucks and heavy the year 1999, she filed an Application for will profit thereby. (Sec. 3(g), R.A. No. 3019)
100,000-dry metric ton threshold of the equipment. As it was, he did not only bid for Mayor's Permit and submitted the
combined permits, a fact that Reyes does not Quezon, but also for himself. He merged the bid of requirements to the Mayor's Office. However, Elements:
dispute. His act of renewing Olympic Mines' Quezon and his own bid to make it appear that accused Mayor Corazon Lacap denied her a. Accused is a public officer;
Small-Scale Mining Permits, despite a blatant they all pertained to Quezon. (Leonardo v. People, application and she (accused) was angry at b. The public officer entered into a contract
violation of the terms of the permit, was correctly G.R. No. 246451, 03 Feb. 2021) her. She went back to accused Lacap twice to or transaction on behalf of the
characterized as gross inexcusable negligence. ask for reconsideration but she (Lacap) was government; and
(Reyes v. People, G.R. No. 237172, 18 Sept. 2019) 6. Neglecting or refusing, after due demand or even more angry, and told them to leave the c. Such contract or transaction is grossly
request, without sufficient justification, to act place. and manifestly disadvantageous to the
Q: On Feb. 11, 2010, the Sangguniang Bayan of within a reasonable time on any matter government.
Quezon, Bukidnon issued Resolution No. 10th pending before him for the purpose of The Sandiganbayan rendered a Decision
SB 2010-27 authorizing then Municipal Mayor obtaining, directly or indirectly, from any holding Corazon guilty beyond reasonable Q: The Presidential Ad Hoc Fact-Finding
petitioner to cause the procurement of trucks person interested in the matter some doubt of violation of Sec. 3(f) of R.A. No. 3019 Committee on Behest Loans conducted an
and heavy equipment in behalf of the pecuniary or material benefit or advantage, for “Neglecting or refusing, after due demand investigation on all non-performing loans,
Municipality of Quezon (Quezon). Quezon, or for the purpose of favoring his own or request, without sufficient justification, to whether behest or non-behest. Among the
through Municipal Mayor Leonardo, joined interest or giving undue advantage in favor of act within a reasonable time on any matter loan accounts investigated by the Committee
the auction conducted by United Auctioneers, or discriminating against any other pending before him for the purpose of was that of the Philippine Pigment and Resin
Inc. It paid the bid deposit of P100,000.00, to interested party. (Sec. 3 (f), R.A. 3019) obtaining, directly or indirectly, from any Corporation (PPRC) which it found to have
be deducted from the purchase price in case person interested in the matter some possessed positive characteristics of behest
of a successful bid. Elements: pecuniary or material benefit or advantage, or loans. A complaint was filed before the Office
a. Offender is a public officer; for the purpose of favoring his own interest or of the Ombudsman (OMB) for violation of
Using the bid book and bid deposit of Quezon, b. Public officer neglected or refused to giving undue advantage in favor of or Secs. 3(e) and (g) of R.A. No. 3019, as
Municipal Mayor Leonardo bid for five (5) act without sufficient justification after discriminating against any other interested amended. The complaint alleged that 64% of

the collaterals to said loan consisted of yet to Graft and Corrupt Practices Act. It is true that Sec. officer. with the Government:
be acquired assets. Further, there was no 3 of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act
proof that the loans grossly and manifestly speaks of corrupt practices of public officers. b. Is prohibited by the constitution or by 1. Person giving the gift, present, share,
disadvantageous to the government or that "However, if there is an allegation of conspiracy, law from having any interest. (Sec. 3(h), percentage or benefit in par. 2 and 3.
there was evident bad faith, manifest a private person may be held liable together with R.A. No. 3019) 2. Person offering or giving to the public officer
partiality or gross inexcusable negligence on the public officer." This is consistent with the the employment mentioned in par. 4.
the part of PPRC. Will the complaint prosper? policy behind the statute, which, as provided in 9. Directly or indirectly becoming interested, 3. Person urging the divulging or untimely
its first section, is "to repress certain acts of for personal gains, or having a material release of the confidential information in par.
A: NO. The elements of evident bad faith, public officers and private persons alike which interest in any transaction or act which: 11.
manifest partiality and/or gross inexcusable may constitute graft or corrupt practices or
negligence are lacking in the instant case; and which may lead thereto." a. Requires the approval of a board, panel Q: May a public officer charged under Sec. 3(b)
petitioner failed to prove that the questioned or group of which he is a member and of R.A. No. 3019 (“directly or indirectly
foreign currency loans granted by the DBP to The reason that private persons may be charged which exercises discretion in such requesting or receiving any gift, present,
PPRC were grossly and manifestly with public officers under the Anti-Graft and approval; or share, percentage or benefit, for himself of for
disadvantageous to the government. While Corrupt Practices Act is "to avoid repeated and b. Even if he votes against the same or does any other person, in connection with any
petitioner alleged that the subject foreign unnecessary presentation of witnesses and not participate in the action of the board, contract or transaction between the
currency loans were undercollateralized and exhibits against conspirators in different venues, committee, panel or group. government and any other party, wherein the
PPRC was undercapitalized, it failed to especially if the issues involved are the same. It public officer in his official capacity has to
sufficiently establish that indeed the transactions follows, therefore, that if a private person may be NOTE: Interest for personal gain shall be intervene under the law”) also be
were either grossly and manifestly tried jointly with public officers, he or she may presumed against those public officials simultaneously or successively charged with
disadvantageous to the government or that there also be convicted jointly with them." (Garcia-Diaz responsible for the approval of manifestly direct bribery under Art. 210 of the RPC?
was evident bad faith, manifest partiality or gross v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 193236, 17 Sept. 2018) unlawful, inequitable, or irregular Explain. (2010 BAR)
inexcusable negligence on the part of private transaction or acts by the board, panel or
respondents. Furthermore, even if the collaterals Q: Accused Dela Cruz contends that he cannot group to which they belong. (Sec. 3(i), R.A. No. A: YES. A public officer charged under Sec. 3 (b)
consisted mostly of assets yet to be acquired, the be held guilty of violation of Sec. 3(g) of R.A. 3019) of R.A. No. 3019 may also be charged
inclusion of after-acquired properties in a 3019 as the law only mentioned that public simultaneously or successively for the crime of
mortgage contract was held to be lawful as officials are offenders of such provision. Can a 10. Knowingly approving or granting any license, direct bribery under Art. 210 of the RPC because
decided by the Supreme Court in its previous private person be held guilty under R.A. permit, privilege or benefit in favor of: two crimes are essentially different and are
decisions. (PCGG v. Office of the Ombudsman, et al., 3019? penalized under distinct legal philosophies.
G.R. No. 195962, 18 Apr. 2018, J. Caguioa) a. Any person not qualified for or not Violation of Sec. 3(b) of R.A. No. 3019 is a malum
A: YES. Private persons acting in conspiracy with legally entitled to such license, permit, prohibitum, the crime under Art. 210 of the Code
Private Persons as Offenders public officers may be indicted and if found guilty, privilege or benefit; or is a malum in se.
be held liable for the pertinent offenses under b. A mere representative or dummy of one
Q: Public officers Solicitor General Galvez, Sec. 3 of R.A. 3019. This supports the "policy of who is not so qualified or entitled. (Sec. 3 Q: Differentiate Sec. 3(b) of R.A. 3019 and
NAMRIA officials Solis, Fabian, Bonnevie, the anti-graft law to repress certain acts of public (j), R.A. No. 3019) Direct Bribery under Art. 210 of the RPC. Will
Valencia, and Viernes, and private person officers and private persons alike [which there be double jeopardy if a person is
Garcia-Diaz were charged for violating Sec. constitute] graft or corrupt practices act or which 11. (a) Divulging valuable information of a: charged simultaneously or successively for
3(g) of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices may lead thereto." (Granada v. People, G.R. No. i. Confidential character violation of Sec. 3 of R.A. 3019 and the RPC?
Act before the Sandiganbayan. Garcia-Diaz 184092, 22 Feb. 2017) ii. Acquired by his office or by him on
filed a Motion to Dismiss/Quash Information, account of his official position to A: The violation of Sec. 3(b) of R.A. No. 3019 is
contending that private persons cannot be 8. Directly or indirectly having a financial or unauthorized person neither identical nor necessarily inclusive of
charged under the Anti-Graft and Corrupt pecuniary interest in any business, contract (b) Releasing such information in advance direct bribery. While they have common
Practices Act. May a private person be or transaction in which he: of its authorized released date. (Sec. 3 elements, not all the essential elements of one
charged and convicted of violating the (k), R.A. No. 3019) offense are included among or form part of those
provisions of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt a. Intervenes or takes part in his official enumerated in the other. Whereas the mere
Practices Act? capacity; The following persons shall also be punished request or demand of a gift, present, share,
with the public officer and shall be permanently percentage or benefit is enough to constitute a
A: YES. A private person may be charged and NOTE: Intervention must be actual and or temporarily disqualified, in the discretion of violation of Sec. 3(b) of R.A. No. 3019, acceptance
convicted of violating the provisions of the Anti- in the official capacity of the public the Court, from transacting business in any form of a promise or offer or receipt of a gift or present

is required in direct bribery. Adalim, not in his official capacity as a mayor, but Undue Injury PROHIBITED ACTS FOR PRIVATE
as a detainee charged with murder. Thus, for INDIVIDUALS
Moreover, the ambit of Sec. 3(b) of R.A. No. 3019 purposes of applying the provisions of Sec. 3(e), The term “undue injury” in the context of Sec. 3(e)
is specific. It is limited only to contracts or R.A. No. 3019, Adalim was a private party. (Ambil of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices 1. For any person having family or close
transactions involving monetary consideration Jr. v. People, G.R. No. 175457, 06 July 2011) Act punishing the act of “causing undue injury to personal relation with any public official to
where the public officer has the authority to any party,” has a meaning akin to that of the civil capitalize or exploit or take advantage of
intervene under the law. Direct bribery, on the NOTE: The requirement before a private person law concept of actual damage. (Guadines v. such family or personal relation by directly
other hand, has a wider and more general scope: may be indicted for violation of Sec. 3 of R.A. 3019 Sandiganbayan and People, G.R. No. 164891, 06 or indirectly requesting or receiving any
(a) performance of an act constituting a crime; is that such private person must be alleged to June 2011) present, gift, or material or pecuniary
(b) execution of an unjust act which does not have acted in conspiracy with a public officer. The advantage from any person having some
constitute a crime; and (c) agreeing to refrain or law, however, does not require that such person Q: In violation of Sec. 3(e) of R.A. No. 3019, is business, transaction, application, request or
refraining from doing an act which is his official must, in all instances, be indicted together with it necessary that the circumstances of: (1) contract with the government, in which such
duty to do. the public officer. If circumstances exist where “causing any undue injury to any party, public officer has to intervene. (Sec. 4, R.A. No.
the public officer may no longer be charged in including the Government”; and (2) “giving 3019)
Although the two charges against the petitioner court, as in the present case where the public any private party any unwarranted benefits,”
stemmed from the same transaction, the same act officer has already died, the private person may both be present to convict the accused of the NOTE: Family relations include the spouse or
led two separate and distinct offenses. No double be indicted alone. (People v. Go, G.R. No. 168539, said crime? relatives by consanguinity or affinity within
jeopardy attached since there was a variance 25 Mar. 2014) third (3rd) civil degree.
between the elements of the offenses charged. A: NO. The Supreme Court has clarified that the
The constitutional protection against double Manifest Partiality use of the disjunctive word “or” connotes that Close personal relations include close
jeopardy proceeds from a second prosecution for either act of (a) “causing any undue injury to any personal friendship, social and fraternal
the same offense, not for a different one. There is a clear, notorious, or plain inclination or party, including the Government” and (b) “giving relations, and professional employment, all
(Merencillo v. People, G.R. Nos. 142369-70, 13 April predilection to favor one side or person rather any private party any unwarranted benefits, giving rise to intimacy which assures free
2007) than another. (Alvizo v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. Nos. advantage or preference,” qualifies as a violation access to such public officer.
98494-98692, 17 July 2003; Webster, Third New of Sec. 3(e) of R.A. No. 3019, as amended. The use
Q: Mayor Adalim was charged with murder. International Dictionary; Bouvier’s Law of the disjunctive “or” connotes that the two 2. For any person to knowingly induce or cause
He was transferred from the provincial jail Dictionary, Third Edition) modes need not be present at the same time. In any public official to commit any of the
and detained him at the residence of Ambil, Jr. other words, the presence of one would suffice offenses defined in Sec. 3.
Considering that Sec. 3(e) of R.A. No. 3019 Gross Inexcusable Negligence for conviction. (Alvarez v. People, G.R. No. 192591,
punishes the giving by a public officer of 29 June 2011) Other Prohibited Acts for the Relatives
unwarranted benefits to a private party, does Refers to negligence characterized by the want of
the fact that a Mayor was the recipient of such even the slightest care, acting or omitting to act in Q: Is proof of the extent of damage necessary GR: It shall be unlawful for the spouse or relative
benefits take petitioners’ case beyond the a situation where there is a duty to act, not to prove the crime? by consanguinity or affinity within the third civil
ambit of said law? inadvertently but willfully and intentionally, with degree of the President, Vice President, Senate
conscious indifference to consequences insofar A: NO. The Supreme Court held in Fonacier v. President, or Speaker of the House to intervene,
A: NO. In drafting the Anti-Graft Law, the as other persons may be affected. (Sistoza v. Sandiganbayan, that proof of the extent or directly or indirectly, in any business,
lawmakers opted to use “private party” rather Desierto, G.R. No. 144784. 03 Sept. 2002) quantum of damage is not essential. It is transaction, contract, or application with the
than “private person” to describe the recipient of sufficient that the injury suffered or benefits government.
the unwarranted benefits, advantage or Evident Bad Faith received can be perceived to be substantial
preference for a reason. A private person simply enough and not merely negligible. Under the XPNs:
pertains to one who is not a public officer while a It connotes not only bad judgment but also second mode of the crime defined in Sec. 3(e) of 1. Any person who, prior to the assumption of
private party is more comprehensive in scope to palpably and patently fraudulent and dishonest R.A. No. 3019, damage is not required. In order to office of any of the above officials to whom
mean either a private person or a public officer purpose to do moral obliquity or conscious be found guilty under the second mode, it suffices he is related, has been already dealing with
acting in a private capacity to protect his personal wrongdoing for some perverse motive or ill will that the accused has given unjustified favor or the Government along the same line of
interest. (Sistoza v. Desierto, supra). It also contemplates a benefit to another, in the exercise of his official, business;
state of mind affirmatively operating with furtive administrative or judicial functions. (Alvarez v.
When Mayor Adalim was transferred from the design or with some motive or self-interest or ill People, supra) 2. Any transaction, contract, or application
provincial jail and was detained at Ambil, Jr.’s will or for ulterior purposes. (Air France v. already existing or pending at the time of
residence, they accorded such privilege to Carrascoso, G.R. No. L-21438, 28 Sept. 1966) such assumption of public office;

3. Any application filed by him the approval of expiration of his term of office, or upon his not automatic or self-operative. A pre-condition (60) days.” (Rios v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No.
which is not discretionary on the part of the resignation or separation from office: therefor is the existence of a valid information, 129913, 26 Sept. 1997)
official or officials concerned but depends Provided, that public officers assuming office determined at a pre-suspension hearing. Such a
upon compliance with requisites provided less than two (2) months before the end of hearing is in accord with the spirit of the law, Prescriptive Period
by law, or rules or regulations issued the calendar year, may file their statements considering the serious and far-reaching
pursuant to law; or in the following months of January. (Sec. 7, consequences of a suspension of a public official 20 years. (Sec. 11, R.A. No. 3019 as amended by
R.A. No. 3019) even before his conviction, and the demands of R.A. No. 10910)
4. Any act lawfully performed in an official public interest for a speedy determination of the
capacity or in the exercise of a profession. DISMISSAL DUE TO UNEXPLAINED WEALTH issues involved in the case. Once a proper
(Sec. 5, R.A. No. 3019) determination of the validity of the information D. ANTI-HAZING ACT OF 2018
A public official found to have acquired during has been made, it becomes the ministerial duty of R.A. 8049, as amended by R.A. No. 11053
EXCEPTIONS his incumbency, whether in his name or in the the court to issue the order of preventive
name of other persons, an amount of property suspension. (Segovia v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No.
1. Unsolicited gifts or presents of small or and/or money manifestly out of proportion to his 124067, 27 Mar. 1998)
Hazing
insignificant value offered or given as a mere salary and to his other lawful income, that fact
ordinary token of gratitude or friendship shall be a ground for dismissal or removal. (Sec. No hard and fast rule exists in regulating conduct
Any act that results in physical or psychological
according to local customs and usage; and 8, R.A. No. 3019) of pre-suspension hearing. (Luciano v. Mariano,
suffering, harm, or injury inflicted on a recruit,
G.R. No. L-32950, 30 July 1971)
neophyte, applicant, or member as part of an
2. Practice of any profession, lawful trade or Court of Competent Jurisdiction over initiation rite or practice made as a prerequisite
occupation by any private persons or by any Offenses Punishable under this Act Q: What pre-conditions are necessary to be
for admission or a requirement for continuing
public officer who under the law may met or satisfied before preventive
membership in a fraternity, sorority, or
legitimately practice his profession, trade or The Sandiganbayan that has jurisdiction to try suspension may be ordered? (1999 BAR)
organization including, but not limited to
occupation during his incumbency except cases for violation of R.A. No. 3019 if the public paddling, whipping, beating, branding, forced
where the practice of such profession, trade officer is occupying a position corresponding to A: The pre-conditions necessary to be met or
calisthenics, exposure to the weather, forced
or occupation involves conspiracy with any salary grade ‘27’ or higher. Those classified as satisfied before a suspension may be ordered
consumption of any food, liquor, beverage, drug
other person or public official to commit any salary grade ‘26’ or below may still fall within the are:
or other substance, or any other brutal treatment
violations of said Act. (Sec. 14, R.A. No. 3019) jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan, provided that or forced physical activity which is likely to
they hold the positions enumerated by the law. (1) There must be proper notice requiring the
adversely affect the physical and psychological
Otherwise, jurisdiction shall be vested in the accused to show cause at a specific date of
STATEMENT OF ASSETS AND LIABILITIES health of such recruit, neophyte, applicant, or
Regional Trial Court (RTC). (Sec. 4, P.D. No. 1606) hearing why he should not be ordered
member.
suspended from office pursuant to R.A.
Every public officer shall prepare and file with
Private Individuals are Tried Jointly with 3019; and
the office of the corresponding Department Head, This shall also include any activity, intentionally
or in the case of a Head of Department or chief of Principals made or otherwise, by one person alone or acting
(2) There must be a determination of a valid
an independent office, with the Office of the with others, that tends to humiliate or embarrass,
In case private individuals are charged as co- information against the accused that
President, or in the case of members of the degrade, abuse, or endanger, by requiring a
principals, accomplices, or accessories with the warrants his suspension.
Congress and the officials and employees thereof, recruit, neophyte, applicant, or member to do
with the Office of the Secretary of the public officers or employees, including those menial, silly, or foolish tasks. (Sec. 2, R.A. No.
employed in government-owned or controlled However, no specific rules need be laid down for
corresponding House, a true detailed and sworn 11053)
corporations, they shall be tried jointly with said pre-suspension hearing. Suffice it to state that
statement of assets and liabilities, including a
public officers and employees in the proper the accused should be given a fair and adequate
statement of the amounts and sources of his Initiation or Initiation Rites
courts which shall exercise exclusive jurisdiction opportunity to challenge the validity of the
income, the amounts of his personal and family
over them. (Sec. 4, R.A. No. 3019 as amended by criminal proceedings against him. (Luciano v.
expenses and the amount of income taxes paid for Ceremonies, practices, rituals, or other acts,
R.A. 8249) Mariano, supra)
the next preceding calendar year: whether formal or informal, that a person must
perform or take part in order to be accepted into
Necessity of Preventive Suspension Length of Preventive Suspension
1. Within thirty days (30) after the approval of fraternity, sorority, organization as a full-fledged
this Act or after assuming office; and member. It includes ceremonies practices, rituals,
It is mandatory for the court to place under Under Sec. 63(b) of the Local Government Code,
and other acts in all stages of membership in a
preventive suspension a public officer accused “any single preventive suspension of local
2. Within the month of January of every other fraternity, sorority, or organization. (Sec. 2, R.A.
before it. Imposition of suspension, however, is elective officials shall not extend beyond sixty
year thereafter, as well as upon the No. 11053).

Organization apply to any customary athletic events or other section, and in unequivocal terms in a formal 3. Representatives who were present during
similar contests or competitions or any activity or advice to the fraternity sorority, or the initiation shall make a report of the
An organized body of people which includes, but conduct that furthers a legal and legitimate organization concerned, taking into initiation rites to the appropriate officials of
it is not limited to, any club, association, group, objective, subject to prior submission of a consideration the safety and security of the school regarding the conduct of the said
fraternity, and sorority. This term shall include medical clearance or certificate. (Sec. 3, R.A. No. participants in the activity. initiation: Provided, That if hazing is still
the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP), the 11053) committed despite their presence, no liability
Philippine National Police (PNP), the Philippine 8. School officials shall have the authority to shall attach to them unless it is proven that
Military Academy (PMA), the Philippine National REGULATION OF SCHOOL-BASED impose after due notice and summary they failed to perform an overt act to prevent
Police Academy (PNPA), and other similar INITIATION RITES hearing, disciplinary sanctions, in or stop the commission thereof. (Sec. 5, R.A.
uniformed service learning institutions. (Sec. 2, accordance with the school's guidelines and No. 11053)
R.A. No. 11053) 1. A written application to conduct initiation regulations on the matter, which shall
rites shall be made to the proper authorities include, but shall not be limited to, REGISTRATION OF FRATERNITIES,
Schools of the school not later than seven (7) days reprimand, suspension, exclusion, or SORORITIES, AND OTHER ORGANIZATIONS
prior to scheduled initiation date; expulsion, to the head and all other officers of
Colleges, universities, and other educational the fraternity, sorority and organization All existing fraternities, sororities, and other
institutions. (Sec. 2, R.A. No. 11053) 2. The written application shall indicate the which conducts an initiation without first organizations otherwise not created or organized
place and date of the initiation rites and the securing the necessary approval of the school by the school but has existing members who are
PROHIBITION ON HAZING names of the recruits, neophytes, or as required under this section. All members students or plans to recruit students to be its
applicants to be initiated and the manner by of the fraternity, sorority, or organization, member shall be required to register with the
1. All forms of hazing shall be prohibited in which they will conduct the initiation rites; who participated in the unauthorized proper school authorities before it conducts
fraternities, sororities, and organizations in initiation rites, even if no hazing was activities whether on or off-campus, including
schools, including citizens' military training 3. The initiation rites shall not last more than conducted, shall also be punished recruitment of members.
and citizens' army training. three (3) days; accordingly.
Upon registration, all fraternities, sororities, or
2. The prohibition shall apply to all other 4. The application shall contain the names of 9. In case the written application for the organizations shall submit a comprehensive list
fraternities, sororities, and organizations the incumbent officers of the fraternity, conduct of initiation rites contains false or of members, which shall be updated not later
that are not school-based, such as sorority, or organization and any person or inaccurate information, appropriate than thirty (30) days from the start of every
community-based and other similar persons who will take charge in the conduct disciplinary sanctions in accordance with the semester or trimester, depending on the
fraternities, sororities and organizations. of the initiation rites; school's guidelines and regulations on the academic calendar of the school.
matter ranging from reprimand to expulsion
3. In no case shall hazing be made a 5. The application shall be under oath with a shall be imposed, after due notice and School official shall have the authority to impose,
requirement for employment in any business declaration that it has been posted in the summary hearing, against the person who after due notice and summary hearings,
or corporation. official school bulletin board, the bulletin prepared the application or supplied the disciplinary penalties in accordance with the
board of the office of the fraternity, sorority, false and inaccurate information and to the school's guidelines and regulations on the matter
NOTE: The physical, mental, and practices to or organization, and two (2) other head and other officers of the fraternity, including suspension to the head and other
determine and enhance the physical, mental, and conspicuous places in the school or in the sorority, or organization concerned. (Sec. 4, officers of the fraternity, sorority, or organization
psychological fitness of prospective regular premises of the organization; and R.A. No. 11053) who fail to register or update their roster of
members of the AFP and the PNP as approved by members as required under this section.
the Secretary of National Defense and National 6. The application shall be posted from the time MONITORING OF INITIATION RITES
Police Commission, duly recommended by the of submission of the written notice to the Failure to comply with any of the requirements
Chief of Staff of the AFP and Director General of school authorities or head of organization 1. The head of the school or an authorized shall result in the cancellation of the registration
the PNP, shall not be considered as hazing and shall only be removed from its posting representative must assign at least two (2) of the fraternity, sorority, or organization. (Sec. 6,
purposes of this Act. three (3) days after the conduct of the representatives of the school to be present R.A. No. 11053)
initiation rites. during the initiation.
The exemption provided herein shall likewise FACULTY ADVISER
apply to similar procedures and practices 7. The appropriate school authorities shall have 2. It is the duty of the school representatives to
approved by the respective heads of other the obligation to disapproved the application see to it that no hazing is conducted during Faculty Adviser
uniformed learning institutions as to their to conduct initiation rites that do not the initiation rites and to document the
prospective members, nor shall this provision conform with any of the requirements of this entire proceedings. The person who is responsible for monitoring the

activities of the fraternity, sorority, or contribute to solving relevant and pressing 5. The initiation rites shall not last more than whether written or otherwise, or of an express
organization established or registered. issues of society. (Sec. 8, R.A. No. 11053) three (3) days; waiver of the right to object to the initiation rite
or proceeding which consists of hazing, as
In case of violation of any of the provisions of this REGISTRATION OF COMMUNITY-BASED AND 6. The application shall contain the names of defined in this Act, made by a recruit, neophyte,
Act, it is presumed that the faculty adviser has OTHER SIMILAR FRATERNITIES, SORORITIES, the incumbent officers of the community- or applicant prior to an initiation rite that
knowledge and consented to the commission of OR ORGANIZATIONS based fraternity, sorority, or organization involves inflicting physical or psychological
any of the unlawful acts stated therein. and any person or persons who will take suffering, harm, or injury, shall be void and
GR: All new and existing community-based charge in the conduct of initiation rites; without any binding effect on the parties.
NOTE: Schools shall require all fraternities, fraternities, sororities, or organizations,
sororities, or organizations, as a condition to the including their respective local chapters, shall 7. The application shall be under oath with a NOTE: The defense that the recruit, neophyte, or
grant of accreditation or registration, to submit register with the barangay, municipality, or city declaration that it has been posted on the applicant consented to being subjected to hazing
the name or names of their respective faculty wherein they are primarily based. official bulletin board of the barangay hall or shall not be available to persons prosecuted
adviser or advisers who must not be members of the municipal or city hall where the under this Act." (Sec. 11, R.A. No. 11053)
the respective fraternity, sorority, or NOTE: Upon registration, all community-based community-based fraternity, sorority or
organization. The submission shall also include a fraternities, sororities, or organizations including organization is based, and the bulletin board ADMINISTRATIVE SANCTIONS
written acceptance or consent on the part of the their respective local chapters, shall submit a of the office of the community-based
selected faculty adviser or advisers. (Sec. 7, R.A. comprehensive list of members and officers fraternity, sorority or organization; and The responsible officials of the school, the
No. 11053) which shall be updated yearly from the date of uniformed learning institutions, the AFP, or the
registration. (Sec. 9, R.A. No. 11053) 8. The application shall be posted from the time PNP may impose the appropriate administrative
ROLE OF EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION of submission of the written notice to the sanctions, after due notice and summary hearing,
punong barangay or municipal or city mayor on the person or the persons charged under this
REGULATION OF INITIATION RITES FOR
1. The responsibility of schools to exercise and shall only be removed from its posting Act even before their conviction. (Sec. 12, R.A. No.
COMMUNITY-BASED AND OTHER SIMILAR
reasonable supervision in loco parentis over three (3) days after the conduct of the 11053)
FRATERNITIES, SORORITIES, OR
the conduct of its students requires the initiation rites." (Sec. 10, R.A. No. 11053)
ORGANIZATIONS
diligence that prudent parents would employ PERSONS LIABLE AND THE
in the same circumstances when MONITORING OF INITIATION RITES CORRESPONDING PENALTIES
1. A written application to conduct the same
discriminating and protecting their children.
shall be made to the punong barangay in the
1. The punong barangay of the barangay or the Other Principals:
barangay or municipal or city mayor in the
2. It shall be the duty of schools to take more municipal or city mayor of the municipality
municipality or city where the community-
proactive steps to protect its students from or city where community-based fraternity, 1. The owner or lessee of the place where
based fraternity, sorority, or organization is
the dangers of participating in activities that sorority or organization is based must assign hazing is conducted shall be liable as
based, not later than seven (7) days prior to
involve hazing. at least two (2) barangay or municipal or city principal and penalized with the penalty of
the scheduled initiation date;
officials to be present during the initiation reclusion perpetua and a fine of Three
3. Schools shall implement an information and document the entire proceedings. million pesos (P3,000,000) OR with the
2. The written initiation shall indicate the place
dissemination campaign at the start of every penalty of reclusion perpetua and a fine of
and date of the initiation rites and the names 2. Representatives who are present during the
semester or trimester to provide adequate Two million pesos (P2,000,000) when such
of the recruits, neophytes, or applicants to be initiation shall make a report of the initiation
information to students and parents or owner or lessee has actual knowledge of the
initiated; rites to the punong barangay, or the
guardians regarding the consequences of hazing conducted therein but failed to take
conducting and participating in hazing. municipal or the city mayor regarding the any action to prevent the same from
3. Such written application shall further conduct of the initiation. Provided, that if
contain an undertaking that no harm or any occurring or failed to promptly report the
4. An orientation program relating to hazing is still committed despite their same to the law enforcement authorities if
membership in a fraternity, sorority, or kind shall be committed by anybody during presence, no liability shall attach to them
the initiation rites; they can do so without peril to their person
organization shall also be conducted by unless it is proven that they failed to perform or their family.
schools at the start of every semester or an overt act prevent or stop the commission.
trimester. 4. A medical certificate of the recruit, neophyte, (Sec. 11, R.A. No. 11053) 2. If the hazing is held in the home of one of the
or applicant must be attached to the
officers or members of the fraternity,
5. Schools shall encourage fraternities, application to ensure fitness to undergo
NULLITY OF WAIVER AND CONSENT sorority, or organization, the parents shall be
sororities, and organizations to engage in initiation when it involves physical activity
held liable as principals and penalized with
undertakings that foster holistic personal not failing under the definition of hazing as
Any form of approval, consent, or agreement, the penalty of reclusion perpetua and a fine
growth and development and activities that used in this Act;

of Three million pesos (P3,000,000) OR with NOTE: The same shall apply to the president, Gabito was actually a jueteng operator and a. Imprisonment from six (6) months to
the penalty of reclusion perpetua and a fine manager, director, or other responsible officers the amounts he deposited were proceeds four (4) years; OR
of Two million pesos (P2,000,000) when of businesses or corporations engaged in hazing from his jueteng operations. What crime/s b. A fine of not less than P100,000 but not
they have actual knowledge of the hazing as a requirement for employment in the manner were committed? Who are criminally liable? more than P500,000; OR
conducted therein but failed to take any provided herein. Explain. (2005 BAR) c. Both
action to prevent the same from occurring or
failed to promptly report the same to the law A: BOTH. Don Gabito violated the Anti-Money 2. Penalties for Failure to Keep Records
enforcement authorities if such parents can E. ANTI-MONEY LAUNDERING ACT OF 2001 Laundering Act (Sec. 4, R.A. 9160) for knowingly a. Imprisonment from six (6) months to
do so without peril to their person or their R.A. No. 9160, as amended transacting money as property which involves or one (1) year; OR
family. relates to the proceeds of an unlawful activity b. A fine of not less than P100,000 but not
such as jueteng. In addition, he may be more than P500,000; OR
Other Accomplice prosecuted for liability as a jueteng operator. c. Both
MONEY LAUNDERING OFFENSE
The school authorities including faculty members The mayor who allowed the opening of an 3. Malicious Reporting
as well as barangay, municipal, or city officials Refers to a crime whereby the proceeds of an account in his name is likewise guilty for violation
shall be liable as an accomplice and likewise be unlawful activity are transacted, thereby making of the AMLA. He, knowing that the money Any person who, with malice, or in bad faith,
held administratively accountable for hazing them appear to have originated from legitimate instrument or property involves the proceeds of reports or files a completely unwarranted
conducted by the fraternities, sororities, other sources. an unlawful activity, performs or fails to perform or false information relative to money
organizations, if it can be shown that the school any act which results in the facilitation of money laundering transaction against any person:
or barangay, municipal, or city officials allowed PERSONS LIABLE laundering.
or consented to the conduct of hazing, but such a. Imprisonment of six (6) months to four
officials failed to take action to prevent the same 1. Any person knowing that any monetary PENAL PROVISIONS (4) years; AND
from occurring or failed to promptly report to the instrument or property represents, involves, b. A fine of not less than P100, 000 but not
law enforcement authorities if the same can be or relates to, the proceeds of any unlawful 1. Penalties for the Crime of Money more than P500,000, at the discretion
done without peril to their person or their family. activity, transacts or attempts to transact said Laundering of the court: Provided, That the offender
monetary instrument or property. is not entitled to avail the benefits of the
Prima Facie Evidence of Participation Person who knowingly transacts using monetary Probation Law.
2. Any person knowing that any monetary instrument from any unlawful activity:
The presence of any person, even if such person instrument or property involves the proceeds Offender is a Corporation, Association,
is not a member of the fraternity, sorority, or of any unlawful activity, performs or fails to a. Imprisonment ranging seven (7) to Partnership or any Juridical Person
organization, during the hazing is prima facie perform any act as a result of which he fourteen (14) years; AND
evidence of participation therein as a principal facilitates the offense of money laundering. b. A fine of not less than P3 Million but not The penalty shall be imposed upon the
unless such person or persons prevented the more than twice the value of the monetary responsible officers, as the case may be, who
commission of the acts punishable herein or 3. Any person knowing that any monetary instrument or property involved in the participated in the commission of the crime or
promptly reported the same to the law instrument or property is required under this offense. who shall have knowingly permitted or failed to
enforcement authorities if they can do so without Act to be disclosed and filed with the Anti- prevent its commission. The court may suspend
peril, to their person or their family. Money Laundering Council (AMLC), fails to do Person knowing that a monetary instrument or revoke its license.
so. involves proceeds from any unlawful activity, but
Joint Liability who fails to perform any act as a result of which Offender is an Alien
Q: Don Gabito, a philanthropist, offered to he facilitates the offense of money laundering:
The incumbent officers of the fraternity, sorority, fund several projects of the Mayor. He opened In addition to the penalties herein prescribed, he
or organization concerned shall be jointly liable an account in the Mayor’s name and regularly a. Imprisonment from four (4) to seven (7) shall be deported without further proceedings
with those members who actually participated in deposited various amounts ranging from years; AND after serving the penalties herein prescribed.
the hazing. P500,000.00 to P1 Million. From this account, b. A fine of not less than P1.5 Million but not
the Mayor withdrew and used the money for Offender is a Public Official or Employee
more than P3 Million.
NOTE: Any person charged under this Act shall constructing feeder roads, barangay clinics,
NOT be entitled to the mitigating circumstances repairing schools and for all other municipal In addition to the penalties prescribed herein,
Person who knowingly fails to disclose and file
that there was no intention to commit so grave a projects. suffer perpetual or temporary absolute
any monetary instrument, required under the
wrong. disqualification from office, as the case may be.
rules, with AMLC
It was subsequently discovered that Don Any public official or employee who is called

upon to testify and refuses to do the same or violation of the Anti-Money Laundering Law. Rudy. As Luansing Realty, Inc. is not a covered
purposely fails to testify shall suffer the same Can Rudy move to dismiss the case on the institution under Sec. 3 of the Anti-Money
penalties prescribed herein. ground that he has no criminal record? (2006 Laundering Act, it may not invoke this law to
BAR) refuse delivery of the titles to Rudy.
4. Breach of Confidentiality
a. Imprisonment ranging from three (3) to A: NO. Under the Anti-Money Laundering Law, COVERED TRANSACTIONS
eight (8) years; AND Rudy would be guilty of a "money laundering
b. A fine of not less than P500,000 but not crime" committed when the proceeds of an Covered Transactions under R.A. 9160 vs. R.A. 9194 vs. R.A. 10927
more than P1 Million. (Sec. 14, R.A. 9160) "unlawful activity," like jueteng operations, are
made to appear as having originated from Comparison of R.A. No. 9160, R.A. No. 9194, and R.A. 10927
COVERED INSTITUTIONS legitimate sources. The money laundering crime R.A. No. 10927
is separate from the unlawful activity of being a (An Act Designating Casinos
R.A. No. 9160 R.A. No. 9194
1. Banks, non-banks, quasi-banks, trust entities, jueteng operator, and requires no previous as Covered Persons under
and all other institutions and their conviction for the unlawful activity. (Sec. 3, R.A. R.A. No. 9160)
subsidiaries and affiliates supervised or No. 9160) a. Single, series, or Transaction in cash or other Transaction in cash or other
regulated by the BSP; combination of transactions equivalent monetary instrument equivalent monetary instrument
Q: To raise funds for his defense, Rudy sold involving a total amount in involving a total amount in involving a total amount in
2. Insurance companies and all other the houses and lots to a friend. Can Luansing excess of Php4,000,000 or excess of P500,000 within 1 excess of Five hundred
institutions supervised or regulated by the Realty, Inc. be compelled to transfer to the an equivalent amount in banking day. (Sec. 1, R.A. No. thousand pesos (P500,000.00)
Insurance Commission; buyer ownership of the houses and lots? foreign currency based on 9194) within one (1) banking day; for
the prevailing exchange rate covered persons under Sec.
3. A: YES. Luansing Realty, Inc. is a real estate within 5 consecutive 3(a)(8), a single casino
a. Securities dealers, brokers, salesmen, company, hence it is not a covered institution banking days. (Sec. 3, R.A. transaction involving an
investment houses and other similar under Sec. 3 of the Anti-Money Laundering Act. No. 9160) amount in excess of Five
entities; Only banking institutions, insurance companies, million pesos (P5,000,000) or
b. Mutual funds, closed-end investment securities dealers and brokers, pre-need XPN: Those between a covered its equivalent in any other
companies, common trust funds, pre-need companies and other entities administering or institution and a person who, at currency. (Sec. 2, R.A. No. 10927)
companies and other similar entities; otherwise dealing in currency, commodities or the time of the transaction was a
c. Foreign exchange corporations, money financial derivatives are covered institutions. properly identified client and
changers, money payment, remittance, Hence, Luansing Realty, Inc. may not use the Anti- the amount is commensurate
and transfer companies and other similar Money Laundering Act to refuse to transfer to the with the business or financial
entities; buyer ownership of the houses and lots. capacity of the client; or those
d. Other entities administering or otherwise with an underlying legal or
dealing in currency, commodities or Q: Did the bank violate any law in disclosing
trade obligation, purpose, origin
financial derivatives. Rudy’s bank accounts to the AMLC?
or economic justification. (Sec. 3,
R.A. No. 9160)
Q: Rudy is jobless but is reputed to be a A: NO, the bank did not violate any law. The bank
jueteng operator. He has never been charged being specified as a "covered institution" under
b. Single, series or combination
or convicted of any crime. He maintains the Anti-Money Laundering Law, is obliged to
or pattern of unusually
several banks bank accounts and has report to the AMLC covered and suspicious
large and complex
purchased 5 houses and lots for his children transactions, without thereby violating any law.
transactions in excess of
from the Luansing Realty, Inc. since Since he This is one of the exceptions to the Secrecy of
Php4,000,000 especially
does not have any visible job, the company Bank Deposit Act.
cash deposits and
reported his purchases to the AMLC. investments having no
Thereafter, AMLC charged him with violation Q: Suppose the titles of the houses and lots are
credible purpose or origin,
of the Anti-Money Laundering Law. in possession of the Luansing Realty, Inc., is it
underlying trade obligation
under the obligation to deliver the titles to
or contract. (Sec. 3, R.A. No.
Upon request of the AMLC, the bank disclosed Rudy?
9160)
to it Rudy’s bank deposits amounting to P100
M. Subsequently, he was charged in court for A: YES, it has an obligation to deliver titles to

SUSPICIOUS TRANSACTIONS covered transaction and a suspicious transaction, 2. Record Keeping 3. Reporting of Covered Transactions
the covered institution shall be required to report
Transactions with covered institutions, the same as a suspicious transaction. (Sec. 9, R.A. All records of all transactions of covered Covered institutions shall report to the AMLC
regardless of the amounts involved, with No. 9194) institutions shall be maintained and safely all covered transactions within 5 working
attendant circumstances. stored for 5 years from the dates of days from occurrence thereof, unless the
JURISDICTION transactions, and closed accounts for 5 years Supervising Authority concerned prescribes
Circumstances Existing in Suspicious from dates they were closed. a longer period not exceeding 10 working
Transactions 1. RTCs; days. (Sec. 9, R.A. No. 9160)
2. Sandiganbayan, if committed by public
1. There is no underlying legal or trade officers and private persons who are in Authority to Freeze under R.A. 9160 vs. R.A. 9194 vs. R.A. 10927
obligation, purpose or economic conspiracy with such public officers.
justification; COMPARISON OF R.A. NO. 9160, R.A. NO. 9194, AND R.A. NO. 10927
ANTI-MONEY LAUNDERING COUNCIL (AMLC) R.A. No. 9160 R.A. No. 9194 R.A. No. 10927
2. The client is not properly identified;
Upon determination that The Court of Appeals, upon Upon a verified ex parte petition by the
Composition probable cause exists that application ex parte by the AMLC and after determination that
3. The amount involved is not commensurate
any deposit or similar AMLC and after determination probable cause exists that any monetary
with the business or financial capacity of the 1. Governor of the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas account is in any way related that probable cause exists that instrument or property is in any way
client; (BSP) as Chairman; to an unlawful activity, the any monetary instrument or related to an unlawful activity as
2. Commissioner of the Insurance Commission; AMLC may issue a freeze property is in any way related defined in Sec. 3(i) hereof, the Court of
4. Taking into account all known 3. Chairman of the Securities and Exchange order, which shall be to an unlawful activity as Appeals may issue a freeze order
circumstances, it may be perceived that the Commission (SEC). effective immediately, on defined in Sec. 3(i) hereof, which shall be effective immediately,
client’s transaction is structured in order to
the account for a period not may issue a freeze order for a period of twenty (20) days.
avoid being the subject of reporting Investigation of Money Laundering Offenses exceeding 15 days. which shall be effective
requirements under the Act;
immediately. The freeze order Within the 20-day period, CA shall
The AMLC shall investigate: Notice to the depositor that shall be for a period of 20 conduct a summary hearing, with
5. Any circumstance relating to the transaction
his account has been frozen days unless extended by the notice to the parties, to determine
which is observed to deviate from the profile 1. Suspicious transactions; shall be issued court. (Sec. 10, R.A. No. 9194) whether or not to modify or lift the
of the client and/or the client’s past 2. Covered transactions deemed suspicious simultaneously with the freeze order, or extend its
transactions with the covered institution; after an investigation conducted by the issuance of the freeze order. effectivity.
AMLC; (Sec. 10, R.A. No. 9160)
6. The transaction is in any way related to an 3. Money laundering activities; and The total period of the freeze order
unlawful activity or offense under this Act 4. Other violations of the AMLA, as amended issued by the Court of Appeals under
that is about to be, is being or has been (Rule 5.b., IRR of R.A. No. 9160) this provision shall not exceed 6
committed; or
months.
The AMLC does not exercise quasi-judicial
7. Any transaction that is similar or analogous powers and is simply an investigatory body. (Shu Provided, That if there is no case filed
to any of the foregoing. (Sec. 2, R.A. No. 9194) v. Dee, as cited in Subido Pagente Certeza Mendoza against a person whose account has
and Binay Law Offices v. CA, G.R. No. 216914, 06 been frozen within the period
REPORTING OF COVERED AND Dec. 2016) determined by the Court of Appeals, not
SUSPICIOUS TRANSACTIONS exceeding 6 months, the freeze order
PREVENTION OF MONEY LAUNDERING shall be seemed ipso facto lifted:
Covered institutions shall report to the AMLC all
covered transactions and suspicious transactions 1. Customer Identification Provided, further, That this new rule
within five (5) working days from occurrence shall not apply to pending cases in the
thereof, unless the Supervising Authority Covered institutions shall establish and courts. In any case, the court should act
prescribes a longer period not exceeding ten (10) record the true identity of its clients based on on the petition to freeze within 24
working days. official documents. hours from filing of the petition. (Sec,
10, R.A. No. 10927)
Should a transaction be determined to be both a

Special Penal Laws Criminal Law
Q: Finding the existence of probable cause The right to due process, under these terms, Sec. 11 of the AMLA Not Violative of the Right shall apply.
that the monetary instruments and requires a limitation or at least an inquiry on to Due Process; Constitutional
properties enumerated in the ex-parte whether sufficient justification for the 2. Claim on Forfeited Assets
application are related to an unlawful activity, governmental action. (Yambao v. Republic, G.R. R.A. No. 9160 provides safeguards before the
the Court of Appeals, through a Resolution No. 171054, 26 Jan. 2021) issuance of a bank inquiry order, ensuring Where the court has issued an order of
dated July 5, 2005, issued a Freeze Order over adherence to the general state policy of forfeiture of the monetary instrument or
the subject monetary instruments of Gen. AUTHORITY TO INQUIRE preserving the absolutely confidential nature of property in a criminal prosecution for any
Ligot and Edgardo Tecson Yambao, the Ligot’s INTO BANK DEPOSITS Philippine bank accounts. (Subido Pagente money laundering offense, the offender or
brother in-law who is alleged to be the Ligot’s (Sec. 11, R.A. No. 9160) Certeza Mendoza and Binay Law Offices v. CA, any other person claiming an interest
dummy. supra) therein may apply, by verified petition, for a
The AMLC may inquire into or examine any declaration that the same legitimately
On Nov. 18, 2005, this Court promulgated A.M. Succinctly, Sec. 11 of the AMLA providing for ex- belongs to him and for segregation or
particular deposit or investment with any
No. 05-11-04-SC limiting the effectivity of an parte application and inquiry by the AMLC into exclusion of the monetary instrument or
banking institution or non-bank financial
extended freeze order to 6 months. Asserting certain bank deposits and investments does not property corresponding thereto.
institution upon order of any competent court in
the applicability of the said Rule, Yambao filed violate substantive due process, there being no
cases of violation of this Act when it has been
an Urgent Motion for Summary Hearing to physical seizure of property involved at that The verified petition shall be filed with the
established that there is probable cause that the
Limit Effectivity of Freeze Order and/or to stage. It is the preliminary and actual seizure of court which rendered the judgment of
deposits or investments involved are in any way
Declare Expiration of Freeze Order. This was the bank deposits or investments in question conviction and order of forfeiture, within
related to a money laundering offense.
denied by the CA. The CA ruled that A.M. No. which brings these within reach of the judicial fifteen (15) days from the date of the order
05-11-04-SC is inapplicable in petitioner's process, specifically a determination that the of forfeiture, in default of which the said
Provided, that this provision shall not apply to
case because the issues of extending and seizure violated due process. (Subido Pagente order shall become final and executory.
deposits and investments made prior to the
lifting the Freeze Order issued against his Certeza Mendoza and Binay Law Offices v. CA,
effectivity of this Act. (Sec. 11, R.A. No. 9160)
monetary instruments and properties were supra) 3. Payment in Lieu of Forfeiture
already resolved through the July 4, 2005 and
NOTE: The Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP)
Sept. 20, 2005 CA Resolutions. Rule on the There is no such violation [of substantive due Instances when Order of Forfeiture Cannot
may inquire into or examine any deposit or
proprietary of the CA’s denial to limit/declare process] because the physical seizure of the be Enforced
investment with any banking institution or non-
the expiration of the freeze order. targeted corporeal property is not contemplated
bank financial institution when the examination
in any form by the law. The AMLC may indeed be a. Any particular monetary instrument or
is made in the course of a periodic or special
A: The CA erred in denying Yambao’s Urgent authorized to apply ex parte for an inquiry into property cannot, with due diligence, be
examination, in accordance with the rules of
Motion for Summary Hearing to Limit Effectivity bank accounts, but only in pursuance of its located;
examination of the BSP. (Sec. 11, R.A. No. 9194)
of Freeze Order and/or to Declare Expiration of investigative functions akin to those of the
Freeze Order. National Bureau of Investigation. As the AMLC b. It has been substantially altered,
Jurisdiction of Trial Courts
does not exercise quasi-judicial functions, its destroyed, diminished in value or
The relief is pre-emptive in character, meant to inquiry by court order into bank deposits or otherwise rendered worthless by any act
In the issuance of a bank inquiry order, the power
prevent the owner from disposing his property investments cannot be said to violate any or omission, directly or indirectly,
to determine the existence of probable cause is
and thwarting the State's effort in building its person's constitutional right to procedural due attributable to the offender;
lodged in the trial court. (AMLC v. Bolante, et al,
case and eventually filing civil forfeiture process. (Republic v. Bolante, G.R. No. 186717, 17
G.R. No. 186717, 17 Apr. 2017) c. It has been concealed, removed,
proceedings and/or prosecuting the owner. The April 2017)
Court issued A.M. No. 05-11-04 SC, limiting the converted or otherwise transferred to
Elements of Sec. 11 of the AMLA, as amended prevent the same from being found or to
effectivity of an extended freeze order to six FORFEITURE PROVISIONS
months should be applied in Yambao’s case. avoid forfeiture thereof;
1. Ex-parte application by the AMLC;
2. Determination of probable cause by the CA; 1. Civil Forfeiture d. It is located outside the Philippines or has
To otherwise leave the grant of the extension to
and been placed or brought outside the
the sole discretion of the CA, which may extend a
3. Exception of court order in cases involving When there is a covered transaction report jurisdiction of the court; or
freeze order indefinitely or to an unreasonable
unlawful activities defined in Secs. 3(i)(1), made, and the court has, in a petition filed for
amount of time — carries serious implications on
(2), and (12). (Subido Pagente Certeza the purpose ordered seizure of any monetary e. It has been commingled with other
an individual's substantive right to due process.
Mendoza and Binay Law Offices v. CA, G.R. No. instrument or property, in whole or in part, monetary instruments or property
This right demands that no person be denied his
216914, 06 Dec. 2016) directly or indirectly, related to said report, belonging to either the offender himself
right to property or be subjected to any
the Revised Rules of Court on civil forfeiture or a third person or entity, thereby
governmental action that amounts to a denial.

rendering the same difficult to identify or 3. Obtaining Assistance from Foreign States execution of a request is likely to prejudice 6. Authentication of Documents
be segregated for purposes of forfeiture. the national interest of the Philippines.
The AMLC may make a request to any foreign XPN: When there is a treaty between the A document is authenticated if the same is
The Court may instead accordingly order State for assistance in: Philippines and the requesting State signed or certified by a judge, magistrate or
the convicted offender to pay an amount relating to the assistance in relation to equivalent officer in or of, the requesting
equal to the value of said monetary a. Tracking down, freezing, restraining and money laundering offenses. State, and authenticated by the oath or
instrument or property. (Sec. 12, R.A No. seizing assets alleged to be proceeds of any affirmation of a witness or sealed with an
9160) unlawful activity; 5. Requirements for Requests for Mutual official or public seal of a minister, secretary
Assistance from Foreign States of State, or officer in or of, the government of
MUTUAL ASSISTANCE AMONG STATES b. Obtaining information that it needs relating the requesting State, or of the person
to any covered transaction, money a. Confirm that an investigation or administering the government or a
1. Request for Assistance from a Foreign laundering offense or any other matter prosecution is being conducted in department of the requesting territory,
State directly or indirectly related thereto; respect of a money launderer named protectorate or colony.
therein or that he has been convicted of
Where a foreign State makes a request for c. To the extent allowed by the law of the any money laundering offense; The certificate of authentication may also be
assistance in the investigation or prosecution foreign State, applying with the proper made by a secretary of the embassy or
of a money laundering offense, the AMLC may court therein for an order to enter any b. State the grounds on which any person is legation, consul general, consul, vice consul,
execute the request or refuse to execute the premises belonging to or in the possession being investigated or prosecuted for consular agent or any officer in the foreign
same and inform the foreign State of any valid or control of, any or all of the persons named money laundering or the details of his service of the Philippines stationed in the
reason for not executing the request or for in said request, and/or search any or all conviction; foreign State in which the record is kept, and
delaying the execution thereof. The principles such persons named therein and/or remove authenticated by the seal of his office.
any document, material or object named in c. Give sufficient particulars as to the
of mutuality and reciprocity shall, for this
said request; and identity of said person; 7. Extradition
purpose, be at all times recognized.
NOTE: The documents accompanying the d. Give particulars sufficient to identify any The Philippines shall negotiate for the
2. Powers of the AMLC to Act on a Request for
request in support of the application should covered institution believed to have any inclusion of money laundering offenses as
Assistance from a Foreign State
be duly authenticated in accordance with information, document, material or herein defined among extraditable offenses
the applicable law or regulation of the object which may be of assistance to the in all future treaties. (Sec. 13, R.A. No. 9160)
The AMLC may execute a request for
foreign State. investigation or prosecution;
assistance from a foreign State by:
PROHIBITIONS AGAINST
d. Applying for an order of forfeiture of any e. Ask from the covered institution POLITICAL HARASSMENT
a. Tracking down, freezing, restraining and
monetary instrument or property in the concerned any information, document,
seizing assets alleged to be proceeds of
proper court in the foreign State. material or object which may be of
any unlawful activity; This Act shall not be used for political persecution
assistance to the investigation or
b. Giving information needed by the or harassment or as an instrument to hamper
NOTE: The request is accompanied by an prosecution;
foreign State; and competition in trade and commerce. No case for
authenticated copy of the order of the RTC
c. Applying for an order of forfeiture of any money laundering may be filed against and no
ordering the forfeiture of said monetary f. Specify the manner in which and to
monetary instrument or property in the assets shall be frozen, attached or forfeited to the
instrument or property of a convicted whom said information, document,
court. prejudice of a candidate for an electoral office
offender and an affidavit of the clerk of court material or object obtained pursuant to
during an election period. (Sec. 16, R.A. No. 9160)
stating that the conviction and the order of said request, is to be produced;
NOTE: The court shall not issue such an order
unless the application is accompanied by an the forfeiture are final and no further appeal
g. Give all the particulars necessary for the RESTITUTION
authenticated copy of the order of a court in lies.
issuance by the court in the requested
the requesting State ordering the forfeiture of Restitution for any aggrieved party shall be
4. Limitations on Requests for Mutual State of the writs, orders or processes
said monetary instrument or property, and a governed by the provisions of the New Civil Code.
Assistance needed by the requesting State; and
certification or an affidavit of a competent (Sec. 17, R.A. No. 9160)
officer of the requesting State stating that the
GR: The AMLC may refuse to comply with h. Contain such other information as may
conviction and the order of forfeiture are final.
any request for assistance where the action assist in the execution of the request.
sought by the request contravenes any
provision of the Constitution or the

the private area of a person/s such as the be committed, and that the evidence to be which is manifestly out of proportion of his salary
F. ANTI-PHOTO AND VIDEO VOYEURISM naked or undergarment clad genitals, pubic obtained is essential to the conviction of any and to his other lawful income, such amount of
ACT OF 2009 area, buttocks or female breast without the person for, or to the solution or prevention of property is then presumed prima facie to have
Secs. 3 and 4, R.A. No. 9995 consent of the person/s involved and under such crime. (Sec. 6, R.A. No. 9995) been unlawfully acquired.
circumstances in which the person/s
has/have a reasonable expectation of INADMISSIBILITY OF EVIDENCE Thus, if the public official is unable to show to the
privacy; satisfaction of the court that he has lawfully
PHOTO OR VIDEO VOYEURISM
Any record, photo or video, or copy thereof, acquired the property in question, then the court
2. Copy or reproduce, or to cause to be copied obtained or secured by any person in violation of shall declare such property forfeited in favor of
1. The act of taking photo or video coverage of or reproduced, such photo or video or the State, and by virtue of such judgment, the
the preceding sections shall not be admissible in
a person or group of persons performing recording of sexual act or any similar activity property aforesaid shall become property
evidence in any judicial, quasi-judicial, legislative
sexual act or any similar activity or with or without consideration; forfeited in favor of the State. (Garcia v.
or administrative hearing or investigation. (Sec. 7,
capturing an image of the private person or Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 170122, 12 Oct. 2009)
R.A. No. 9995)
persons without the latter’s consent, under 3. Sell or distribute, or cause to be sold or
circumstances in which such person/s distributed, such photo or video or recording PLUNDER
has/have a reasonable expectation of of sexual act, whether it be the original copy
privacy; or G. ANTI-PLUNDER ACT
or reproduction thereof; or A crime committed by a public officer, by himself
Secs. 1, 2, and 6, R.A. No. 7080,
as amended by R.A. No. 7659 or in connivance with members of his family,
2. The act of selling, copying, reproducing, 4. Publish or broadcast, or cause to be relatives by affinity or consanguinity, business
broadcasting, sharing, showing, or published or broadcast, whether in print or associates, subordinates or other persons, by
exhibiting the photo or video coverage or broadcast media, or show or exhibit the amassing, accumulating, or acquiring ill-gotten
recordings of such sexual act or similar photo or video coverage or recordings of Public Officers
wealth through a combination or series of overt
activity through VCD/DVD, internet, cellular such sexual act or any similar activity acts in the aggregate amount or total value of at
phones, and similar means or device through VCD/DVD, internet, cellular phones Any person holding any public office in the
least fifty million pesos (P50 Million). (Sec. 2, R.A.
without the written consent of the person/s and other similar means or device. (Sec. 4, Government of the Republic of the Philippines by
No. 7080, as amended by R.A. No. 7659) (2014
involved, notwithstanding that consent to R.A. No. 9995) virtue of an appointment, election, or contract.
BAR)
take photo or video coverage of same was (Sec. 1(a), R.A. No. 7080)
given by such person. (Sec. 3(d), R.A. No. NOTE: The prohibition under paragraphs (2), (3) There must be at least two (2) predicate crimes
9995) and (4) shall apply notwithstanding that consent “Government” under R.A. No. 7080
committed before one can be convicted of
to record or take photo or video coverage of the plunder.
Reasonable Expectation of Privacy It includes the National Government, and any of
same was given by such person/s. (Sec. 4, R.A. No.
9995) its subdivisions, agencies or instrumentalities,
1. Circumstances under which a person Elements of Plunder
including government-owned or controlled
believes that he/she could disrobe in corporations and their subsidiaries. (Sec. 1(b),
XPN: Any peace officer, who is authorized by a 1. That the offender is a public officer who acts
privacy, without being concerned that an R.A. No. 7080)
written order of the court, to use the record or by himself or in connivance with members of
image or a private are of the person was
any copy thereof as evidence in any civil, criminal his family, relatives by affinity or
being captured; or
investigation or trial of the crime of photo or ILL-GOTTEN WEALTH consanguinity, business associates,
video voyeurism. subordinates, or other persons;
2. Circumstances in which a reasonable person
Any asset, property, business enterprise or
would believe that a private area of the
Requisites on the Issuance or Grant of Written material possession of any person, acquired by a 2. That he amassed, accumulated or acquired
person would not be visible to the public,
Order public officer, directly or indirectly, through ill-gotten wealth through a combination or
regardless of whether that person is in a
dummies, nominees, agents, subordinates, series of the following overt or criminal acts:
public or private place. (Sec. 3(f), R.A. No.
1. Upon written application and the examination and/or business associates. (Sec. 1(d), R.A. No,
9995)
under oath or affirmation of the applicant and 7080) a. Through misappropriation, conversion,
the witnesses he/she may produce; and misuse, or malversation of public funds,
PROHIBITED ACTS (T-Co-P-S)
Presumption under this Law or raids on the public treasury;
2. Upon showing that there are reasonable
1. Take photo or video coverage of a person or b. By receiving, directly or indirectly, any
grounds to believe that photo or video When a public officer or employee acquires
group of persons performing sexual act or commission, gift, share, percentage,
voyeurism has been committed or is about to during his incumbency an amount of property
any similar activity or to capture an image of kickback, or any other form of

pecuniary benefits from any person Q: Is the crime of plunder malum prohibitum acquire ill-gotten wealth, indicative of the overall A: NO. In order to prove the predicate act of raids
and/or entity in connection with any or malum in se? unlawful scheme or conspiracy to achieve said of the public treasury, there is a requirement of
government contract or project or by common goal. As commonly understood, the term personal benefit on the part of the main
reason of the office or position of the A: The legislative declaration in R.A. No. 7659 'overall unlawful scheme' indicates a 'general plunderer or his co-conspirators by virtue of
public officer concerned; that plunder is a heinous offense implies that it is plan of action or method' which the principal their plunder. As a result, not only did the
a malum in se. For when the acts punished are accused and public officer and others conniving Prosecution fail to show where the money went
c. By the illegal or fraudulent conveyance inherently immoral or inherently wrong, they are with him follow to achieve the aforesaid common but, more importantly, it failed to prove that GMA
or disposition of assets belonging to the mala in se and it does not matter that such acts goal. (Estrada v. Sandiganbayan, supra) and Aguas had personally benefited from the
National Government or any of its are punished in a special law, especially since in same. Hence, the Prosecution did not prove the
subdivisions, agencies or the case of plunder the predicate crimes are The said acts are mentioned only as predicate predicate act of raids on the public treasury
instrumentalities of GOCCs or their mainly mala in se. Indeed, it would be absurd to acts of the crime of plunder and the allegations beyond reasonable doubt. (Macapagal-Arroyo v.
subsidiaries; treat prosecutions for plunder as though they are relative thereto are not to be taken or to be People, G.R. No. 220598, supra)
mere prosecutions for violations of the Bouncing understood as allegations charging separate
d. By obtaining, receiving, or accepting, Check Law (B.P. Blg. 22) or of an ordinance criminal offenses punished under the RPC, the
directly or indirectly, any shares of against jaywalking, without regard to the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act and Code of H. ANTI-TORTURE ACT OF 2009
stock, equity, or any other form of inherent wrongness of the acts. (Estrada v. Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials Secs. 3 (a, b), 4, and 5, R.A. No. 9745
interest or participation including the Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 148560, 19 Nov. 2001) and Employees. It bears stressing that the
promise of future employment in any predicate acts merely constitute acts of plunder
business enterprise or undertaking; COMBINATION/SERIES and are not crimes separate and independent of
Torture
the crime of plunder. (Serapio v. Sandiganbayan,
e. By establishing agricultural, industrial, Combination G.R. No. 148468, 28 Jan. 2003)
or commercial monopolies or other An act by which severe pain or suffering, whether
combinations and/or implementation physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a
At least two (2) acts falling under different NOTE: Under Sec. 4 of R.A. No. 7080, “in
of decrees and orders intended to person for such purposes as obtaining from
categories of enumeration provided in Sec. 1(d). furtherance of the scheme or conspiracy” implies
benefit particular persons or special him/her or a third person information or a
(Estrada v. Sandiganbayan, supra) that plunder cannot be committed by just one
interests; confession; punishing him/her for an act he/she
person.
Series or a third person has committed or is suspected
f. By taking undue advantage of official of having committed; or intimidating or coercing
Q: Senator X, with the help of his
position, authority, relationship, Two (2) or more overt or criminal acts falling him/her or a third person; or for any reason
subordinates, acquired the amount of
connection, or influence to unjustly under the same category of enumeration found in based on discrimination of any kind, when such
P100,000,000 through a misappropriation of
enrich himself or themselves at the Sec. 1(d). (Estrada v. Sandiganbayan, supra). pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the
public funds in just a single transaction. Is
expense and to the damage and instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence
plunder committed?
prejudice of the Filipino people and the Rule of Evidence of a person in authority or agent of a person in
Republic of the Philippines; and authority. (Sec. 3(a), R.A. No. 9745)
A: NO. There must be combination or series of the
It is not necessary to prove each and every
means or similar schemes in Sec. 1 (d) of R.A. No.
g. That the aggregate amount or total criminal act done by the accused to commit the NOTE: It does not include pain or suffering
7080. As defined in Estrada v. Sandiganbayan
value of the ill-gotten wealth amassed, crime of plunder. It is sufficient to establish arising only from inherent in or incidental to
(2001), a combination and a series require at
accumulated, or acquired is at least P50 beyond reasonable doubt a pattern of overt or lawful sanctions. (Sec. 3(a), R.A. No. 9745)
least two (2) overt criminal acts in the aggregate
Million (Enrile v. People, G.R. No. 213455, criminal acts indicative of the overall unlawful
amount or total value of at least P50 Million.
11 Aug. 2015) scheme or conspiracy. (Sec. 4, R.A. No. 7080) Other Cruel, Inhuman, and Degrading
Thus, if there is only one transaction, the crime of
Treatment or Punishment
NOTE: The corpus delicti of plunder is the plunder is not committed, regardless of the
PATTERN
amassment, accumulation, or acquisition of amount amassed by the public officer.
A deliberate and aggravated treatment or
ill-gotten wealth valued at not less than Pattern punishment, not enumerated under Sec. 4 of this
P50,000,000.00. The failure to establish the Q: The Prosecution failed to prove that GMA
Act, inflicted by a person in authority or agent of
corpus delicti should lead to the dismissal of and Aguas benefited in the act of raids of the
Pattern consists of at least a combination or a person in authority against a person under
the criminal prosecution. (Macapagal-Arroyo public treasury. The Prosecution asserts that
series of overt or criminal acts enumerated in his/her custody, which attains a level of severity
v. People, G.R. No. 220598, 19 July 2016) personal benefit is not a requirement for
subsections (1) to (6) of Sec. 1 (d) directed causing suffering, gross humiliation or
plunder. Is the Prosecution correct?
towards a common purpose or goal, which is to debasement to the latter. (Sec. 3(b), R.A. No. 9745)
enable the public officer to amass, accumulate or

NOTE: The assessment of the level of severity 8. Mutilation or amputation of the essential deprived of liberty from one place to (Sec. 8, R.A. No. 9745)
shall depend on all the circumstances of the case, parts of the body such as the genitalia, ear, another creating the belief that he/she
including the duration of the treatment or tongue, etc.; will be summarily executed; Torture as a Separate and Independent Crime
punishment, its physical and mental effects, and,
in some cases, the sex, religion, age, and state of 9. Dental torture or the forced extraction of 7. Maltreating a member/s of a person's Torture as a crime shall not absorb or shall not be
health of the victim. (Sec. 5, R.A. No. 9745) the teeth; family; absorbed by any other crime or felony committed
as a consequence or as a means in the conduct or
PUNISHABLE ACTS 10. Pulling out of fingernails; 8. Causing the torture sessions to be commission thereof. In which case, torture shall
witnessed by the person’s family, be treated as a separate and independent
11. Harmful exposure to the elements such as relatives, or any third party; criminal act whose penalties shall be imposable
I. ACTS OF TORTURE sunlight and extreme cold; without prejudice to any other criminal liability
9. Denial of sleep/rest; provided for by domestic and international laws.
Torture, as punished under the law, may either be 12. The use of plastic bag and other materials
(Sec. 15, R.A. No. 9745)
physical or mental/psychological. placed over the head to the point of
10. Shame infliction such as stripping the
asphyxiation;
person naked, parading him/her in public Applicability of Refouler
A. Physical Torture is a form of treatment or
places, shaving the victim’s head or
punishment that causes severe pain, 13. The use of psychoactive drugs to change
putting marks on his/her body against No person shall be expelled, returned, or
exhaustion, disability, or dysfunction of one or the perception, memory. alertness or will
his/her will; extradited to another State where there are
more parts of the body, such as: of a person, such as:
substantial grounds to believe that such person
1. Systematic beating, head-banging, 11. Deliberately prohibiting the victim to shall be in danger of being subjected to torture.
i. The administration or drugs to
punching, kicking, striking with communicate with any member of (Sec. 17, R.A. No. 9745)
induce confession and/or reduce
truncheon or rifle butt or other similar his/her family; and
mental competency; or
objects, and jumping on the stomach; PERSONS LIABLE
ii. The use of drugs to induce extreme 12. Other analogous acts of mental/
2. Food deprivation or forcible feeding with pain or certain symptoms of a psychological torture. (Sec. 4, R.A. No. 1. As principals for the crime of torture or
spoiled food, animal or human excreta, disease; and 9745) other cruel or inhuman and degrading
and other stuff or substances not treatment or punishment:
normally eaten; 14. Other analogous acts of physical torture. II. ACTS CONSTITUTING CRUEL, INHUMAN,
AND DEGRADING TREATMENT a. Any person who actually participated or
3. Electric shock; B. Mental/Psychological Torture refers to acts OR PUNISHMENT induced another in the commission of
calculated to affect or confuse the mind torture or other cruel, inhuman, and
4. Cigarette burning, burning by electrically and/or undermine a person’s dignity, and Applicable to ALL Circumstances degrading treatment or punishment, or
heated rods, hot oil or acid, or by the morale, such as: who cooperated in the execution of the
rubbing of pepper or other chemical A state of war or a threat of war, internal political act of torture or other cruel, inhuman,
substances on mucous membranes, or 1. Blindfolding; instability, or any other public emergency, or a and degrading treatment or punishment
acids or spices directly on the wound; document or any determination comprising an by previous or simultaneous acts;
2. Threatening a person(s) or his/her "order of battle" shall not and can never be
5. The submersion of the head in water or relative(s) with bodily harm, execution, or invoked as a justification for torture and other b. Any superior military, police or law
water polluted with excrement, urine, other wrongful acts; cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment or enforcement officer, or senior
vomit and/or blood until the brink of punishment. (Sec. 6, R.A. No. 9745) government official who issued an order
suffocation; 3. Confinement in solitary cells or secret
to any lower ranking personnel to
detention places;
Applicability of Exclusionary Rule commit torture for whatever purpose;
6. Being tied or forced to assume fixed and
and
stressful bodily position; 4. Prolonged interrogation;
GR: Any confession, admission, or statement
obtained as a result of torture shall be c. The immediate commanding officer of
7. Rape and sexual abuse, including the 5. Preparing a prisoner for a “show trial,”
inadmissible in evidence in any proceedings. the unit concerned of the AFP or the
insertion of foreign objects into the sex public display, or public humiliation of a
detainee or prisoner; immediate senior public official of the
organ or rectum, or electrical torture of
XPN: If the same is used as evidence against a PNP and other law enforcement
the genitals;
6. Causing unscheduled transfer of a person person or persons accused of committing torture. agencies, if:

i. By his act or omission, or negligence, torture or other cruel, inhuman, and NOTE: Any person who does not wish to avail of financial relief programs that may be made
he has led, assisted, abetted, or degrading treatment or punishment, the rights may knowingly and voluntarily waive available to him/her under existing law and rules
allowed, whether directly or provided the accessory acts are done such rights in writing, executed in the presence and regulations. (Sec. 18, R.A. No. 9745)
indirectly, the commission of torture with the abuse of the official’s public and assistance of his/her counsel. (Sec. 12, R.A.
by his/her subordinates; or functions. (Sec. 13, R.A. No. 9745) No. 9745)
I. ANTI-TRAFFICKING IN PERSONS
ii. He/she has knowledge of or, owing Prohibited Detention RIGHTS OF A VICTIM ACT OF 2003
to the circumstances at the time, Secs. 3 – 12, R.A. No. 9208
should have known that acts of Secret detention places, solitary confinement, 1. To have a prompt and impartial investigation
torture or other cruel, inhuman, and incommunicado, or other similar forms of by the CHR and other concerned government
degrading treatment or punishment detention, where torture may be carried out with agencies such as the DOJ, the PAO, the PNP, State Policy
will be committed, is being impunity are prohibited. (Sec. 7, R.A. No. 9745) the NBI, and the AFP;
committed, or has been committed
It is the State’s Policy to give highest priority to
by his/her subordinates or by others Applicability of the RPC NOTE: A prompt investigation shall mean a the enactment of measures and development of
within his/her area of responsibility maximum period of sixty (60) working days programs that will promote human dignity,
and, despite such knowledge, did not The provisions of the RPC insofar as they are from the time a complaint for torture is filed protect the people from any threat of violence
take preventive or corrective action applicable shall be suppletory to this Act. within which an investigation report and/or and exploitation, eliminate trafficking in persons,
either before, during, or Moreover, if the commission of any crime resolution shall be completed and made and mitigate pressures for involuntary migration
immediately after its commission, punishable under Title Eight (Crimes Against available. An appeal, whenever available, and servitude of persons, not only to support
when he/she has the authority to Persons) and Title Nine (Crimes Against Personal shall be resolved within the same period trafficked persons but more importantly, to
prevent or investigate allegations of Liberty and Security) of the RPC is attended by prescribed herein. ensure their recovery, rehabilitation, and
torture or other cruel, inhuman, and any of the acts constituting torture and other
reintegration into the mainstream of society. (Sec.
degrading treatment or punishment cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment or 2. To have sufficient government protection 2, R.A. No. 9208, as amended by R.A. No. 10364)
but failed to prevent or investigate punishment as defined herein, the penalty to be against all forms of harassment, threat,
allegations of such act, whether imposed shall be in its maximum period. (Sec. 22, and/or intimidation as a consequence of the
deliberately or due to negligence. R.A. No. 9745) PUNISHABLE ACTS
filing of a complaint for torture or the
presentation of evidence for such complaint;
2. Any public officer or employee will be liable 1. Acts of Trafficking in Persons committed by
RIGHTS TO PHYSICAL, MEDICAL, AND and
as an accessory if he/she has knowledge that any person, natural or juridical
PSYCHOLOGICAL EXAMINATION
torture or other cruel, inhuman, and NOTE: The protection extends to other
degrading treatment or punishment is being a. To recruit, obtain, hire, provide, offer,
Before and after interrogation, every person persons involved in the investigation/
committed and without having participated transport, transfer, maintain, harbor, or
arrested, detained, or under custodial prosecution such as his/her lawyer,
in its commission, either as principal or receive a person by any means, including
investigation shall have the right to be informed witnesses and relatives.
accomplice, takes part subsequent to its those done under the pretext of domestic
of his/her right to demand physical examination
commission: or overseas employment or training or
by an independent and competent doctor of 3. To be given sufficient protection in the
apprenticeship, for the purpose of
his/her own choice. Furthermore, any person manner by which he/she testifies and
a. By profiting from or assisting the prostitution, pornography, or sexual
arrested, detained, or under custodial presents evidence in any forum to avoid
offender to profit from the effects of the exploitation; (2014 BAR)
investigation, including his/her immediate further trauma. (Sec. 9, R.A. No. 9745)
act of torture or other cruel, inhuman, family, shall have the right to immediate access to
and degrading treatment or punishment; Q: International Justice Mission (IJM), a
proper and adequate medical treatment. Compensation to Victims of Torture
nongovernmental organization, coordinated
b. By concealing the act of torture or other with the police in order to entrap persons
The physical examination and/or psychological Any person who has suffered torture shall have
cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment engaged in human trafficking in Cebu City.
evaluation of the victim shall be contained in a the right to claim for compensation as provided
or punishment and/or destroying the The team went to Queensland Motel and
medical report, duly signed by the attending for under R.A. No. 7309: Provided, that in no case
effects or instruments of torture in order rented Rooms 24 and 25. These rooms were
physician, which shall include in detail his/her shall compensation be any lower than ten
to prevent its discovery; or adjacent to each other. Room 24 was
medical history and findings, and which shall he thousand pesos (P10,000).
designated for the transaction while Room 25
attached to the custodial investigation report.
c. By harboring, concealing, or assisting in was for the rest of the police team.
Such report shall be considered a public NOTE: Victims of torture shall also have the right
the escape of the principal/s in the act of document. (Sec. 12, R.A. No. 9745) to claim for compensation from such other
PO1 Luardo and PO1 Veloso proceeded to D.

Jakosalem Street in Barangay Kamagayan, meaningless due to the coercive, abusive, or Trafficking in Persons Act, despite the lack of hiring, providing, offering, transportation
Cebu City’s red-light district. Accused noticed deceptive means employed by Casio of human testimony from the confidential informant? transfer, maintaining, harboring, or receipt of
them and called their attention by saying trafficking. (People v. Casio, G.R. No. 211465, 03 persons with or without the victim’s consent or
"Chicks mo dong?" (Do you like girls, guys?). Dec. 2014) A: YES. Santiago is guilty beyond reasonable knowledge, within or across national borders; (2)
PO1 Veloso and PO1 Luardo convinced doubt for violating Sec. 4(a) of the Anti- The means used include “by means of threat, or
accused to come with them to Queensland Q: TV5 segment producer Melvin Espenida Trafficking in Persons Act, despite the lack of use of force, or other forms of coercion,
Motel. Upon proceeding toRoom 24, PO1 and his crew went to Plaza Morga and Plaza testimony from the confidential informant. The abduction, fraud, deception, abuse of power or of
Veloso handed the marked money to accused. Moriones in Tondo, Manila to investigate the testimony of the confidential informant is not position, taking advantage of the vulnerability of
As accused counted the money, PO1 Veloso alleged prostitution operations in the relevant for conviction nor is it indispensable for the person, or, the giving or receiving of
gave PSI Ylanan a missed call. This was their area. They had earlier designated a a successful prosecution of this case because his payments or benefits to achieve the consent of a
pre-arranged signal. The rest of the team confidential asset, "Romeo David", on whom a testimony would merely be corroborative and person having control over another person”; and
proceeded to Room 24, arrested accused, and lapel microphone was clipped, to pose as a cumulative. The testimonies of the trafficked (3) The purpose of trafficking includes “the
informed her of her constitutional rights. The customer and transact with the alleged pimps person, AAA, clearly narrating what transpired exploitation or the prostitution of others or other
police confiscated the marked money from for a night with a minor. on the trafficking incident and the police officers forms of sexual exploitation, forced labor or
accused. regarding the entrapment operation were services, slavery, servitude, or the removal or sale
During the transaction, the pimps allegedly sufficient to prove appellant's guilt of the crime of organs.”
Meanwhile, AAA and BBB were brought to asked for P500. Espenida, who was on board a charged. (Santiago v. People, G.R. No. 213760, 01
Room 25 and placed in the custody of the TV5 vehicle located about a hundred meters July 2019) In the instant case, the accused-appellant cannot
representatives from the IJM and the DSWD. away from where David and the pimps were, use as a valid defense either BBB's and AAA's
AAA described that her job as a prostitute heard the transaction through the Q: The Regional Anti-Human Trafficking Task consent to the transaction or that BBB received
required her to display herself, along with microphone. Espenida and his crew filed a Force conducted an entrapment operation in the payment on her behalf. The victim's consent
other girls. She received money for every Complaint reporting about the rampant Lapu-Lapu City. At the bar, two women is rendered meaningless due to the coercive,
customer who selected her. Is Casio properly human trafficking in Plaza Morga and Plaza approached PO1 Nemenzo and PO1 Llanes abusive, or deceptive means employed by
convicted of trafficking in persons, Moriones. and introduced themselves as AAA and BBB, perpetrators of human trafficking. Even without
considering that AAA admitted that she works minors. Upon hearing that they would need the use of coercive, abusive, or deceptive means,
as a prostitute? Acting on the complaint, the police operatives two more girls, another woman approached a minor's consent is not given out of his or her
conducted an entrapment operation, the them and introduced herself as Nancy, who own free will. Trafficking in persons may be
A: YES. Casio is properly convicted of trafficking pimps were eventually caught and arrested. was later identified as Ramirez. She told the committed also by means of taking advantage of
in persons, considering that AAA admitted that According to AAA, she was about to buy coffee police officers that she could provide the girls. the persons' vulnerability as minors. Accused-
she works as a prostitute. Knowledge or consent at Plaza Moriones when Santiago called her, Then, BBB and Ramirez left, and after a while, appellant hired children to engage in
of the minor is not a defense under R.A. No. 9208. offering to pay her to spend a night with a returned with two more girls. They agreed prostitution, taking advantage of their
Accused claims that AAA admitted engaging in customer. He allegedly promised to pay AAA that each girl would cost P600 as payment for vulnerability as minors. AAA's and BBB's
prostitution even before May 2, 2008. She P350 out of the P500 that the customer would sexual services. After Ramirez provided the acquiescence to the illicit transactions cannot be
concludes that AAA was predisposed to having pay for the transaction. AAA later confirmed four girls, the group left and hailed a taxi considered as a valid defense. (People v. Ramirez,
sex with "customers" for money. For liability during trial that Santiago was the pimp, but heading for a Motel. Ramirez had told the girls G.R. No. 217978, 30 Jan. 2019)
under our law, this argument is irrelevant. As said that she only saw Castillo and Legazpi for to accept the money that they would be given.
defined under Sec. 3(a) of R.A. No. 9208, the first time upon getting into the van bound b. To introduce or match for money, profit,
trafficking in persons can still be committed even for the police station. While in the taxi, one of the men handed her or material, economic or other
if the victim gives consent. P2,400. BBB received the money and told her consideration, any person or, as
RTC and CA convicted Santiago of committing companions to set aside P400 as their pimp's provided for under R.A. No. 6955, any
AAA and BBB were recruited by Casio when their trafficking in persons punished under Sec. share. Ramirez denied the allegations and Filipino woman to a foreign national, for
services were peddled to the police who acted as 4(a) of R.A. No. 9208, or the Anti-Trafficking claimed that it was BBB who negotiated with marriage for the purpose of acquiring,
decoys. AAA was a child at the time that accused in Persons Act. However, Santiago points out the customers and received the supposed buying, offering, selling, or trading
peddled her services. AAA also stated that she that the lack of testimony from the payment. Is Ramirez guilty of qualified him/her to engage in prostitution,
agreed to work as a prostitute because she confidential informant, David, raises doubts trafficking of persons? pornography, sexual exploitation, forced
needed money. Accused took advantage of AAA’s on whether "petitioner truly offered AAA to labor, slavery, involuntary servitude, or
vulnerability as a child and as one who need him." Is Santiago guilty beyond reasonable A: YES. The elements for crimes prosecuted debt bondage;
money, as proven by the testimonies of the doubt for violating Sec. 4(a) of the Anti- under R.A. No. 9208, as amended by R.A. No
witnesses. AAA’s consent is rendered 10364, are: (1) The act of “recruitment, obtaining,

c. To offer or contract marriage, real or servitude, including a scheme, plan, or 9208, as amended) 2. To produce, print and issue, or distribute
simulated, for the purpose of acquiring, pattern intended to cause the person unissued, tampered, or fake counseling
buying, offering, selling, or trading them either: 2. Attempted Trafficking certificates, registration stickers, overseas
to engage in prostitution, pornography, employment certificates, or other certificates
sexual exploitation, forced labor or i. To believe that if the person did not Where there are acts to initiate the commission of of any government agency which issues these
slavery, involuntary servitude, or debt perform such labor or services, he a trafficking offense but the offender failed to or certificates, decals, and such other markers
bondage; or she or another person would did not execute all the elements of the crime, by as proof of compliance with government
d. To undertake or organize tours and suffer serious harm or physical accident or by reason of some cause other than regulatory and pre-departure requirements
travel plans consisting of tourism restraint; or voluntary desistance, such overt acts shall be for the purpose of promoting trafficking in
packages or activities for the purpose of ii. To abuse or threaten the use of law deemed as an attempt to commit an act of persons;
utilizing and offering persons for or the legal processes; trafficking in persons. As such, an attempt to
prostitution, pornography, or sexual commit any of the offenses enumerated in Sec. 4 3. To advertise, publish, print, broadcast or
exploitation; k. To recruit, transport, harbor, obtain, shall constitute attempted trafficking in persons. distribute, or cause the advertisement,
transfer, maintain, hire, offer, provide, (Sec. 4-A(1), R.A. No. 9208, as amended) publication, printing, broadcasting or
e. To maintain or hire a person to engage in adopt, or receive a child for purposes of distribution by any means, including the use
prostitution or pornography; exploitation or trading them, including Acts that Constitute Attempted Trafficking in of information technology and the internet,
but not limited to, the act of buying Persons where the Victim is a Child of any brochure, flyer, or any propaganda
f. To adopt persons by any form of and/or selling a child for any material that promotes trafficking in
consideration for exploitative purposes consideration or for barter for purposes 1. Facilitating the travel of a child who travels persons;
or to facilitate the same for purposes of of exploitation. alone to a foreign country or territory
prostitution, pornography, sexual without valid reason therefor and without 4. To assist in the conduct of misrepresentation
exploitation, forced labor, slavery, Trafficking for purposes of exploitation the required clearance or permit from the or fraud for purposes of facilitating the
involuntary servitude, or debt bondage; of children shall include: Department of Social Welfare and acquisition of clearances and necessary exit
Development (DSWD), or a written permit or documents from government agencies that
g. To adopt or facilitate the adoption of i. All forms of slavery or practices justification from the child’s parent or legal are mandated to provide pre-departure
persons for the purpose of prostitution, similar to slavery, involuntary guardian; registration and services for departing
pornography, sexual exploitation, forced servitude, debt bondage and forced persons for the purpose of promoting
labor, slavery, involuntary servitude, or labor, including recruitment of 2. Executing, for a consideration, an affidavit of trafficking in persons;
debt bondage; children for use in armed conflict; consent or a written consent for adoption;
5. To facilitate, assist, or help in the exit and
h. To recruit, hire, adopt, transport, ii. The use, procuring or offering of a 3. Recruiting a woman to bear a child for the entry of persons from/to the country at
transfer, obtain, harbor, maintain, child for prostitution, for the purpose of selling the child; international and local airports, territorial
provide, offer, receive, or abduct a production of pornography, or for boundaries and seaports who are in
person, by means of threat, or use of pornographic performances; 4. Simulating a birth for the purpose of selling possession of unissued, tampered, or
force, fraud, deceit, violence, coercion, or the child; and fraudulent travel documents for the purpose
intimidation for the purpose of removal iii. The use, procuring, or offering of a of promoting trafficking in persons;
or sale of organs of said person; child for the production and 5. Soliciting a child and acquiring the custody
trafficking of drugs; and thereof through any means from among 6. To confiscate, conceal, or destroy the
i. To recruit, transport, obtain, transfer, hospitals, clinics, nurseries, daycare centers, passport, travel documents, or personal
harbor, maintain, offer, hire, provide, iv. The use, procuring, or offering of a refugee or evacuation centers, and low- documents or belongings of trafficked
receive, or adopt a child to engage in child for illegal activities or work income families, for the purpose of selling the persons in furtherance of trafficking or to
armed activities in the Philippines or which, by its nature or the child. (Sec. 4-A(2), R.A. No. 9208, as amended) prevent them from leaving the country or
abroad; circumstances in which it is carried seeking redress from the government or
out, is likely to harm their health, Acts that Promote Trafficking in Persons, or appropriate agencies;
j. To recruit, transport, transfer, harbor, safety or morals; and Facilitate Trafficking in Persons
obtain, maintain, offer, hire, provide, or 7. To knowingly benefit from, financial or
receive a person by means defined in Sec. l. To organize or direct other persons to 1. To knowingly lease or sublease, use, or allow otherwise, or make use of, the labor or
3 of this Act for purposes of forced labor, commit the offenses defined as acts of to be used any house, building, or services of a person held to a condition of
slavery, debt bondage, and involuntary trafficking under this Act. (Sec. 4, R.A. No. establishment for the purpose of promoting
trafficking in persons;

involuntary servitude, forced labor, or simultaneous acts defined under this Act. (Sec. 4- any person “to maintain or hire a person to involuntary servitude, or debt bondage;
slavery; B, R.A. No. 9208, as amended) engage in prostitution or pornography.”
Trafficking is qualified when "the trafficked 3. When the crime is committed by a syndicate,
8. To tamper with, destroy, or cause the Accessories person is a child. (People v. Tabieros and Infante, or in large scale.
destruction of evidence, or to influence or G.R. No. 234191, 01 Feb. 2021)
attempt to influence witnesses, in an Whoever has the knowledge of the commission of NOTE: Trafficking is deemed committed by a
investigation or prosecution of a case under the crime, and without having participated Q: CCC, FFF, and DDD, all minors, worked in syndicate if carried out by a group of three
this Act; therein, either as principal or as accomplices, ABC Bar. Their private parts were touched in (3) or more persons conspiring or
take part in its commission in any of the following exchange for payment. FFF and DDD were confederating with one another. It is deemed
9. To destroy, conceal, remove, confiscate or manners: offered to have sexual intercourse with the committed in large scale if committed
possess, or attempt to destroy, conceal, customers but only DDD did it. against three (3) or more persons,
remove, confiscate, or possess, any actual or 1. By profiting themselves or assisting the individually or as a group. (2015 BAR)
purported passport or other travel, offender to profit by the effects of the crime; DDD testified that she was recruited by a
immigration or working permit or document, friend to work at the bar. Mommy Jojie was 4. When the offender is a spouse, an ascendant,
or any other actual or purported government 2. By concealing or destroying the body of the managing the bar when DDD first visited, and parent, sibling, guardian, or a person who
identification, of any person in order to crime or effects or instruments thereof, in told her that her job was to: (1) entertain exercises authority over the trafficked
prevent or restrict, or attempt to prevent or order to prevent its discovery; or customers; (2) accompany them as they person or when the offense is committed by
restrict, without lawful authority, the drank; (3) kiss them; and (4) allow herself to a public officer or employee;
person’s liberty to move or travel in order to 3. By harboring, concealing, or assisting in the be touched intimately. DDD accompanied
maintain the labor or services of that person; escape of the principal of the crime, provided customers to the VIP room more than 10 5. When the trafficked person is recruited to
or the accessory acts with abuse of his or her times. The floor manager Lapena knew that engage in prostitution with any member of
public functions or is known to be habitually she had sexual intercourse with customers, the military or law enforcement agencies;
10. To utilize his or her office to impede the guilty of some other crime. (Sec. 4-C, R.A. No. and would get angry when she refused. What
investigation, prosecution or execution of 9208, as amended) crime is committed by Lapena? 6. When the offender is a member of the
lawful orders in a case under this Act. (Sec. 5, military or law enforcement agencies;
R.A. No. 9208, as amended) QUALIFIED TRAFFICKING IN PERSONS A: Lapena is guilty of qualified trafficking.
7. When by reason or on occasion of the act of
3. Any person who buys or engages the 1. When the trafficked person is a child; The first element is present. As Floor Manager trafficking in persons, the offended party
services of trafficked persons for Lapena harbored, received, and maintained the dies, becomes insane, suffers mutilation or is
prostitution. (Sec. 11, R.A. No. 9208, as Q: AAA, a minor, narrated that Baby Velasco minors for the purpose of prostitution and sexual afflicted with Human Immunodeficiency
amended) convinced her to work as a kasambahay in exploitation. The second element of trafficking in Virus (HIV) or the Acquired Immune
Ilocos. However, AAA was instead forced to persons was present. Lapena achieved the Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS);
PERSONS LIABLE work as a prostitute in a videoke bar run by consent of the minors CCC, FFF, and DDD to work
Tabieros and Infante. Upon arrest, the as GROs, by taking advantage of the vulnerability 8. When the offender commits one or more
Principal information stated: “… for the purpose of and minority of the complainants. The third violations of Sec. 4 over a period of sixty (60)
exploitation, such as prostitution, did then element of trafficking in persons was present. or more days, whether those days are
1. Any person, natural or juridical, who and there willfully, unlawfully and knowingly The purpose of recruitment, transportation, continuous or not; and
commits any of the punishable acts of hire, maintain and manage said victim to transfer, harbouring, and trafficking, was
trafficking; engage in prostitution through sexual exploitation and prostitution, as already 9. When the offender directs or through
2. Any person who promote or facilitate the services or lascivious conduct, in discussed in the two preceding paragraphs. another manages the trafficking victim in
acts of trafficking; or consideration of the payments and benefits carrying out the exploitative purpose of
3. Any person who buys or engages the services given to her by customers, to her damage and Lastly, trafficking is qualified when the trafficked trafficking. (Sec. 6, R.A. No. 9208, as amended)
of trafficked persons for prostitution shall be prejudice.” What crime did Tabieros and person is a child. (People v. Lapena, G.R. No.
penalized. Infante commit? 238213, 01 Feb. 2021) Q: In an entrapment operation, 2 minor girls
were rescued from being subjected to
Accomplice A: Tabieros and Infante committed acts of 2. When the adoption is effected through R.A. prostitution. Consequently, Sayo and Roxas
qualified trafficking in persons in relation to No. 8043 and said adoption is for the purpose were charged with a violation of R.A. No. 9208
Whoever knowingly aids, abets, or cooperates in Section 4 (e) of Republic Act No. 9208, or the Anti- of prostitution, pornography, sexual (Anti-Trafficking in Persons Act of 2003) –
the execution of the offense by previous or Trafficking in Persons Act of 2003. Such prohibits exploitation, forced labor, slavery, Sayo for recruiting and transporting AAA and

BBB (minors); while Roxas for managing and shall be irrelevant. (Sec. 17, R.A. No. 9208, as any of the means set forth in Sec. 3(a) of this Act
operating a room to be used for prostitution. amended) has been used. (Sec. 17-B, R.A. No. 9208 as J. ANTI-VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN AND
amended) THEIR CHILDREN ACT OF 2004
The RTC found Roxas was found guilty beyond NOTE: Victims of trafficking for purposes of Secs. 3, 5, and 26, R.A. No. 9262
reasonable doubt of Qualified Trafficking in prostitution as defined under Sec. 4 of this Act are Exercise of Extra-Territorial Jurisdiction
Persons under Secs. 5(a) and 6(a) of R.A. No. not covered by Art. 202 of the RPC and as such,
9208. Is the conviction correct? shall not be prosecuted, fined, or otherwise GR: The State shall exercise jurisdiction over any
Violence against Women and their Children
penalized under the said law. (Sec. 17, R.A. No. act defined under this Act even if committed
(VAWC)
A: NO. The RTC committed serious error in 9208, as amended) outside the Philippines and whether or not such
convicting Roxas for Qualified Trafficking of act or acts constitute an offense at the place of
Any act or a series of acts committed by ANY
Persons. Q: Ronnie was able to convince Lolita to work commission, the crime being a continuing
PERSON against a woman who is his wife, former
as a restaurant entertainer in Malaysia. When offense, having been commenced in the
wife, or against a woman with whom the person
Sec. 4 of R.A. No. 9208 refers to those acts which they were already at the restaurant, a Filipina Philippines and the other elements having been
has or had a sexual or dating relationship, or with
directly involve trafficking in persons, such as woman working there said that the place is a committed in another country, if the suspect or
whom he has a common child, or against her child
recruitment, transport, transfer, harboring, prostitution den and the women there are accused:
whether legitimate or illegitimate, within or
receiving, buying, offering, selling, or trading used as prostitutes. Lolita was forced to work
without the family abode, which result in or is
persons to engage in prostitution, pornography, as entertainer. 1. Is a Filipino citizen; or
likely to result in physical, sexual, psychological
sexual exploitation, forced labor, slavery, 2. Is a permanent resident of the Philippines; or
harm or suffering, or economic abuse including
involuntary servitude, or debt bondage. Several customers used Lolita many times. 3. Has committed the act against a citizen of the
threats of such acts, battery, assault, coercion,
Meanwhile, Sec. 5 refers to those acts that Some even had sexual intercourse with her Philippines.
harassment, or arbitrary deprivation of liberty.
promote or facilitate any of the predicate acts of every hour. Ronnie was then sued for
(Sec. 3(a), R.A. No. 9262)
Trafficking in Persons, including knowingly Trafficking in Persons. He claims that he XPN: If the foreign government, with jurisdiction
leasing or subleasing, using or allowing to be used cannot be convicted of the crime charged recognized by the Philippines, has prosecuted or
NOTE: A man cannot be a victim under this Act.
any house, building, or establishment for the because he was not part of the group that is prosecuting such person for the conduct
He should resort to the appropriate provisions of
purpose of promoting trafficking in persons. transported Lolita from the Philippines to constituting the offense.
the RPC.
Malaysia. Is he correct?
The offenses punished under Sec. 5 cannot be XPN to the XPN: Upon approval of the Secretary
Children
qualified by Sec. 6 as what the latter seeks to A: NO. Trafficking in Persons under Sec. 3(a) and of Justice. (Sec. 26-A, R.A. No. 9208, as amended)
qualify is the act of trafficking and not the 4 of R.A. No. 9208 is not only limited to
Those below eighteen (18) years of age or older
promotion of trafficking. Thus, the Court affirms transportation of victims, but also includes the Prescriptive Period
but are incapable of taking care of themselves. It
with modification Roxas' conviction and holds act of recruitment of victims for trafficking. The
includes the biological children of the victim and
that he is guilty of one count of violation of Sec. crime of recruitment for prostitution also PRESCRIPTIVE PERIOD
other children under her care. (Sec. 3(h), R.A. No.
5(a) of R.A. No. 9208 for Acts that Promote constitutes trafficking. (People v. Lalli et al., G.R. Trafficking cases 10 years
9262)
Trafficking in Persons and not Trafficking in No. 195419, 12 Oct. 2011) Trafficking cases committed
Persons, qualified or otherwise. (People v. Susan by a syndicate, or in a large 20 years
Sayo, G.R. No. 227704, 10 Apr. 2019, J. Caguioa) Inadmissibility of Past Sexual Behavior or PUNISHABLE ACTS
scale, or against a child
Predisposition as Evidence
Trafficked Persons are NOT Penalized The crime of violence against women and their
The prescriptive period shall commence to run
The past sexual behavior or the sexual from the day on which the trafficked person is children is committed through any of the
Trafficked persons shall be recognized as victims predisposition of a trafficked person shall be delivered or released from the conditions of following acts:
of the act or acts of trafficking and as such, shall considered inadmissible in evidence for the bondage, or in the case of a child victim, from the
not be penalized for unlawful acts committed as a purpose of proving consent of the victim to 1. Causing physical harm to the woman or her
day the child reaches the age of majority. (Sec. 12,
direct result of, or as an incident or in relation to, engage in sexual behavior, or to prove the child.
R.A. No. 9208, as amended)
being trafficked based on the acts of trafficking predisposition, sexual, or otherwise, of a
2. Threatening to cause the woman or her child
enumerated in this Act or in obedience to the trafficked person. (Sec. 17-B, R.A. No. 9208 as
physical harm.
order made by the trafficker in relation thereto. amended)
In this regard, the consent of a trafficked person
3. Attempting to cause the woman or her child
to the intended exploitation set forth in this Act NOTE: The consent of a victim of trafficking to the
physical harm.
intended exploitation shall be irrelevant where

4. Placing the woman or her child in fear of 8. Engaging in purposeful, knowing, or reckless Elements of the Crime of Violence against substance (Sec. 27, R.A. No. 9262)
imminent physical harm. conduct, personally or through another, that Women through Harassment 2. End of dating relationship prior to the
alarms or causes substantial emotional or violence.
5. Attempting to compel or compelling the psychological distress to the woman or her 1. The offender has or had a sexual or dating
woman or her child to engage in conduct child. This shall include, but not limited to, relationship with the offended woman; NOTE: It is immaterial whether the relationship
which the woman or her child has the right to the following acts: had ceased for as long as there is sufficient
desist from or conduct which the woman or 2. The offender, by himself or through another, evidence showing the past or present existence of
her child has the right to engage in, or a. Stalking or following the woman or her commits an act or series of acts of such relationship between the offender and the
attempting to restrict or restricting the child in public or private places; harassment against the woman; and victim when the physical harm was committed.
woman's or her child's freedom of movement (Dabalos v. RTC, Branch 59, Angeles City,
or conduct by force or threat of force, b. Peering in the window or lingering 3. The harassment alarms or causes substantial Pampanga, G.R. No. 193960, 07 Jan. 2013)
physical or other harm or threat of physical outside the residence of the woman or emotional or psychological distress to her.
or other harm, or intimidation directed her child; (Ang v. CA, G.R. No. 182835, 20 Apr. 2010) Four (4) Acts included under Sec. 3: (P-E-P-S)
against the woman or child. This shall
include, but is not limited to, the following c. Entering or remaining in the dwelling NOTE: Sec. 3(a) of R.A. No. 9262 punishes any act 1. Physical violence (Sec. 3(a)(A), R.A. 9262);
acts committed with the purpose or effect of or on the property of the woman or her or series of acts that constitutes violence against 2. Economic abuse (Sec. 3(a)(D), R.A. 9262);
controlling or restricting the woman's or her child against her/his will; women. This means that a single act of 3. Psychological violence (Sec. 3(a)(C), R.A.
child's movement or conduct: harassment, which translates into violence, 9262); and
d. Destroying the property and personal 4. Sexual violence (Sec. 3(a)(B), R.A. 9262).
would be enough. The object of the law is to
a. Threatening to deprive or actually belongings or inflicting harm to animals
protect women and children. Punishing only
depriving the woman or her child of or pets of the woman or her child; and Physical Violence
violence that is repeatedly committed would
custody to her/his family; license isolated ones. (Ang v. CA, supra)
e. Engaging in any form of harassment or Acts that include bodily or physical harm. (Sec.
b. Depriving or threatening to deprive the violence. 3(a)(A), R.A. No. 9262)
Dating Relationship vs. Sexual Relations
woman or her children of financial
support legally due her or her family, or 9. Causing mental or emotional anguish, public Economic Abuse (2010 BAR)
ridicule, or humiliation to the woman or her DATING
deliberately providing the woman's SEXUAL RELATIONS
child, including, but not limited to, repeated RELATIONSHIP
children insufficient financial support; Acts that make or attempt to make a woman
verbal and emotional abuse, and denial of It refers to a situation financially dependent which includes, but is not
financial support or custody of minor wherein the parties
c. Depriving or threatening to deprive the limited to, the following:
children of access to the woman's live as husband and
woman or her child of a legal right; It refer to a single
child/children. (Sec. 5, R.A. No. 9262) wife without the 1. Withdrawal of financial support or
sexual act which may
benefit of marriage or preventing the victim from engaging in any
d. Preventing the woman in engaging in or may not result in
Prescriptive Period are romantically legitimate profession, occupation, business,
any legitimate profession, occupation, the bearing of a
involved over time or activity, except in cases wherein the other
business, or activity or controlling the common child. (Sec.
1. Acts falling under Nos. 1-6 shall prescribe in and on a continuing spouse/partner objects on valid, serious, and
victim's own money or properties, or 3(f), R.A. No. 9262)
twenty (20) years. basis during the moral grounds as defined in Art. 73 of the
solely controlling the conjugal or
2. Acts falling under Nos. 7-9 shall prescribe in course of the Family Code;
common money, or properties.
ten (10) years. (Sec. 24, R.A. No. 9262) relationship. (Sec.
6. Inflicting or threatening to inflict physical 3(e), R.A. No. 9262) 2. Deprivation or threat of deprivation of
harm on oneself for the purpose of NOTE: VAWC shall be considered a public offense financial resources and the right to the use
controlling her actions or decisions. which may be prosecuted upon the filing of a NOTE: A casual acquaintance or ordinary and enjoyment of the conjugal, community or
complaint by any citizen having personal socialization between two individuals in a property owned in common;
7. Causing or attempting to cause the woman or knowledge of the circumstances involving the business or social context is not a dating
her child to engage in any sexual activity commission of the crime. (Sec. 25, R.A. No. 9262) relationship. 3. Destroying household property; or
which does not constitute rape, by force or
threat of force, physical harm, or through Prohibited Defense 4. Controlling the victims’ own money or
intimidation directed against the woman or properties or solely controlling the conjugal
her child or her/his immediate family. 1. Being under the influence of alcohol, any money or properties. (Sec. 3(a)(D), R.A. No.
illicit drug, or any other mind-altering 9262)

Q: AAA had a romantic relationship with that such deprivation caused either AAA or rise to the level of criminality under Sec. 5(i), women and their children. All the elements of the
Melgar, which resulted in the birth of BBB, an BBB any mental or emotional anguish. even if mental or emotional anguish is crime charged are present in the instant case. It is
illegitimate child. Melgar freely experienced by the woman. In other words, even duly established that petitioner committed
acknowledged the paternity of BBB. However, Sec. 5(i) of R.A. No. 9262, a form of if the woman were to suffer mental or emotional psychological violence through marital infidelity
AAA's relationship with Melgar turned sour as psychological violence, punishes the act of anguish due to the lack of financial support, but and public ridicule or humiliation, which caused
the latter had an affair with a younger woman. "causing mental or emotional anguish, public the accused merely failed or was unable to so mental anguish and emotional suffering upon his
When BBB was just about one year old, Melgar ridicule or humiliation to the woman or her provide support, then criminal liability would not wife. While petitioner sorely attempts to
stopped giving support, prompting AAA to file child, including, but not limited to, repeated arise. A contrary interpretation to the foregoing downplay the effect of his marital infidelity, the
a case for support, which was eventually verbal and emotional abuse, and denial of would result in absurd, if not outright pain and suffering is without a doubt real and raw
granted. This, notwithstanding, Melgar still financial support or custody of minor unconstitutional, consequences. (Acharon v. and far from being imaginary. Just because the
refused to give support for her and BBB. As children or denial of access to the woman's People, G.R. No. 224946, 09 Nov. 2021, J. Caguioa) wife was not bodily present to witness the
such, AAA was constrained to file the instant child/children." (Melgar v. People, G.R. No. unfaithfulness of her husband, it does not negate
criminal case against Melgar. 223477, 14 Feb. 2018) NOTE: The foregoing case is not covered by the the emotional pain and anguish his infidelity
cut-off period for jurisprudence for the 2022 Bar caused her. (XXX v. People, G.R. No. 241390, 13 Jan.
a. Is Melgar liable for violation of Sec. 5(e) of Doctrine in Melgar v. People Abandoned in Exams. 2021)
R.A. No. 9262? Acharon v. People; Secs. 5(i) and 5(e) of R.A.
b. Is Melgar liable for violation of Sec. 5(i) of 9262 are Mala in se Psychological Violence Sexual Violence
R.A. No. 9262?
The crimes penalized under Secs. 5(i) and 5(e) of Acts or omissions causing or likely to cause An act, which is sexual in nature, committed
A: R.A. 9262 are mala in se, not mala prohibita, even mental or emotional suffering of the victim such against a woman or her child. It includes, but is
a. YES. Melgar is liable for the violation of Sec. though R.A. 9262 is a special penal law. The acts as but not limited to intimidation, harassment, not limited to:
5(e) of R.A. No. 9262 for his refusal to provide punished therein are inherently wrong or stalking, damage to property, public ridicule or
support to his child. depraved, and the language used under the said humiliation, repeated verbal abuse, and marital 1. Rape, sexual harassment, acts of
penal law requires a mental element. Being a infidelity. It includes causing or allowing the lasciviousness, treating a woman or her child
R.A. No. 9262 is a landmark legislation that crime mala in se, there must thus be a victim to witness the physical, sexual, or as a sex object, making demeaning and
defines and criminalizes acts of violence concurrence of both actus reus and mens rea to psychological abuse of a member of the family to sexually suggestive remarks, physically
against women and their children (VAWC) constitute the crime. which the victim belongs, or to witness attacking the sexual parts of the victim’s
perpetrated by women's intimate partners, pornography in any form, or to witness abusive body, forcing her/him to watch obscene
i.e., husband, former husband, or any person It is not enough, therefore, for the woman to injury to pets, or to unlawful or unwanted publications and indecent shows or forcing
who has or had a sexual or dating experience mental or emotional anguish, or for deprivation of the right to custody and/or the woman or her child to do indecent acts
relationship, or with whom the woman has a her partner to deny financial support that is visitation of common children. (Sec. 3(a)(C), R.A. and/or make films thereof, forcing the wife
common child, or against her child whether legally due her. No. 9262) and mistress/lover to live in the conjugal
legitimate or illegitimate, within or without home or sleep together in the same room
the family abode, which result in or is likely It bears emphasis that Sec. 5(i) penalizes some Q: Sometime in October 2010, petitioner with the abuser;
to result in, inter alia, economic abuse. As forms of psychological violence that are inflicted started a fight with YYY, his legal wife, as it is
may be gathered from the foregoing, on victims who are women and children." In his usual habit when he is intoxicated. 2. Acts causing or attempting to cause the
"economic abuse" may include the prosecutions under Sec. 5(i), therefore, Petitioner drove YYY and her four children victim to engage in any sexual activity by
deprivation of support of a common child of "[p]sychological violence is the means employed out of the house. However, the spouses’ eldest force, threat of force, physical or other harm
the man-accused and the woman-victim, by the perpetrator" with denial of financial child convinced his three sisters to return to or threat of physical or other harm or
whether such common child is legitimate or support as the weapon of choice. In other words, their house. Later on, one of their daughters, coercion; or
not. (Melgar v. People, G.R. No. 223477, 14 to be punishable by Sec. 5(i) of R.A. 9262, it must AAA, reported to YYY through text messages
Feb. 2018) ultimately be proven that the accused had the that petitioner was always drunk, and that he 3. Prostituting the woman or child. (Sec.
intent of inflicting mental or emotional anguish brought them to a videoke bar and introduced 3(a)(B), R.A. No. 9262)
b. NO. Melgar is not liable for violation of Sec. upon the woman, thereby inflicting psychological one Pearl Manto. She thereafter learned that
5(i) of R.A. No. 9262 since it cannot be proven violence upon her, with the willful denial of the same woman was already living in their Protection Order
that his deprivation of support caused financial support being the means selected by the house for two months. Is petitioner liable for
mental and emotional anguish. In this case, accused to accomplish said purpose. violation of Sec. 5(i) of R.A. No. 9262? An order issued for the purpose of preventing
while the prosecution had established that further acts of violence against a woman or her
Melgar indeed deprived AAA and BBB of This means that the mere failure or one's inability A: YES. Sec. 5(i) of R.A. No. 9262 penalizes some
child. (Sec. 8, R.A. No. 9262)
support, no evidence was presented to show to provide financial support is not sufficient to forms of psychological violence inflicted against

Kinds of Protection Orders PPO 8. At least two (2) concerned responsible 135981, 15 Jan. 2004)
citizens of the city or municipality where the
1. Barangay Protection Orders (BPO) A protection order issued by the court after violence against women and their children Three (3) Phases of Cycle of Violence
2. Temporary Protection Orders (TPO) notice and hearing. (Sec. 16, R.A. No. 9262) occurred and who has personal knowledge of
3. Permanent Protection Orders (PPO) the offense committed. (Sec. 9, R.A. No. 9262) 1. Tension-Building Phase - minor battering
NOTE: The court shall not deny the issuance of occurs - it could be verbal or slight physical
BPO protection order on the basis of the lapse of time If the applicant is not the victim, the application abuse or another form of hostile behavior.
between the act of violence and the filing of the must be accompanied by an affidavit of the
A protection order issued by the Punong application. (Sec. 16, R.A. No. 9262) applicant attesting to: 2. Acute Battering incident - characterized by
Barangay ordering the perpetrator to desist from brutality, destructiveness and, sometimes,
committing acts under Sec. 5 (a) and (b). (Sec. 14, Period of Effectivity of PPO 1. The circumstances of the abuse suffered by death. The battered woman deems this
R.A. No. 9262) the victim; and incident as unpredictable, yet also inevitable.
It shall be effective until revoked by a court upon 2. The circumstances of consent given by the
Who issues a BPO application of the person in whose favor the victim for the filing of the application. 3. Tranquil, Loving or (at least nonviolent)
order was issued. (Sec. 16, R.A. No. 9262) Phase - the couple experience profound relief.
The Punong Barangay may issue a BPO. If he is When disclosure of the address of the victim will On one hand, the batterer may show a tender
unavailable, the application shall be acted upon Where to File TPO and PPO pose danger to her life, it shall be so stated in the and nurturing behavior towards his partner.
by any available Barangay Kagawad. (Sec. 14, R.A. application. In such a case, the applicant shall: On the other hand, the battered woman tries
No. 9262) GR: TPO and PPO are filed in the Family court at to convince herself that the battery will never
the place of residence of petitioner. 1. Attest that the victim is residing in the happen again. (People v. Genosa, G.R. No.
NOTE: If the BPO is issued by a Barangay XPN: In the absence of the Family court, with the municipality or city over which court has 135981, 15 Jan. 2004)
Kagawad, the order must be accompanied by an RTC, MeTC, MTC, or MCTC with territorial territorial jurisdiction; and
attestation by the Barangay Kagawad that jurisdiction over the place of residence of the 2. Provide a mailing address for the purpose of Battered Woman Syndrome as a Proper
the Punong Barangay was unavailable at the time petitioner. (Sec. 10, R.A. No. 9262). service processing. (Sec. 11, R.A. No. 9262) Defense
for the issuance of the BPO.
The issuance of a BPO or the pendency of NOTE: A TPO cannot be issued in favor of a man Victim-survivors who are found by the courts to
Period of Effectivity of BPO application for BPO shall not preclude a against his wife under R.A. No. 9262. (Ocampo v. be suffering from battered woman syndrome DO
petitioner from applying for, or the court from Judge Arcaya-Chua, A.M. OCA IPI No. 07-2630-RTJ, NOT incur any criminal and civil liability
The period of effectivity of a BPO shall be 15 days. granting a TPO or PPO. (Sec. 8, R.A. No. 9262). 23 Apr. 2010) notwithstanding the absence of any of the
(Sec. 14, R.A. No. 9262) elements for justifying circumstances of self-
Who may File Petition for Protection Orders BATTERED WOMAN SYNDROME defense under the RPC. (Sec. 26, R.A. No. 9262)
TPO
A petition for protection order may be filed by Battery Q: BBB and AAA had a relationship when the
A protection order issued by the court on the date any of the following: latter was still raising her first child borne
of filing of the application after ex An act of inflicting physical harm upon the CCC from a previous relationship. During the
parte determination that such order should be 1. The offended party; woman or her child resulting to the physical and relationship with BBB, AAA bore two more
issued. (Sec. 15, R.A. No. 9262) 2. Parents or guardians of the offended party; psychological or emotional distress. (Sec. 3(b), children namely, DDD and EEE.
3. Ascendants, descendants, or collateral R.A. No. 9262)
Period of Effectivity of TPO relatives within the fourth civil degree of To legalize their relationship, BBB and AAA
consanguinity or affinity; Battered Woman Syndrome married in civil rights and thereafter, the
The period of effectivity of a TPO shall be 30 days. 4. Officers or social workers of the DSWD or birth certificates of the children, including
(Sec. 15, R.A. No. 9262) social workers of local government units A scientifically defined pattern of psychological CCC’s, was amended to change their civil
(LGUs); and behavioral symptoms found in women living status to be legitimated by virtue of the said
NOTE: The court shall schedule a hearing on the 5. Police officers, preferably those in charge of in battering relationships as a result of marriage. However, there were fights and
issuance of a PPO prior to or on the date of the women and children's desks; cumulative abuse. (Sec. 3(c), R.A. No. 9262) arguments which caused them to have
expiration of the TPO. (Sec. 15, R.A. No. 9262) 6. Punong Barangay or Barangay Kagawad; strained relationship that led them to file a
7. Lawyer, counselor, therapist, or healthcare NOTE: In order to be classified as a battered case under the VAWC.
provider of the petitioner; or woman, the couple must go through the battering
cycle at least twice. (People v. Genosa, G.R. No. Pending the Court’s deliberation of the

instant case, BBB filed a Manifestation and either before or after the effective date of rebellion or acts of sedition, as the case conversation through a telephone extension.
Motion to Render Judgment Based on a this Act. may be, have actually been or are being
Memorandum of Agreement (MOA). BBB committed; When the P8,000 agreed upon on the
alleges that on July 29, 2013, he and AAA had 3. Replay the said tape record, wire record or telephone was delivered to Atty. T at the
entered into a compromise anent the custody, disc record for any other person or persons. 2. There are reasonable grounds to believe appointed place and time, he (Atty. T) was
exercise of parental authority over, and that evidence will be obtained essential to arrested by the police for Robbery/Extortion
support of DDD and EEE. Is the case a proper 4. Communicate the contents of the said tape the conviction of any person for, or to the on complaint of L who was accompanied by
subject of a compromise agreement? record, wire record or disc record, either solution of, or to the prevention of, any of his lawyer, Atty. X. Atty. X executed an
verbally or in writing. such crimes; and affidavit stating that he heard Atty. T
A: NO. The instant petition is not a proper subject demanding P8,000 for the withdrawal of the
of a compromise agreement. The law explicitly 5. Furnish transcriptions of the said tape 3. There are no other means readily available criminal complaint through a telephone
prohibits compromise on any act constituting the record. Wire record or disc record, whether for obtaining such evidence. (Sec. 3(1), R.A. extension. On the basis of this affidavit, Atty. T
crime of violence against women. Thus, in Garcia complete or partial, to any other person. No. 4200) filed a criminal complaint against Atty. X and
v. Drilon, the Court declared that violence is not a (Sec. 1(2), R.A. No. 4200) L for violation of Sec. 1 of RA. No. 4200,
subject for compromise. A process which Period of Authorization of Written Order otherwise known as the Anti-Wire Tapping
involves parties mediating the issue of violence 6. Knowingly does or aid, permit or cause to de Act. which says:
Effective for the period specified in the Order, but
implies that the victim is somehow at fault. done any of the acts declared unlawful in
shall not exceed sixty (60) days from the date of
Sec. 1. (Sec. 2, R.A. No. 4200) "It shall be unlawful for any person not being
issuance. (Sec. 3(2), R.A. No. 4200)
NOTE: While AAA filed her application for a authorized by all the parties to any private
Temporary Protection Order (TPO) and a XPN: Any peace officer, who is authorized by a conversation or spoken word to tap any wire
After the expiration of such period, all recordings
Permanent Protection Order (PPO) as an written order of the Court, to execute any of the or cable or by using any other device or
made under court authorization shall, within
independent action and not as an incidental relief acts declared to be unlawful in cases involving arrangement, to secretly overhear, intercept
forty-eight (48) hours after the expiration of the
prayed for in a criminal suit, the instant petition the crimes of treason, espionage, provoking war or record such communication or spoken
period fixed in the order, be deposited with the
cannot be taken outside the ambit of cases falling and disloyalty in case of war, piracy, mutiny in word by using a device commonly known as
court in a sealed envelope or sealed package.
under the provisions of R.A. No. 9262. Perforce, the high seas, rebellion, conspiracy and proposal Dictaphone or dictograph or detectaphone,
Such package shall not be opened, or the
the prohibition against subjecting the instant to commit rebellion, inciting to rebellion, walkie-talkie or tape recorder, or however
recordings replayed, or used in evidence, or their
petition to compromise applies. (BBB* v. AAA*, sedition, conspiracy to commit sedition, inciting otherwise described." If you were the Judge,
contents revealed. (Sec. 3(3), R.A. No. 4200)
G.R. No. 193225, 09 Feb. 2015) to sedition, kidnapping and violations of would you convict or acquit L and his lawyer,
Commonwealth Act No. 616, punishing Atty. X? Explain.
XPN: Upon motion, with due notice and
espionage and other offenses against national
opportunity to be heard to the person or persons
K. ANTI-WIRE TAPPING ACT security. (Sec. 3(1), R.A. No. 4200) A: NO. It is a telephone extension and those
whose conversation or communications have
Secs. 1 – 4, R.A. No. 4200 enumerated by law means an extension with
been recorded. (Sec. 3(3), R.A. No. 4200)
Written Order permanent recording of which a telephone
extension is not.
Issued only upon written application and the The court referred shall be understood to mean
PUNISHABLE ACTS examination under oath or affirmation of the the RTC within whose territorial jurisdiction the
An extension telephone cannot be placed in the
applicant and the witnesses he may produce and acts for which authority is applied is for are
same category as a dictaphone, dictagraph or the
1. Tap any wire or cable, or by using any other a showing that: executed. (Sec. 3(3), R.A. No. 4200)
other devices enumerated in Sec. 1 of R.A. No.
device or arrangement, to secretly overhear, 4200 as the use thereof cannot be considered as
intercept, or record such communication or 1. There are reasonable grounds to believe Q: C told his lawyer, Atty. T, to settle the
"tapping" the wire or cable of a telephone line.
spoken word by using a device commonly that any of the crimes enumerated criminal case he filed against L, and so Atty. T
The telephone extension in this case was not
known as a Dictaphone or dictograph or hereinabove exception has been called up through telephone L, and informed
installed for that purpose.
detectaphone or walkie-talkie or tape committed or is being committed or is him that C is willing to have the case
recorder. (Sec. 1(1), R.A. No. 4200) about to be committed. Provided, that in dismissed provided that L pays P8,000 and
A person should safely presume that the party he
cases involving the offenses of rebellion, makes a public apology. L told Atty. T to call
is calling at the other end of the line probably has
2. Knowingly possess any tape record, wire conspiracy and proposal to commit him up the following day as he would consult
an extension telephone and he runs the risk of a
record, disc record, or any other such rebellion, inciting to rebellion, sedition, his lawyer. The following day when Atty. T
third party listening as in the case of a party line
record, or copies thereof, of any conspiracy to commit sedition, and called up L, the latter requested his lawyer
or a telephone unit which shares its line with
communication or spoken word secured inciting to sedition, such authority shall be Atty. X, who was in his (L's) office at that time,
another. (Gaanan v. IAC, G.R. No. L-69809, 16 Oct.
granted only upon prior proof that a to secretly listen to the telephone

1986) recording is authenticated by the testimony of the Q: Will R.A. No. 4200 apply to tapping of a drawee bank for the payment of such check
witness: private conversation by one of the parties to a in full upon its presentment, which check is
Q: From an extension line, Ricardo overheard conversation? subsequently dishonored by the drawee
a telephone conversation between Julito and 1. That he personally recorded the bank for insufficiency of funds or credit or
Atty. Hipolito. The latter (Atty. Hipolito) was conversations; A: YES. The law makes no distinction as to would have been dishonored for the same
asking money from Julito in exchange for 2. That the tape played in the court was the whether the party sought to be penalized by the reason had not the drawer, without any valid
dropping the extortion charge filed against one he recorded; and statute ought to be a party other than or different reason, ordered the bank to stop payment;
Julito. Ricardo was charged of violating the 3. That the voices on the tape are those of the from those involved in the private (Sec. 1(1), B.P. 22)
Anti-Wire Tapping Act or R.A. No. 4200. Under persons such are claimed to belong. communication. The statute's intent to penalize
these facts, was there a violation as charged? all persons unauthorized to make such recording 2. Any person who, having sufficient funds in or
(2013 BAR) In the given facts, it is clear that Jalbuena was able is underscored by the use of the qualifier "any". credit with the drawee bank when he makes
to comply with the aforementioned requisites. Consequently, "even a (person) privy to a or draws and issues a check, shall fail to keep
A: NO, because a telephone extension line is not Hence, there is no question that his voice communication who records his private sufficient funds or to maintain a credit to
the device or arrangement contemplated by the recording is admissible. (Navarro v. CA and conversation with another without the cover the full amount of the check if
law and the use of an extension line cannot be People, G.R. No. 121087, 26 Aug. 1999) knowledge of the latter will qualify as a violator" presented within a period of 90 days from
considered as wiretapping. under this provision of R.A. No. 4200. (Ramirez v. the date appearing thereon, for which reason
NON-ADMISSIBILITY IN EVIDENCE CA, G.R. No. 93833, 25 Sept. 1995) it is dishonored by the drawee bank. (Sec.
Q: Lingan and Jalbuena, who were reporters 1(2), B.P. 22)
in a radio station, went to a police station to Any communication or spoken word, or the 2. Any person who willfully or knowingly does
report an offense while they were existence, contents, substance, purport, effect, or or who shall aid, permit, or cause to be done NOTE: Where the check is drawn by a
investigating an entertainment house. The meaning of the same or any part, or any any of the acts declared to be unlawful or corporation, company, or entity, the person
stationed police officers, who were having a information therein contained obtained or violates the provisions of this Act or of any or persons who actually signed the check in
drinking spree, aggressively dismissed them. secured by any person in violation of the order issued thereunder, or aids, permits, or behalf of such drawer shall be liable under
provisions of the Act shall not be admissible in causes such violation. (Sec. 2, R.A. No. 4200) this Act. (Sec. 1(3), B.P. 22)
During an altercation, Navarro hit Lingan with evidence in any judicial, quasi-judicial, legislative
the back of his pistol and thereafter hit the or administrative hearing or investigation. (Sec. 4, Elements for Violation of B.P. 22(1)
latter’s head on concrete. Lingan died from his R.A. No. 4200) L. BOUNCING CHECKS LAW
wounds, thus Navarro was charged of murder. B.P. Blg. 22 1. That a person makes or draws and issues any
Jalbuena was able to produce a voice record of check;
Q: In an annulment proceeding, among the
the altercation and used it as part of his exhibits offered by private respondent were
testimony. He testified that: he personally 2. The check is drawn or issued to apply on
three (3) cassette tapes of alleged telephone Check
made the voice recording, the tape played in account or for a valuable consideration;
conversations between petitioner and
the court was the one he recorded, and the unidentified persons. Will the tapes be A bill of exchange drawn on a bank payable on
speakers were petitioner Navarro and Lingan. 3. The person who makes or draws and issues
admissible as evidence? demand. (Sec. 185, Act No. 2031)
Is his voice recording valid and admissible as the check knows at the time of issue that he
evidence under R.A. No. 4200? does not have sufficient funds in or credit
A: NO. Absent a clear showing that both parties to Q: Does B.P. 22 cover manager’s check?
with the drawee bank for the payment of
the telephone conversations allowed the
A: YES. The voice recording was made in the such check in full upon its presentment; and
recording of the same, the inadmissibility of the A: NO. B.P. 22 does not cover manager’s check
police station where policemen were discharging subject tapes is mandatory under R.A. No. 4200. because of its peculiar character and general use
4. At the time the check was presented for
their public functions. R.A. No. 4200 prohibits (Salcedo-Ortañez v. CA, G.R. No. 110662, 04 Aug. in the commercial world. It is as good as the
payment at due date, the same was
only the overhearing, intercepting, or recording 1994) money it represents and is therefore deemed as
dishonored for insufficiency of funds or
of private communications. Since the exchange cash. (Festin, pp. 145)
credit or would have been dishonored for the
between Navarro and Lingan was made while the
PERSONS LIABLE same reason had not the drawer, without any
former was in the exercise of his public functions,
PERSONS LIABLE (2013, 2014 BAR) valid reason, ordered the bank to stop
the communication is public and hence not
1. Any person not being authorized by all the payment.
prohibited.
parties to any private communication or 1. Any person who makes or draws and issues
spoken word, be he a participant or not in the any check to apply on account or for value, NOTE: Knowledge of insufficiency of funds is a
Furthermore, his voice recording is admissible as
acts penalized. (Sec. 1, R.A. No. 4200) knowing at the time of issue that he does not state of mind, hence, the hardest element to
evidence since it was duly authenticated. A voice
have sufficient funds in or credit with the prove.

Elements for Violation of B.P. 22(2) Effect when the Check was Presented for prosecution must not only establish that a check Insufficiency of Verbal Notice of Dishonor
Payment on the 96th day after its Due Date was issued and that the same was subsequently
1. That a person has sufficient funds in or credit dishonored. It must further be shown that Verbal notice of dishonor is NOT sufficient. The
with the drawee bank when he makes or If the payee presented the check and it bounced, accused knew, at the time of the issuance of the notice of dishonor must be in writing. A mere oral
draws and issues a check; even if the payee sends a written notice of check, that he did not have sufficient funds or notice or demand to pay would be insufficient for
dishonor to the drawer, the payee would not be credit with the drawee bank for the payment of conviction under the law. (Marigomen v. People,
2. That he fails to keep sufficient funds or to entitled to a presumption that the drawer had such check in full upon its presentment. G.R. No. 153451, 26 May 2005; Domagsang v. CA,
maintain a credit to cover the full amount of knowledge that he has no funds when the check G.R. No. 139292, 05 Dec. 2000)
the check if presented within a period of 90 was issued. Under Sec. 2 of B.P. 22, the said This knowledge of insufficiency of funds or credit
days from the date appearing thereon; and presumption can only be utilized during the 90- at the time of the issuance of the check is the If the drawer or maker is an officer of a
day period. second element of the offense. In as much as this corporation, the notice of dishonor to the said
3. That the check is dishonored by the drawee element involves a state of mind of the person corporation is not notice to the employee or
bank. Stolen Check Cannot Give Rise to a Violation of making, drawing or issuing the check, which is officer who drew or issued the check for and in its
B.P. 22 difficult to prove, Sec. 2 of B.P. 22 creates a prima behalf. It is axiomatic that notice to the
Q: A and B agreed to meet at the latter’s house
facie presumption of such knowledge. corporation, which has a personality distinct and
to discuss B’s financial problems. On his way,
A stolen check cannot give rise to a violation of separate from the officer of the corporation, does
one of A’s car tires blew up. Before A left the
B.P. 22 because the check is not drawn for a For this presumption to arise, the prosecution not constitute notice to the latter. (Lao v. CA, G.R.
meeting, he asked B to lend him money to buy
valuable consideration. Such checks were not must prove the following: (a) the check is No. 119178, 20 June 1997)
a new spare tire. B had temporarily exhausted
made to apply to a valid, due, and demandable presented within ninety (90) days from the date
his bank deposits leaving a zero balance.
obligation. This, in effect, is a categorical ruling of the check; (b) the drawer or maker of the check Receipt of Notice from the Drawee Bank by
Anticipating, however a replenishment of his
that the fact from which the civil liability of receives notice that such check has not been paid the Payee
account soon, B, issued a postdated check
respondent may arise does not exist. (Ching v. by the drawee; and (c) the drawer or maker of the
with which A negotiated for the new tire.
Nicdao, G.R. 141181, 27 Apr. 2007) check fails to pay the holder of the check the The notice of dishonor may be sent by the
amount due thereon, or make arrangements for offended party or the drawee bank. (Lim Lao v.
When presented, the check bounced for lack
EVIDENCE OF KNOWLEDGE OF payment in full within five (5) banking days after CA, G.R. No. 119178, 20 June 1997; Azarcon v.
of funds. The tire company filed a criminal
INSUFFICIENT FUNDS receiving notice that such check has not been People, G.R. No. 185906, 29 June 2010; Resterio v.
case against A and B. What would be the
paid by the drawee. People, G.R. No. 177438, 24 Sept. 2012)
criminal liability, if any, of each of the two
accused? Explain. Necessity of Actual Knowledge of
Insufficiency of Funds in B.P. 22 In other words, the presumption is brought into Probative Value of the Unpaid or Dishonoured
existence only after it is proved that the issuer Check with Stamped Information “re: refusal
A: A, who negotiated the unfunded check of B in
Knowledge of insufficiency of funds or credit in had received a notice of dishonor and that within to pay”
buying a new tire for his car, may only be
the drawee bank for the payment of a check upon five days from receipt thereof, he failed to pay the
prosecuted for estafa if he was aware at the time
its presentment is an essential element of the amount of the check or to make arrangements for Such is prima facie evidence of:
of such negotiation that the check has no
offense. its payment. A notice of dishonor received by the
sufficient funds in the drawee bank; otherwise, he
maker or drawer of the check is thus 1. The making or issuance of the check;
is not criminally liable.
There is a prima facie presumption of the indispensable before a conviction can ensue. 2. The due presentment to the drawee for
existence of this element from the fact of drawing, (Dico v. CA, G.R. No. 141669, 28 Feb. 2005; Resterio payment and the dishonour thereof; and
B, who accommodated A with his check, may
issuing or making a check, the payment of which v. People, G.R. No. 177438, 24 Sept. 2012) 3. The fact that the check was properly
nevertheless be prosecuted under B.P. 22 for
was subsequently refused for insufficiency of dishonored for the reason stamped on the
having issued the check, knowing at the time of
funds. It is important to stress, however, that this NOTE: The presumption or prima facie evidence check. (Sec. 3, B.P. 22)
issuance that he has no funds in the bank and that
is not a conclusive presumption that forecloses or as provided in this section cannot arise, if such
A will negotiate it to buy a new tire, i.e. for value.
precludes the presentation of evidence to the notice of non-payment by the drawee bank is not Prima Facie Evidence of Knowledge of
B may not be prosecuted for estafa because the
contrary. (Lim Lao v. CA, G.R. No. 119178, 20 June sent to the maker or drawer, or if there is no proof Insufficient Funds
facts indicate that he is not actuated by intent to
1997) as to when such notice was received by the
defraud in issuing the check negotiated.
drawer, since there would simply be no way of GR: There is a prima facie evidence of knowledge
Obviously, B issued the postdated check only to
Notice of Dishonor is an Indispensable reckoning the crucial 5-day period. (Lim Lao v. CA, of insufficient funds when the check was
help A. Criminal intent or dolo is absent.
Requisite for Prosecution G.R. No. 119178, 20 June 1997; Resterio v. People, presented within 90 days from the date
G.R. No. 177438, 24 Sept. 2012) appearing on the check and was dishonored.
To hold a person liable under B.P. 22, the

XPNs: G.R. No. 150618, 24 July 1989) funds in the bank, he does not incur any liability payment after receipt payment after
1. When the check was presented after 90 days under B.P. 22, if the lessor of the equipment of notice of dishonour receipt of notice of
from date; Dishonor of the Check Due to a Stop Payment pulled out the loaned equipment. The drawer has dishonour
Order no obligation to make good the check because
2. When the maker or drawer: there is no more deposit or guaranty. Recovery from Civil Action arising from B.P.
a. Pays the holder of the check in cash, Under Sec. 1, Par. 1 of B.P. 22, it is implied that 22 Precludes Recovery from Corresponding
the amount due within five (5) banking when the stop payment order is with a valid Violation of B.P. 22 in case of a Check Drawn Civil Action arising from Estafa
days after receiving notice that such reason, there can be no violation of B.P. 22. against a Dollar Account
check has not been paid by the drawee; Double recovery is not allowed by the law. Settled
NOTE: Notwithstanding receipt of an order to The law does not distinguish the currency is the rule that the single act of issuing a bouncing
b. Makes arrangements for payment in stop payment, the drawee shall state in the notice involved under B.P. 22. Foreign checks, provided check may give rise to two distinct criminal
full by the drawee of such check within that there were no sufficient funds in or credit they are either drawn or issued in the Philippines, offenses: estafa and violation of B.P. 22.
five (5) banking days after notice of with such bank for the payment in full of such though payable outside thereof, are within the
non-payment. check, if such be the fact. (Sec. 3, BP 22) coverage of said law. (De Villa v. CA, G.R. No. However, the recovery of the single civil liability
87416, 08 Apr. 1991) arising from the single act of issuing a bouncing
Q: Evangeline issued checks to accommodate Liability of Drawer in cases of Checks Issued check in either criminal case bars the recovery of
and to guarantee the obligations of Boni in in Payment of Installments Violation of B.P. 22 vs. Estafa the same civil liability in the other criminal
favour of another creditor. When the checks action. While the law allows two simultaneous
issued by Evangeline were presented for When checks are issued in payment of VIOLATION OF civil remedies for the offended party, it
payment, the same was dishonored for the installments covered by promissory notes and ESTAFA
B.P. 22 authorizes recovery in only one. In short, while
reason “Account Closed”. She was then said checks bounced, the drawer is liable if the Malum prohibitum Malum in se two crimes arise from a single set of facts, only
convicted of three (3) counts of violation of checks were drawn against insufficient funds, Crime against public Crime against one civil liability attaches to it. (Rodriguez v. Hon.
B.P. 22. On appeal, she contended that the especially when the drawer, upon signing of the interest property Ponferrada, G.R. Nos. 155531-34, 29 July 2005)
prosecution failed to prove that she received promissory note, closed his account. Said check is Deceit is an
any notice of dishonor of the subject checks still with consideration. (Caram Resources v. Hon. Deceit not required
element PREFERENCE OF IMPOSITION OF FINE
from the drawee bank. Thus, according to her, Contreras, A.M. No. MTJ-93-849, 26 Oct. 1994)
The act
in the absence of such notice, her conviction
Punishes the making constituting the Penalty that the Judge may Impose for
under B.P. 22 was not warranted for there was Liability of a Person who Issues Guarantee
or drawing of any offense is Violation of B. P. 22
no bad faith or fraudulent intent that may be Checks which were Dishonored in Violation of
check that is postdating or
inferred on her part. the Purpose of the Law
subsequently issuing a check in SC-AC No. 12-2000, as clarified by SC-AC No. 13-
dishonoured, whether payment of an 2001, established a rule on preference in
May Evangeline be held liable for violation of The mere issuance of any kind of check
issued in payment of obligation when imposing the penalties. When the circumstances
B.P. 22 even in the absence of notice of regardless of the intent of the parties, i.e. whether
an obligation or to the offender has no of the case clearly indicate good faith or clear
dishonor? the check is intended merely to serve as guaranty
merely guarantee an funds in the bank mistake of fact without taint of negligence, the
or deposit, but which check is subsequently
obligation. or his funds imposition of fine alone may be considered as the
A: NO. In order to create the prima facie dishonored makes the person who issued the
The issuance of a check deposited therein preferred penalty. The determination of the
presumption that the issuer knew of the check liable for BP 22. (Lazaro v. CA, et.al., G.R. No.
and not the non- were not sufficient circumstances that warrant the imposition of fine
insufficiency of funds, it must be shown that he or 105461, 11 Nov. 1993)
payment of obligation to cover the rests upon the trial judge only. Should the judge
she received a notice of dishonor and within five
is punished. amount of the deem that imprisonment is appropriate, such
banking days thereafter, failed to satisfy the Q: Suppose guarantee checks were issued for
check. penalty may be imposed.
amount of the check or arrange for its payment. It the lease of certain equipment but later their
Not violated if
is only then that the drawer may be held liable for equipment was pulled out. Is the drawer Violated if check is
check is issued in Being a First-time Offender is NOT the Sole
violation of the subject law. liable? issued in payment of a
payment of a pre- Factor for the Preferential Penalty of Fine
pre-existing obligation
existing obligation Alone
In order to be punished for the acts committed A: NO. In the case of Magno v. CA (G.R. No. 96132,
There must be
under B.P. 22, it is required that not only should 26 June 1992), the accused issued a check of Damage not required
damage This circumstance is not the sole factor in
the accused issue a check that is dishonored but warranty deposit for lease of certain equipment.
Drawer is given 5 Drawer is given 3 determining whether he deserves the preferred
likewise the accused has actually been notified in
banking days to make days to make penalty of fine alone. The penalty to be imposed
writing of the fact of dishonor. (Cabrera v. People, Even knowing that he has no funds or insufficient
arrangements of arrangements of depends on the peculiar circumstances of each

case. It is the trial court’s decision to impose any Schedules annexed to the 1971 Single Convention Parties, Social Gatherings, or Meetings (Sec. 20. Consenting to or knowingly tolerating any
penalty within the confines of the law. (SC-AC No. on Psychotropic Substances. (Sec. 3(j), R.A. No. 13, R.A. No. 9165); violation of this Act by a partnership,
13-2001) 9165) corporation, association, or any juridical
11. Possession of Equipment, Instrument, entity, the partner, president, director,
NOTE: In Administrative Circular No. 12-2000, Controlled Precursors and Essential Apparatus and Other Paraphernalia for manager, trustee, estate administrator, or
the SC modified the sentence imposed for Chemicals Dangerous Drugs During Parties, Social officer (Sec. 30(1), R.A. No. 9165).
violation of B.P. 22 by deleting the penalty of Gatherings, or Meetings (Sec. 14, R.A. No.
imprisonment and imposing only the penalty of Includes those listed in Tables I and II of the 1988 9165); 21. Knowingly authorizing, tolerating, or
fine in an amount double the amount of the check. UN Convention Against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic consenting to the use of a vehicle, vessel,
However, by virtue of the passage of Drugs and Psychotropic Substances. 12. Use of Dangerous Drugs (Sec. 15, R.A. No. aircraft, equipment or other facility, as an
Administrative Circular No. 13-2001, the SC 9165); instrument in the importation, sale, trading,
explained that the clear tenor of Administrative PUNISHABLE ACTS administration, dispensation, delivery,
Circular No. 12-2000 is not to remove 13. Cultivation or Culture of Plants Classified as distribution, transportation, or manufacture
imprisonment as an alternative penalty but to lay Dangerous Drugs or are Sources Thereof of dangerous drugs, or chemical diversion, if
1. Importation of Dangerous Drugs and/or
down a rule of preference in the application of the (Sec. 16, R.A. No. 9165); such vehicle, vessel, aircraft, equipment, or
Controlled Precursors and Essential
penalties provided for in B.P. 22. (Vaca v. CA, G.R. Chemicals (Sec. 4, R.A. No. 9165); other instrument is owned by or under the
14. Maintenance and Keeping of Original control or supervision of the partnership,
No. 131714, 16 Nov. 1998; Lim v. People, G.R. No.
Records of Transactions on Dangerous Drugs corporation, association, or juridical entity to
130038, 18 Sept. 2000) 2. Sale, Trading, Administration, Dispensation,
and/or Controlled Precursors and Essential which they are affiliated by a partner,
Delivery, Distribution, and Transportation of
Chemicals (Sec. 17, R.A. No. 9165); president, director, manager, trustee, estate
Prescriptive Period for Violation of B.P. 22 Dangerous Drugs and/or Controlled
Precursors and Essential Chemicals (Sec. 5, administrator, or officer (Sec. 30(2), R.A. No.
15. Unnecessary Prescription of Dangerous
Since BP Blg. 22 is a special law that imposes a R.A. No. 9165); 9165);
Drugs (Sec. 18, R.A. No. 9165);
penalty of imprisonment of not less than thirty
(30) days but not more than one (1) year or by a 3. Maintenance of a Den, Dive, or Resort. (Sec. 6, 22. Violating any rule or regulation issued by the
16. Unlawful Prescription of Dangerous Drugs Dangerous Drugs Board in relation to R.A.
fine for its violation, it therefor prescribes in four R.A. No. 9165);
(Sec. 19, R.A. No. 9165); 9165 (Sec. 32, R.A. No. 9165);
(4) years in accordance with the Act No. 3326. 4. Employees and Visitors of a Den, Dive, or
Resort (Sec. 7, R.A. No. 9165);
17. Misappropriation, misapplication or failure 23. Issuance of False or Fraudulent Drug Test
The running of the prescriptive period, however,
to account for confiscated, seized or Results (Sec. 37, R.A. No. 9165);
should be tolled upon the institution of 5. Manufacture of Dangerous Drugs and/or
surrendered dangerous drugs, plant sources
proceedings against the guilty person. (People v. Controlled Precursors and Essential
of dangerous drugs, controlled precursors 24. Violation of confidentiality rule on records of
Pangilinan, G.R. No. 152662, 13 June 2012) Chemicals (Sec. 8, R.A. No. 9165);
and essential chemicals, drug dependents under voluntary
6. Illegal Chemical Diversion of Controlled instruments/paraphernalia and/or submission (Sec. 72, R.A. No. 9165);
NOTE: Commencement of the proceedings for the
Precursors and Essential Chemicals (Sec. 9, laboratory equipment including the
prosecution of the accused before the Office of the
R.A. No. 9165); proceeds or properties obtained from the 25. Failure or refusal, intentionally or
City Prosecutor effectively interrupts the
unlawful acts by any public officer or negligently, to appear after due notice as a
prescriptive period for the offenses under B.P 22.
7. Manufacture or Delivery of Equipment, employee (Sec. 27, R.A. No. 9165); witness for the prosecution in any
(People v. Pangilinan, supra)
Instrument, Apparatus, and Other proceedings, involving violations of this Act,
Paraphernalia for Dangerous Drugs and/or 18. Benefiting from the proceeds of the without any valid reason by any member of
Controlled Precursors and Essential trafficking of dangerous drugs, or have law enforcement agencies or any other
M. COMPREHENSIVE DANGEROUS DRUGS received any financial or material
Chemicals (Sec. 10, R.A. No. 9165); government official and employee (Sec. 91,
ACT OF 2002 contributions or donations from natural or R.A. No. 9165);
R.A. No. 9165, as amended by R.A. No. 10640 juridical persons found guilty of trafficking
8. Possession of Dangerous Drugs (Sec. 11, R.A.
No. 9165) (2015 BAR); dangerous drugs by any elective local or 26. Causing the unsuccessful prosecution and/or
national official (Sec. 27, R.A. No. 9165); dismissal of the said drug-related cases,
Dangerous Drugs (2007 BAR) 9. Possession of Equipment, Instrument, deliberately or through patent laxity,
Apparatus, and Other Paraphernalia for 19. Planting of dangerous drugs, controlled inexcusable neglect, or unreasonable delay
Include those listed in the Schedules annexed to precursors, or essential chemicals as
Dangerous Drugs (Sec. 12, R.A. No. 9165); by any government officer or employee
the 1961 Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, as evidence (Sec. 29, R.A. No. 9165); tasked with the prosecution of said cases
amended by the 1972 Protocol and in the 10. Possession of Dangerous Drugs During under this Act. (Sec. 92, R.A. No. 9165)

ATTEMPT OR CONSPIRACY Appreciation of Conspiracy in case of chemical whether for money or any other In the crime of illegal sale of dangerous drugs, the
Possession of Dangerous Drugs consideration. (Sec. 3(ii), R.A. No. 9165) delivery of the illicit drug to the poseur buyer and
Effect of Attempt or Conspiracy on the the receipt by the seller of the marked money
Criminal Liability The crime of conspiracy to commit possession of Elements: (I-D-P) consummate the illegal transaction. What
dangerous drugs does not exist. Simply put, the matters is the proof that the transaction or sale
The accused shall be penalized by the same circumstance of conspiracy is not appreciated in 1. The Identity of the buyer and seller, object, actually took place, coupled with the
penalty prescribed for the commission of the the crime of possession of dangerous drugs under and consideration; and presentation in court of the prohibited drug, the
same as provided under: Sec. 11, Art. II of R.A. 9165. (Posiquit v. People, G.R. 2. The Delivery of the thing sold and Payment corpus delicti, as evidence. (People v. Amaro, G.R.
No. 193943, 16 Jan. 2012) thereof. (People v. Buenaventura, G.R. No. No. 207517, 01 June 2016)
1. Importation of any dangerous drug and/or 184807, 23 Nov. 2011)
controlled precursor and essential chemical IMPORTATION OF DANGEROUS DRUGS Q: Around 5:40 p.m., the buy-bust team
2. Sale, trading, administration, dispensation, AND/OR CONTROLLED PRECURSORS AND Elements that Must be Proven in a proceeded to the target area. The informant
delivery, distribution, and transportation of ESSENTIAL CHEMICALS Prosecution for Illegal Sale of Dangerous singled out alias Rico Enriquez, who was in an
any dangerous drug and/or controlled Drugs (S-C-B-S) alley conversing with his male companions,
precursor and essential chemical Any person who, unless authorized by law, shall and approached him while his male
3. Maintenance of a den, dive, or resort where import or bring into the Philippines any 1. That the transaction or Sale took place; companions left. Enriquez and the informant
any dangerous drug is used in any form dangerous drug, regardless of the quantity and 2. That the Corpus delicti or the illicit drug was went over to where P02 Cruz remained
4. Manufacture of any dangerous drug and/or purity involved, including any and all species of presented as evidence; and standing. The informant introduced P02 Cruz
controlled precursor and essential chemical opium poppy or any part thereof or substances 3. That the Buyer and Seller were identified. to Enriquez as a friend in need of shabu.
5. Cultivation or culture of plants which are derived there from even for floral, decorative, (People v. Fermin, G.R. No. 179344, 03 Aug. Enriquez asked how much he needed and P02
sources of dangerous drugs. and culinary purposes. (1990, 1992, 2006 BAR) 2011) Cruz replied, "kasang kinyentos lang" or P500.
Enriquez asked them to wait, withdrew into
NOTE: Where the offense of sale was not NOTE: If a person is caught selling or pushing an alley, and returned shortly to hand P02
SALE, TRADING, ADMINISTRATION,
consummated, the accused should not be dangerous drugs and after his arrest, they found Cruz a heat-sealed plastic sachet containing a
DISPENSATION, DELIVERY, DISTRIBUTION,
prosecuted under mere possession, but under SIMILAR dangerous drugs in his body, the person white crystalline substance believed to be
AND TRANSPORTATION OF DANGEROUS
Sec. 26 for attempt or conspiracy. may be charged and convicted of two offenses: shabu.
DRUGS AND/OR CONTROLLED PRECURSORS
one for illegal sale and one for illegal possession.
AND ESSENTIAL CHEMICALS (DRUG
Illustrative Case for Attempted Sale of After giving Enriquez five (5) pieces of One
PUSHING)
Dangerous Drugs Q: Mirondo was accused of selling illegal Hundred Peso (Pl00) bills in exchange for the
drugs. During trial, the testimonies of the item, P02 Cruz lit a cigarette, the previously
The Maximum Penalty shall be Imposed upon:
The policemen conducted a buy-bust operation. police who conducted the buy-bust operation arranged signal for the buy-bust team to effect
After showing the substance, the sale was were used as evidence against Mirondo. The arrest upon consummation of the transaction.
1. Any person who organizes, manages, or acts
interrupted when the poseur-buyers illegal substance that was confiscated during P02 Cruz grabbed Enriquez's shirt, identified
as a "financier" of any of the illegal activities
immediately introduced themselves as police the buy-bust operation was never presented himself as a police operative and informed
(Sec. 5(6), R.A. No. 9165); and
officers; hence, the crime was not consummated. in court as evidence. Can Mirondo be Enriquez of the nature of his arrest. After
convicted of selling illegal drugs under R.A. examination, Forensic Officer Mangalip found
2. Any person, who acts as a
In such case, the accused already commenced by No. 9165 even though the drug substance was the specimen submitted positive for
"protector/coddler" of any violator of the
overt acts the commission of the intended crime not presented in court? Methylamphetamine Hydrochloride.
provisions under this Section. (Sec. 5(7), R.A.
by showing the substance to both of the No. 9165)
policemen but did not perform all the acts of A: NO. Mirondo cannot be convicted of the said Is Enriquez guilty of violating Secs. 5 and 15 of
execution which would produce such crime by crime. It is necessary to prove that the Art. II of R.A. No. 9165 or the Comprehensive
NOTE: Law enforcement agents who do not
reason of some cause or accident other than his transaction or sale actually took place, coupled Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002?
arrest the drug pushers or illegal possessors may
own spontaneous desistance. with the presentation in court of the confiscated
be held liable as protectors or coddlers.
prohibited or regulated drug as evidence. The A: YES. The presence of the following elements
Such cause or accident is when the policemen narcotic substance itself constitutes the very required for all prosecutions for illegal sale of
Selling Illegal Drugs
introduced themselves and the sale was corpus delicti of the offense and the fact of its dangerous drugs has been duly established in the
immediately aborted. Hence, accused is guilty of existence is vital to sustain a judgment of instant case: (1) proof that the transaction or sale
Any act of giving away any dangerous drug
attempted sale of dangerous drugs. (People v. conviction. (People v. Mirondo, G.R. No. 210841, 14 took place; and (2) the presentation in court of
and/or controlled precursor and essential
Laylo, G.R. No. 192235, 06 July 2011) Oct. 2015) the corpus delicti or the illicit drug as evidence.

Enriquez was caught red-handed delivering one of delivery of a dangerous drug, regardless of any v. Tamil Selvi Veloo and N. Chandrar Nadarajan, If a Den, Dive, or Resort is Owned by a Third
heat sealed plastic sachet containing white consideration. Payment of consideration is G.R. No. 252154, 24 Mar. 2021) Person
crystalline substance to P02 Cruz, the poseur likewise immaterial in the distribution of illegal
buyer, in exchange for 500.00. P02 Cruz drugs. (People v. Yang, G.R. 148077, 16 Feb. 2004) No Transportation of Dangerous Drugs if the If such den, dive, or resort is owned by a third
positively identified Enriquez in open court to be Car is Stationary person, the same shall be confiscated and
the same person who sold to him the item which Transporting Shabu, Malum Prohibitum escheated in favor of the government.
upon examination was confirmed to be “Transport” as used under the Dangerous Drugs
methylamphetamine hydrochloride or shabu. The act of transporting methamphetamine Act is defined to mean “to carry or convey from Requisites:
Upon presentation thereof in open court P02 hydrochloride is malum prohibitum since it is one place to another.”
Cruz duly identified it to be the same object sold punished as an offense under a special law. The 1. That the criminal complaint shall specifically
to him by Enriquez. (People v. Enriquez, G.R. No. fact of transportation of the sacks containing The essential element of the charge is the allege that such place is intentionally used in
214503, 22 June 2016) dangerous drugs need not be accompanied by movement of the dangerous drug from one place the furtherance of the crime;
proof of criminal intent, motive, or knowledge. to another. Since the accused was arrested inside
Q: Is the presentation of informant necessary (People v. Morilla, G.R. No. 189833, 05 Feb. 2014) a car, when the car was not in transit such that the 2. That the prosecution shall prove such intent
in the prosecution for illegal sale of car was parked and stationary, then there is no on the part of the owner to use the property
dangerous drugs? Q: Respondents were apprehended during transportation. The conclusion that the accused for such purpose;
their flight from Hong Kong to NAIA Terminal transported the drugs merely because he was in
A: As a general rule, NO. In People v. Andaya, the 2. Customs Examiner Buenconsejo searched a motor vehicle when he was accosted with the 3. That the owner shall be included as an
confidential informant was not a police officer the false bottom of the luggage where she felt drugs has no basis and is mere speculation. It is accused in the criminal complaint.
but he was designated to be the poseur buyer a bulging hard rough object. She then opened the responsibility of the prosecution to prove the
himself. The State did not present the confidential the zipper at the bottom, yielding a small clear element of transport of dangerous drugs, namely, EMPLOYEES AND VISITORS OF A
informant/poseur buyer during the trial to plastic pack containing crystallized granules. that transportation had taken place, or that the DEN, DIVE, OR RESORT
describe how exactly the transaction between The inventory of the seized items was done in accused had moved the drugs some SEC. 7, R.A. No. 9165
him and Andaya had taken place. There would the presence of the accused, SAII Punzalan, distance. (San Juan v. People, G.R. No. 177191, 30
have been no issue against failure to present the Kagawad Abasola, and ABS-CBN/DWIZ Media May 2011) 1. Any employee of a den, dive, or resort, who is
confidential informant/poseur-buyer except that Reporter Raoul Esperas. Buenconsejo then aware of the nature of the place as such; and
none of the members of the buy-bust team had turned the bags over to the PDEA who MAINTENANCE OF A DEN, DIVE ,OR RESORT
directly witnessed the transaction, if any, delivered the same to Forensic Chemist for SEC. 6, R.A. No. 9165 2. Any person who, not being included in the
between Andaya and the poseur buyer due to analysis before turning them over to the trial provisions of the next preceding paragraph,
their being positioned at a distance at the court. Are the accused guilty of illegal 1. Any person or group of persons who shall is aware of the nature of the place as such and
moment of the supposed transaction. The transportation of drugs? maintain own or operate a den, dive, or shall knowingly visit the same
presentation of the confidential informants as resort where any dangerous drug is used or
witnesses for the Prosecution in those instances A: YES. The essential element for the crime of sold in any form or where any controlled MANUFACTURE OF DANGEROUS DRUGS
could be excused because there were poseur illegal transportation of dangerous drugs is the precursor and essential chemical is used or AND/OR CONTROLLED PRECURSORS AND
buyers who directly incriminated the accused. movement of said drugs from one place to sold in any form. ESSENTIAL CHEMICALS; EQUIPMENT,
another. To establish the accused's guilt, it must
INSTRUMENT, APPARATUS, AND OTHER
In this case, however, it was different, because the be proven that: (1) the transportation of illegal 2. Any person who organizes, manages, or acts PARAPHERNALIA FOR DANGEROUS DRUGS
poseur buyer and the confidential informant drugs was committed; and (2) the prohibited as a "financier" of any of the illegal activities AND/OR CONTROLLED PRECURSORS AND
were one and the same. Without the poseur drug exists. prescribed in this Section. ESSENTIAL CHEMICALS
buyer's testimony, the State did not credibly
SEC. 8, R.A. No. 9165
incriminate Andaya. (People v. Andaya, G.R. No. In the transport of illegal drugs, intent and proof 3. Any person who acts as a
183700, 13 Oct. 2014) of ownership of the prohibited substances, much "protector/coddler" of any violator of the “Manufacture”
less of the receptacles thereof, are not essential provisions under this Section.
Consummation of Crime of Illegal Sale of elements of the crime. The crime is complete
The production, preparation, compounding, or
Drugs may be Sufficiently Established even in when it is shown that a person brings into the
processing of any dangerous drug and/or
the Absence of an Exchange of Money Philippines a regulated drug without legal
controlled precursor and essential chemical,
authority. The crime of transporting illegal drugs
either directly or indirectly, or by extraction from
The absence of actual or completed payment is being malum prohibitum, the accused's intent,
substances of natural origin, or independently by
irrelevant, for the law itself penalizes the very act motive, or knowledge need not be shown. (People
means of chemical synthesis, or by a combination

of extraction and chemical synthesis, and shall POSSESSION OF: possession under R.A. No. 9165 fails. (People v. A: He is liable for Possession of Equipment,
include any packaging or repackaging of such A. Dangerous drugs (Sec. 11, R.A. No. 9165) Alcuizar, G.R. No. 189980, 06 Apr. 2011) Instrument, Apparatus and Other Paraphernalia
substances, design, or configuration of its form, B. Equipment, instrument, apparatus, and for Dangerous Drugs under Sec. 12 of R.A. 9165
or labeling, or relabeling of its container other paraphernalia for dangerous drugs Constructive Possession under R.A. 9165 and may also be liable for Use of Dangerous Drugs
(Sec. 12, ibid.) under Sec. 15 of the same law since possession of
NOTE: “Manufacture” does not include C. Dangerous drugs during parties, social While it is not necessary that the property to be equipment, instrument, apparatus and other
preparation, compounding, packaging, or gatherings, or meetings (Sec. 13, ibid.) searched or seized should be owned by the paraphernalia for dangerous drugs is prima facie
labeling of a drug or other substances by a duly D. Equipment, instrument, apparatus, and person against whom the search warrant is evidence that the possessor has smoked,
authorized practitioner as an incident to his/her other paraphernalia for dangerous drugs issued, there must be sufficient showing that the consumed, administered to himself, injected,
administration or dispensation of such drug or during parties, social gatherings, or property is under the accused’s control or ingested, or used a dangerous drug and shall be
substance in the course of his/her professional meetings (Sec. 14, ibid.) possession. Constructive possession exists when presumed to have violated Sec. 15 of R.A. No.
practice including research, teaching, and the drug is under the dominion and control of the 9165.
chemical analysis of dangerous drugs or such Evidence in Prosecution of Illegal Possession accused or when he has the right to exercise
substances that are not intended for sale or for of Dangerous Drugs dominion and control over the place where it is Q: Chuck and Kenneth were walking along
any other purpose. (Sec. 3(u), R.A. No. 9165) found. The prosecution must prove that the Sampaloc when they saw a group of
Requisites: accused had knowledge of the existence and policemen approaching them. Chuck
Prima Facie Proof of Manufacture of Any 1. The accused is in possession of an item or an presence of the drugs in the place under his immediately handed to Kenneth, the sachet of
Dangerous Drugs object identified to be a prohibited or a control and dominion and the character of the shabu he was carrying inside his pocket. The
regulated drug; drugs. (Del Castillo v. People, G.R. No. 185128, 30 police saw Kenneth placing the shabu inside
Mere presence of any controlled precursor and 2. Such possession is not authorized by law; Jan. 2012) his bag. If Kenneth was unaware that what
essential chemical or laboratory equipment in the and was inside the sachet given to him was shabu,
clandestine laboratory is prima facie proof of 3. The accused freely and consciously Q: If an accused was caught in possession of is he nonetheless liable under the Dangerous
manufacture of any dangerous drugs. possessed the said drug. (People v. Mendoza, shabu and marijuana in one occasion, should Drugs Act? (2002 BAR)
G.R. No. 186387, 31 Aug. 2011) he be charged with, and convicted of, one
ILLEGAL CHEMICAL DIVERSION OF offense only? A: NO. Kenneth will not be criminally liable if he
CONTROLLED PRECURSORS NOTE: The act of throwing away the sachet, the can show any proof of the absence of animus
AND ESSENTIAL CHEMICALS contents of which were later determined to A: YES. The law does not address a case wherein possidendi or present any evidence that would
SEC. 9, R.A. No. 9165 be shabu, presupposes that accused-appellant an individual is caught in possession of different show that he was duly authorized by law to
had prior possession of it. (Castro v. People, G.R. kinds of dangerous drugs. However, it is a well- possess them. Possession of dangerous drugs
“Chemical Diversion” No. 193379, 15 Aug. 2011) known rule of legal hermeneutics that penal or constitutes prima facie evidence of knowledge or
criminal laws are strictly construed against the animus possidendi sufficient to convict an
The sale, distribution, supply, or transport of Corpus Delicti in the Crime of Illegal State and liberally in favor of the accused. Thus, accused in the absence of a satisfactory
legitimately imported, in-transit, manufactured, Possession of Dangerous Drugs an accused may only be convicted of a single explanation of such possession. Thus, the burden
or procured controlled precursors and essential offense of possession of dangerous drugs if he or of evidence is shifted to the accused to explain the
chemicals, in diluted, mixtures or in concentrated The dangerous drug itself constitutes the very she was caught in possession of different kinds of absence of knowledge or animus possidendi.
form, to any person or entity engaged in the corpus delicti of the offense and in sustaining a dangerous drugs in a single occasion. If (Buenaventura v. People, G.R. No. 171578, 08 Aug.
manufacture of any dangerous drug, and shall conviction under R.A. No. 9165, the identity and convicted, the higher penalty shall be imposed, 2007; People v. Buntuyan, G.R. No. 206912, 10 Sept.
include packaging, repackaging, labeling, integrity of the corpus delicti must definitely be which is still lighter if the accused is convicted of 2014)
relabeling, or concealment of such transaction shown to have been preserved. This requirement two (2) offenses having two (2) separate
through fraud, destruction of documents, necessarily arises from the illegal drug's unique penalties. This interpretation is more in keeping USE OF DANGEROUS DRUGS
fraudulent use of permits, misdeclaration, use of characteristic that renders it indistinct, not with the intention of the legislators as well as SEC. 15, R.A. No. 9165
front companies, or mail fraud. (Sec. 3(d), R.A. No. readily identifiable, and easily open to tampering, more favorable to the accused. (David v. People,
9165) alteration, or substitution either by accident or G.R. No. 181861, 17 Oct. 2011) Elements of Use of Dangerous Drugs (2005
otherwise. Thus, to remove any doubt or BAR)
uncertainty on the identity and integrity of the Q: If Paolo Ollero was caught in possession of
seized drug, evidence must definitely show that any equipment, instrument, apparatus and 1. The accused was apprehended for the use of
the illegal drug presented in court is the same other paraphernalia for Dangerous Drugs, dangerous drugs;
illegal drug actually recovered from the accused- what is his offense?
appellant; otherwise, the prosecution for

NOTE: “Use” is any act of injecting, NOTE: The land or portions thereof and/or make or issue a prescription or any other writing a dangerous drug and/or controlled
intravenously, or intramuscularly, of greenhouses on which any of said plants is purporting to be a prescription for any dangerous precursor and essential chemicals involved
consuming, either by chewing, smoking, cultivated or cultured shall be confiscated and drug. `in any offense be the proximate cause of
sniffing, eating, swallowing, drinking, or escheated in favor of the State, unless the owner death of a victim (Sec. 5, R.A. No. 9165);
otherwise introducing into the physiological can prove that he has no knowledge of such PENALTY
system of the body, and of the dangerous cultivation or culture despite the exercise of due 5. Any dangerous drug is administered,
drugs. (Sec. 3(kk), R.A. No. 9165) diligence on his part. Additional Penalty Imposed if Any of the Acts delivered, or sold to a minor who is allowed
Punishable under this Act is Committed by an to use the same in a den, dive, or resort (Sec.
2. He was found to be positive for use of any MAINTENANCE AND KEEPING OF ORIGINAL Alien 6, R.A. No. 9165);
dangerous drugs; and RECORDS OF TRANSACTIONS ON
3. No other dangerous drug was found in his DANGEROUS DRUGS AND/OR CONTROLLED 6. Any dangerous drug be the proximate cause
After service of sentence, he shall be deported
possession. PRECURSORS AND ESSENTIAL CHEMICALS of the death of a person using the same in
immediately without further proceedings. (Sec.
SEC.17, R.A. No. 9165 31, R.A. No. 9165) such den, dive, or resort (Sec. 6, R.A. No.
NOTE: Use of Dangerous Drugs under Sec. 15 of 9165);
R.A. No. 9165 shall not be applicable where the Persons Liable Accessory Penalties Imposed
person tested is also found to have in his/her 7. In case the clandestine laboratory is
possession such quantity of any dangerous drug undertaken or established under the
Any practitioner, manufacturer, wholesaler, Civil interdiction, suspension of political rights
provided for under Sec. 11 of the same Act, in following circumstances:
importer, distributor, dealer, or retailer who such as the right to vote and be voted for. (Sec. 35,
which case the provisions stated therein shall violates or fails to comply with the maintenance R.A. No. 9165)
a. Any phase of the manufacturing process
apply. (Sec. 15, R.A. No. 9165) and keeping of the original records of was conducted in the presence or with
transactions on any dangerous drug and/or Aggravating Circumstances which May be
the help of minor/s.
Q: Does Sec. 15 cover unlawful acts other than controlled precursor and essential chemical in Considered in Prosecuting Cases of
b. Any phase of manufacturing process was
those provided for under Art. II of R.A. No. accordance with Sec. 40 of this Act. Dangerous Drugs
established or undertaken within 100
9165?
meters of a residential, business, church
UNNECESSARY PRESCRIPTION OF 1. If the importation or bringing into the
or school premises.
A: NO. The drug test in Sec. 15 does not cover Philippines of any dangerous drugs and/or
DANGEROUS DRUGS c. Any clandestine laboratory was secured
persons apprehended or arrested for any other controlled precursor and essential chemicals
SEC. 18, R.A. No. 9165 or protected with booby traps.
unlawful act, but only for unlawful acts listed was done through the use of diplomatic
d. Any clandestine laboratory was
under Art. II of R.A. No. 9165. To make the passport, diplomatic facilities, or any other
concealed with legitimate business
provision applicable to all persons arrested or means involving his/her official status
Persons Liable operations.
apprehended for any crime not listed under Art. intended to facilitate the unlawful entry of
e. Any employment of a practitioner,
II is tantamount to unduly expanding its meaning, the same (Sec. 4, R.A. No. 9165);
Any practitioner, who shall prescribe any chemical engineer, public official or
given that a drug testing will turn out to be
dangerous drug to any person whose physical or foreigner (Sec. 8, R.A. No. 9165);
mandatory for all persons apprehended or 2. The sale trading, administration,
physiological condition does not require the use
arrested for any crime. (Dela Cruz v. People, G.R. dispensation, delivery, distribution, or
or in the dosage prescribed therein, as 8. In case the person uses a minor or a mentally
No. 200748, 23 July 2014) transportation of any dangerous drug and/or
determined by the Board in consultation with incapacitated individual to deliver
controlled precursor and essential chemical
recognized competent experts who are equipment, instrument, apparatus, and other
CULTIVATION OR CULTURE OF PLANTS transpired within 100 meters from the
authorized representatives of professional paraphernalia use for dangerous drugs (Sec.
CLASSIFIED AS DANGEROUS DRUGS school (Sec. 5, R.A. No. 9165);
organizations of practitioners, particularly those 10, R.A. No. 9165);
OR SOURCES THEREOF
who are involved in the care of persons with
SEC. 16, R.A. No. 9165 3. The drug pusher uses minors or mentally
severe pain. 9. Any person found possessing any dangerous
incapacitated individuals as runners,
drug during a party, or a social gathering, or
Cultivation as contemplated under R.A. No. couriers and messenger, or in any other
UNLAWFUL PRESCRIPTION meeting, or in the proximate company of at
9165 capacity directly connected to the dangerous
OF DANGEROUS DRUGS least two (2) persons (Sec. 13, R.A. No. 9165);
drug and/or controlled precursor and
SEC. 19, R.A. No. 9165 and
Any act of knowingly planting, growing, raising, essential chemical trade (Sec. 5, R.A. No.
or permitting the planting, growing, or raising of 9165); 10. Possession or having under his/her control
Persons Liable
any plant which is the source of a dangerous drug. any equipment, instrument, apparatus, and
4. The victim of the offense is a minor or
(Sec. 3(i), R.A. No. 9165) other paraphernalia fit of intended for
Any person who, unless authorized by law, shall mentally incapacitated individual, or should

smoking, consuming, administering, buy-bust money by the accused in exchange for participation of PDEA illegal or evidence detailing the buy-bust operation— “from the
injecting, ingesting, or introducing any the illegal drugs he was selling. (People v. Unisa, obtained pursuant to such an arrest inadmissible. initial contact between the poseur-buyer and the
dangerous drug into the body, during parties, G.R. No. 18572, 28 Sept. 2011) (People v. Sabadlab, G.R. No. 186392, 18 Jan. 2012 pusher, the offer to purchase, the promise or
social gatherings, or meetings, or in the reiterating People v. Berdadero) payment of the consideration until the
proximate company of at least 2 persons. The failure of the police officers to use ultraviolet consummation of the sale by the delivery of the
(Sec. 14, R.A. No. 9165) powder on the buy-bust money is not an Q: Gabuya was caught selling illegal drugs illegal drug subject of sale.” (People v. De la Cruz,
indication that the buy-bust operation was a through a buy-bust operation. He contends G.R. No. 185717, 08 June 2011)
Nature of a Buy-bust Operation sham. “The use of initials to mark the money used that he cannot be held guilty because the
in a buy-bust operation has been accepted by the failure of the buy-bust team to coordinate Failure to Establish Corpus Delicti under R.A.
In People v. Sembrano, citing People v. Agulay, this courts.” (People v. Amansec, G.R. No. 186131, 14 with the PDEA, among others. Is his No. 9165
Court held that a buy-bust operation is a form of Dec. 2011) contention meritorious?
entrapment which in recent years has been It is settled that the State does not establish the
accepted as a valid and effective mode of Prior Surveillance in Buy-bust Operation, A: NO. Coordination of the buy-bust operation corpus delicti when the prohibited substance
apprehending drug pushers. Moreover, in a buy- NOT a Prerequisite with the PDEA is not an indispensable element of subject of the prosecution is missing or when
bust operation, the violator is caught in flagrante the crimes of illegal sale and possession of substantial gaps in the chain of custody of the
delicto and the police officers conducting the Prior surveillance is not a prerequisite for the dangerous drugs such as shabu; thus, it is not a prohibited substance raise grave doubts about
same are not only authorized but also duty- validity of an entrapment or a buy-bust fatal flaw. (People v. Gabuya, G.R. No. 195245, 16 the authenticity of the prohibited substance
bound to apprehend the violator and operation, there being no fixed or textbook Feb. 2015) presented as evidence in court. Any gap renders
consequently search him for anything that may method for conducting one. It is enough that the the case for the State less than complete in terms
have been part of or used in the commission of elements of the crime are proven by credible Presentation of the Informant for Conviction of proving the guilt of the accused beyond
the crime. (People v. Cruz, G.R. No. 187047, 15 June witnesses and other pieces of evidence. (People v. under R.A. No. 9165, NOT Essential reasonable doubt. (People v. Relato, G.R. No.
2011) Villahermosa, G.R. No. 186465, 01 June 2011) 173794, 18 Jan. 2012)
The presentation of an informant in an illegal
Q: Is there a valid warrantless arrest in buy Coordination with PDEA, NOT an drugs case is not essential for the conviction nor IMMUNITY FROM PROSECUTION
bust operations? Indispensable Requirement is it indispensable for a successful prosecution AND PUNISHMENT
because his testimony would be merely
A: YES. There is a valid warrantless arrest when Absence of coordination with PDEA does not corroborative and cumulative. The informant’s Persons Exempt from Prosecution and
a crime is actually being committed in the render the buy bust operation invalid. In People v. testimony is not needed if the sale of the illegal Punishment under R.A. No. 9165
presence of the police officer, more known as Roa, the Supreme Court held that coordination drug has been adequately proven by the Any person who:
crimes in flagrante delicto. A buy-bust operation with the PDEA is not an indispensable prosecution.
is considered an entrapment in which the violator requirement before police authorities may carry 1. Has violated Sec. 7 (Employees and Visitors
is caught in flagrante delicto and the officers out a buy-bust operation. While it is true that Sec. In People v. Nicolas, the Court ruled that “police of a Den, Dive or Resort), Sec. 11 (Possession
conducting such search has not only the authority 86 of R.A. No. 9165 requires the NBI, PNP, and the authorities rarely, if ever, remove the cloak of of Dangerous Drugs), Sec. 12 (Possession of
but the duty to apprehend the violator and to Bureau of Customs to maintain "close confidentiality with which they surround their Equipment, Instrument, Apparatus and
search him for anything that may have been part coordination with the PDEA on all drug related poseur-buyers and informers since their Other Paraphernalia for Dangerous Drug),
of or used in the commission of the crime. (People matters," the provision does not, by so saying, usefulness will be over the moment they are Sec. 14 (Possession of Equipment,
v. Dela Cruz, G.R. No. 205414, 04 April 2016) make PDEA’s participation a condition sine qua presented in court. Moreover, drug dealers do Instrument, Apparatus and Other
non for every buy-bust operation. After all, a not look kindly upon squealers and informants. It Paraphernalia for Dangerous Drugs During
The delivery of the contraband to the poseur- buy-bust is just a form of an in flagrante arrest. A is understandable why, as much as permitted, Parties, Social Gatherings or Meetings), Sec.
buyer and the receipt of the marked money buy-bust operation is not invalidated by mere their identities are kept secret.” (People v. 15 (Use of Dangerous Drugs), and Sec. 19
consummates the buy-bust transaction between non-coordination with the PDEA. (People v. Unisa, Amansec, G.R. No. 186131, 14 Dec. 2011) (Unlawful Prescription of Dangerous Drugs),
the entrapping officers and the accused. (People G.R. No. 185721, 28 Sept. 2011) Art. II of R.A. 9165.
v. Fermin, G.R. No. 179344, 03 Aug. 2011) Objective Test in Proving Buy-bust Operation
NOTE: The Internal Rules and Regulations is 2. Voluntarily gives information:
Purpose of using Ultra Violet Powder silent as to the consequences of the failure on the In People v. Doria, the Court laid down the
part of the law enforcers to seek the authority of “objective test” in determining the credibility of a. About any violation of Sec. 4
The only purpose for treating with ultra-violet the PDEA prior to conducting a buy-bust prosecution witnesses regarding the conduct of (Importation of Dangerous Drugs and/or
powder the buy-bust money to be used in the operation. This silence cannot be interpreted as a buy-bust operations. It is the duty of the Controlled Precursors and Essential
actual buy-bust operation is for identification, legislative intent to make an arrest without the prosecution to present a complete picture Chemicals), Sec. 5 (Sale, Trading,
that is, to determine if there was receipt of the

Administration, Dispensation, Delivery, and faithfully comply without delay, any CUSTODY AND DISPOSITION OF 2. The turnover of the illegal drug seized by the
Distribution and Transportation of condition or undertaking, reduced into CONFISCATED, SEIZED AND/OR apprehending officer to the investigating
Dangerous Drugs and/or Controlled writing, lawfully imposed by the State as SURRENDERED DANGEROUS DRUGS officer;
Precursors and Essential Chemicals), further consideration for the grant of SEC. 21, R.A. No. 9165
Sec. 6 (Maintenance of a Den, Dive or immunity from prosecution and 3. The turnover by the investigating officer of
Resort), Sec. 8 (Manufacture of punishment. the illegal drug to the forensic chemist for
Person in-charge of Confiscated, Seized
Dangerous Drugs and/or Controlled laboratory examination; and
and/or Surrendered Dangerous Drugs
Precursors and Essential Chemicals), NOTE: Provided, further, that this immunity
Sec. 10 (Manufacture or Delivery of may be enjoyed by such informant or witness 4. The turnover and submission of the marked
The PDEA shall take charge and have custody of
Equipment, Instrument, Apparatus, and who does not appear to be most guilty for the illegal drug seized from the forensic chemist
all dangerous drugs, plant sources of dangerous
Other Paraphernalia for Dangerous offense with reference to which his/her to the court. (People v. Marcelino, G.R. No.
drugs, controlled precursors and essential
Drugs and/or Controlled Precursors and information or testimony was given: 189325, 15 June 2011)
chemicals, as well as instruments/paraphernalia
Essential Chemicals), Sec. 13 (Possession Provided, finally, that there is no direct and/or laboratory equipment so confiscated,
of Dangerous Drugs During Parties, evidence available for the State except for the What the law requires is "substantial" and not
seized and/or surrendered, for proper
Social Gatherings or Meetings), and Sec. information and testimony of the said necessarily "perfect adherence" to the chain of
disposition.
16 (Cultivation or Culture of Plants informant or witness. custody rule as long as it can be proven that the
Classified as Dangerous Drugs or are integrity and the evidentiary value of the seized
Chain of Custody
Sources Thereof), Art. II of R.A. No. 9165; Applicability of RPC to R.A. No. 9165 items were preserved as the same would be
utilized in the determination of the guilt or
Dangerous Drugs Board Regulation No. 1, Series
b. About any violation of the offenses GR: The RPC shall NOT apply to this Act. innocence of the accused. (People v. Piad, et al,
of 2002, which implements R.A. No. 9165, defines
mentioned if committed by a drug G.R. No. 213607, 25 Jan. 2016)
chain of custody as “the duly recorded authorized
syndicate; or XPN: In cases of minor offenders where the movements and custody of seized drugs or
offender is a minor, the penalty for acts Q: Noah arrived at NAIA Terminal 1 from
controlled chemicals or plant sources of
c. Leading to the whereabouts, identities punishable by life imprisonment to death shall be Kenya. Upon inspection, Customs Examiner
dangerous drugs or laboratory equipment of each
and arrest of all or any of the members reclusion perpetua to death. Landicho noticed that while the smaller bag
stage, from the time of seizure/confiscation to
thereof. was empty, its flap was hard and thick and its
receipt in the forensic laboratory to safekeeping
Plea-bargaining Provision (Prohibition on sidings were suspiciously padded and had
to presentation in court for destruction.” (People
3. Willingly testifies against such persons as Plea-bargaining, Sec. 23, R.A. No. 9165) is tampered stitches.
v. Alejandro, G.R. No. 176350, 10 Aug. 2011)
described above; Provided, that the following Unconstitutional
conditions concur: In the exclusion room, Landicho examined the
NOTE: Ideally, the custodial chain would include
The Supreme Court’s sole prerogative to issue, bag before: (1) Noah; (2) three airport
testimony about every link in the chain or
a. The information and testimony are amend, or repeal procedural rules is limited to employees; (3) Bureau of Customs Narcotics
movements of the illegal drug from the moment
necessary for the conviction of the the preservation of substantive rights. Plea- Group; (4) agents of the Philippine Drug
of seizure until it is finally adduced in evidence.
persons described above; bargaining is a rule of procedure. Sec. 23 of R.A. Enforcement Agency; and (5) other
(Castro v. People, G.R. No. 193379, 15 Aug. 2011)
No. 9165 is declared unconstitutional for being government officers. The inspection revealed
b. Such information and testimony are not seven rectangular packages, wrapped in
contrary to the rule-making authority of the Links that Must be Established in the Chain of
yet in the possession of the State; vacuum-sealed aluminum foil, on which
Supreme Court. (Estipona v. Hon. Lobrigo, G.R. No. Custody in a Buy-bust Situation
226679, 15 Aug. 2017) Landicho affixed his initials and signature.
c. Such information and testimony can be
Landicho then prepared an Inventory Report
corroborated on its material points; In People v. Kamad (G.R. No. 174198, 19 Jan.
Prohibition on Availing the Benefits of with several witnesses including the Anti-
2010), the Court acknowledged that the following
Probation Law by those Convicted for Drug Narcotics Group. Landicho then turned over
d. The informant or witness has not been links must be established in the chain of custody
Trafficking or Pushing the Inventory Report, along with Noah's
previously convicted of a crime involving in a buy-bust situation:
personal belongings, to the Philippine Drug
moral turpitude, except when there is no
Any person convicted for drug trafficking or Enforcement Agency and Customs Task Force.
other direct evidence available for the 1. The seizure and marking, if practicable, of the
State other than the information and pushing under R.A. No. 9165, regardless of the illegal drug recovered from the accused by
penalty imposed by the court, cannot avail of the In addition, there were pictures showing
testimony of said informant or witness; the apprehending officer;
privileges granted by the Probation Law. Noah with Landicho and other witnesses were
and
taken during the field-testing, marking, and
inventory. The seized items were brought to a
e. The informant or witness shall strictly
forensic chemist for laboratory examinations.

The test results showed that the seized items Crucial Stage in the Chain of Custody under (People v. Dela Cruz, G.R. No. 176350, 10 Aug. Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act
contained shabu. Is there an unbroken chain R.A. No. 9165 2011) complied with?
of custody of the drug seized from the
accused? Crucial in proving chain of custody is the Q: Bombasi was caught selling illegal drugs A: NO. While an inventory was supposed to have
marking of the seized drugs or other related through a buy-bust operation. Police marked been conducted, this was done neither in the
A: YES. The four links of chain of custody of items immediately after they are seized from the sachet subject of the sale with "MB," presence of Lescano, the person from whom the
evidence were proven: (1) Landicho seized and the accused. Marking after seizure is the starting corresponding to Bomabasi’s initials. drugs were supposedly seized, nor in the
marked the shabu obtained from accused- point in the custodial link; thus, it is vital that the However, the specimen brought to PNP Crime presence of his counsel or representative.
appellant; (2) he turned them over to Agent seized contrabands are immediately marked Laboratory was marked “MB-B.” Bombasi
Fajardo; (3) Agent Fajardo delivered them to because succeeding handlers of the specimens claims that the integrity of the subject shabu Likewise, not one of the persons required to be
Forensic Chemist Arcos; and (4) from the will use the markings as reference. The marking was not ensured and its identity was not present (an elected public official, and a
Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency, the drugs of the evidence serves to separate the marked established with moral certainty. Can he be representative of the National Prosecution
were presented in court. There was an unbroken evidence from the corpus of all other similar or held liable of sale of illegal drugs? Service or the media) was shown to have been
chain of custody of the seized shabu from the time related evidence from the time they are seized around during the inventory and photographing.
of its discovery up to its presentation in court. from the accused until they are disposed of at the A: NO. The prosecution failed to establish the The mere marking of seized items, done in
(Peoples v. Noah, G.R. No. 228880, 06 Mar. 2019) end of criminal proceedings, obviating switching, identity of the prohibited drug which constitutes violation of the safeguards of the Comprehensive
"planting," or contamination of evidence. (People the corpus delicti of the offense, an essential Dangerous Drugs Act, cannot be the basis of a
Q: After laboratory examination of the seized v. Mantalaba, G.R. No. 186227, 20 July 2011) requirement in a drug-related case. The Court finding of guilt. By failing to establish identity of
sachets of marijuana by the forensic chemist, therefore finds that the prosecution has not been corpus delicti, non-compliance with Sec. 21
the PNP Crime Laboratory agreed to turn over Marking able to prove the guilt of appellant beyond indicates a failure to establish an element of the
custody of the seized items to an unnamed reasonable doubt. The presumption of regularity offense of illegal sale of dangerous drugs. It
receiving person at the City Prosecutor's The placing by the apprehending officer or the in the performance of official duty invoked by the follows that this non-compliance suffices as a
Office before they were submitted as evidence poseur-buyer of his/her initials and signature on prosecution and relied upon by the courts a quo ground for acquittal. (Lescano v. People, G.R. No.
to the trial court. Is there compliance to the the items seized. Long before Congress passed cannot by itself overcome the presumption of 214490, 13 Jan. 2016)
fourth link in the chain of custody? R.A. No. 9165, the Supreme Court has innocence nor constitute proof of guilt beyond
consistently held that failure of the authorities to reasonable doubt. (People v. Bombasi, G.R. No. Strict Compliance with Sec. 21
A: NO. The fourth link is the turnover and immediately mark the seized drugs casts 211608, 07 Sept. 2016)
submission of the marked illegal drug seized reasonable doubt on the authenticity of the Q: Two Informations were filed charging
from the forensic chemist to the court. It should corpus delicti. Marking after seizure is the Persons who must be Present during Physical Castillo for violation of R.A. No. 9165, Art. II,
be emphasized that the City Prosecutor's Office is starting point in the custodial link; hence, it is Inventory and Photography of the Seized Secs. 5 and 11, for the illegal sale and illegal
not, nor has it ever been, a part of the chain of vital that the seized contraband be immediately Items possession of dangerous drugs. The
custody of seized dangerous drugs. It has marked because succeeding handlers of the information alleged that in a buy-bust
absolutely no business in taking custody of specimens will use the markings as reference. 1. Accused or the person/s from whom such operation, four (4) plastic sachets containing
dangerous drugs before they are brought before (People v. Dela Cruz, G.R. No. 176350, 10 Aug. items were confiscated and/or seized; OR suspected shabu were retrieved from
the court. (People v. De Guzman, G.R. No. 219955, 2011) 2. His/her representative or counsel; WITH Castillo/ The officers then brought the items
05 Feb. 2018) 3. An elected public official; AND inside their vehicle, which was still parked
NOTE: In Sanchez, the Court explained that 4. A representative of the National Prosecution near the place of arrest.
While the procedure on the chain of custody consistency with the chain of custody rule Service OR the media. (Sec. 21(1), R.A. No. There, SPO2 Yema marked the plastic sachet
should be perfect and unbroken, in reality, it is requires that the marking of the seized items be 9165, as amended by R.A. No. 10640) subject of the buy-bust. Afterwards, the
almost always impossible to obtain an unbroken done: officers brought Castillo to the Police Station.
chain. Thus, failure to strictly comply with Sec. Q: In a buy-bust operation, Lescano was There, the seized items were photographed
21(1), Art. II of R.A. No. 9165 does not necessarily 1. In the presence of the apprehended violator; caught dealing marijuana. He was then along with the marked money and Castillo.
render an accused person's arrest illegal or the and brought to the City Anti-Illegal Drug Special The seized items were also inventoried, as
items seized or confiscated from him 2. Immediately upon confiscation. Operation Team (CAIDSOT) office for witnessed by the Department of Justice
inadmissible. (Saraum v. People, GR No. 205472, investigation. Inside the CAIDSOT office, an representative, Barangay Chair, SPO2 Yema,
25 Jan. 2016) In People v. Resurreccion, it was ruled that inventory was allegedly conducted and and Castillo, who all signed the Certificate of
“marking upon immediate confiscation” does not photographs of the marked money and the Inventory.
exclude the possibility that marking can be at the sachet were taken. Was Sec. 21 (1) of the
police station or office of the apprehending team.

In his defense, Castillo pointed out supposed kilometers car ride away from the place of (People v. Banding, G.R. No. 2333470, 14 Aug. “Immediately after seizure and confiscation”
gaps in the chain of custody, including, among arrest. 2019)
others, irregularities in the seized items' It means that the physical inventory and
marking and the belated presence of the There, physical inventory and photographing The witnesses' absence at the time of seizure is photographing of the drugs were intended by the
Department of Justice representative, only required under Sec. 21 of R.A. 9165 was not a justifiable ground for not immediately law to be made immediately after or at the place
arriving at the police station when the conducted in the presence of Banding, the marking the items, since they should have, at the of apprehension. It is only when the same is not
inventory had already been prepared. The buy-bust team, and a media representative. onset, been present or near the place of seizure. practicable that the law allows the inventory and
RTC nevertheless convicted Jayson as After the inventory, PO3 Corona prepared the Since the law requires the apprehending team to photographing to be done as soon as the buy-bust
charged. Has Castillo’s guilt for violation of inventory receipt for “a sachet containing conduct the inventory in front of the required team reaches the nearest police station or the
R.A. No. 9165 been established beyond marijuana fruiting tops.” This was submitted witnesses and immediately after seizure, this nearest office of the apprehending team/officer.
reasonable doubt? to the QCPD Crime Laboratory. necessarily means that, in buy-bust operations,
the required witnesses must be present at the Q: In the morning of July 26, 2003, an
A: NO. There remains reasonable doubt on Banding was later on charged with violation time of seizure. (People v. Isidro Ramos, G.R. No. informant reported that a person identified
Castillo’s guilt for the crimes charged. Sec. 21 of Sec. 5 of R.A. 9165. Banding argues that he 225335, 28 Aug. 2019) as "Joshua," later identified as Que, was
plainly requires the apprehending team to cannot be convicted due to lapses in the chain selling shabu. Acting on this report, P/C Insp.
conduct a physical inventory of the seized items of custody of the drugs seized. Can Banding be Q: A buy-bust operation was conducted in Muksan organized a buy-bust operation with
and the photographing of the same immediately held criminally liable under Sec. 5 of R.A. No. Metropolis Starmall, Alabang. The PO3 Lim as poseur-buyer. PO3 Lim and the
after seizure and confiscation, the inventory must 9165? confidential informant introduced Alejandro informant then left for the area of Fort Pilar.
be done in the presence of the accused, his to alias Salim and she told him that she
counsel, or representative, a representative of the A: NO. Banding cannot be convicted under Sec. 5 wanted to buy shabu. After the exchange of There, the informant introduced PO3 Lim to
DOJ, the media, and an elected public official, who of R.A. 9165 due to the lapses in the chain of money and shabu, Salim was arrested. A Que. PO3 Lim then told Que that he intended
shall be required to sign the copies of the custody procedure required under Sec. 21 of the commotion ensued so the buy-bust team was to purchase P100 worth of shabu. Que then
inventory and be given a copy thereof. The same law. Sec. 21 requires strict compliance. The not able to put markings on the evidence. handed him shabu inside a plastic cellophane.
presence of the three witnesses must be secured accuracy it requires goes into the covertness of Upon reaching Brgy. Pinyahan, they In turn, PO3 Lim handed Que the marked
not only during the inventory but more buy-bust operation and the very nature of immediately conducted the inventory which P100 bill and gave the pre-arranged signal to
importantly at the time of the warrantless arrest. narcotic substance. was done before the barangay officials of the have Que arrested. After the arrest, the
said barangay. Were the requirements under marked bill and another sachet of shabu were
It is at this point in which the presence of the From the language of Sec. 21, the mandate to Sec. 21 of R.A. No. 9165 complied with? recovered from Que. The marking of the
three witnesses is most needed, as it is their conduct inventory and take photographs sachets of shabu supposedly obtained from
presence at the time of seizure and confiscation "immediately after seizure and confiscation" A: NO. To start, the conduct of the inventory in accused-appellant was conducted at a police
that would belie any doubt as to the source, necessarily means that these shall be this case was not conducted immediately at the station without accused-appellant, or any
identity, and integrity of the seized drug. Here, accomplished at the place of arrest. When this place of arrest but at the barangay hall of person representing him, around. There was
the absence of witnesses during seizure and is impracticable, the IRR of R.A. No. 9165 allows Pinyahan, Quezon City. There are police stations not even a third person, whose presence was
marking casts reasonable doubt on the actual for two (2) other options: at the nearest police closer to Starmall, Alabang, in Muntinlupa City required by Sec. 21 (1) prior to its
origin and identity of the drugs introduced in station or at the nearest office of the and the office of the PDEA is also in Pinyahan, amendment – "a representative from the
evidence as those allegedly seized from accused- apprehending officer/team, whichever is Quezon City. And yet, the inventory was media and the Department of Justice (DOJ),
appellant. Ultimately, this same absence casts practicable, in case of warrantless seizures. To conducted in the barangay hall of Pinyahan, and any elected public official."
reasonable doubt on accused-appellant's guilt for sanction non-compliance, the prosecution must Quezon City - which is not one of the allowed Que was then brought to the police station
the offenses with which he is charged. (People v. prove that the inventory was conducted in either alternative places provided under Sec. 21 of the where the sachets of shabu and the marked
Castillo, G.R. No. 238339, 07 Aug. 2019) practicable place. IRR. More importantly, there was no compliance bill were turned over to the investigator,
with the three-witness rule. There were no SPO4 Tubo, who then marked these items
Q: Banding was arrested at Mercury Drug The physical inventory and photographing of the witnesses from the DOJ or the media. Only two with his initials. This case merely involves
Store Lagro branch in Quezon City for illegal drugs seized was not done in the place of arrest, witnesses who were elected barangay officials 0.0157 grams and 0.0783 grams of alleged
sale of dangerous drugs (Sec. 5, R.A. 9165). The but was done in Camp Karingal, which was were present. It thus becomes evident that the shabu. He also prepared the letter request for
dangerous drugs sachets containing white impractical since it was 17 kilometers car ride buy-bust team did not prepare or bring with them laboratory examination of the sachets'
crystalline substance were marked by PO2 away from the place of arrest. The clerical errors any of the required witnesses at or near the place contents. P/C Insp. Diestro recounted their
Inway with AB-20-09-10. To avoid the on- and discrepancies in the inventory receipt and of the buy-bust operation and the witnesses were office's receipt of a request for laboratory
going commotion in the area, the team the chemistry report cannot be dismissed since a mere afterthought. (People v. Basher Tomawis, examination of the contents of two (2) plastic
proceeded to Camp Karingal which is 17 they cast doubt as to the origin of the drug seized. G.R. No. 228890, 18 Apr. 2018, J. Caguioa) sachets. She noted that these contents tested

positive for shabu. Did the law enforcers grounds; and seized items in the places allowed by law. (People but the prosecution could not even establish what
ensure the integrity of the corpus delicti? v. Quilatan, G.R. No. 218107, 09 Sept. 2019, J. procedure was followed by the arresting team to
2. There is showing that the police officers Caguioa) ensure a proper chain of custody for the
A: NO. The prosecution here failed to account for intended to comply with the procedure, but confiscated prohibited drug. (People v. Ulat, G.R.
the intervening period between the supposed were thwarted by some justifiable Q: In the crime of illegal possession of No. 180504, 05 Oct. 2011)
handover of the sachet from accused-appellant to consideration or reasons. (People v. Umipang, dangerous drugs, is the failure of the
P03 Lim, to the marking of the sachets by SPO4 G.R. No. 190321, 25 April 2012) policemen to make a physical inventory and The Marking Place being a “Muslim area” NOT
Tubo. Likewise, it absolutely failed to identify to photograph the two plastic sachets a Justifiable Ground for Non-compliance
measures taken during transit from the target Q: X was convicted for the crime of illegal sale containing shabu render the confiscated
area to the police station to ensure the integrity and possession of dangerous drugs. However, items inadmissible in evidence? In the case of People v. Abdulah, the marking of
of the sachets allegedly obtained and to negate during the trial, it was proved that the three the seized drugs was not done immediately after
any possibility of adulteration or substitution. witness rule was not complied with. Can the A: NO. In People v. Bralaan, it was ruled that non- accused-appellant's arrest. In his own words, PO3
presumption of regularity be used as a compliance by the apprehending/buy-bust team Temporal revealed that the team decided to mark
Well-entrenched in jurisprudence is the rule that defense to excuse compliance with Section 21 with Sec. 21 is not fatal as long as there is and inventory the items at the barangay hall after
the conviction of the accused must rest, not on the of R.A. No. 9165? justifiable ground therefore, and as long as the deeming the target area to be unsafe, it being "a
weakness of the defense, but on the strength of integrity and the evidentiary value of the Muslim area." To sustain the police officers'
the prosecution. Since, there is no showing that a A: NO. After allegedly receiving the tip from the confiscated/seized items, are properly preserved equating of a so-called "Muslim area" with
proper inventory and taking of pictures was done confidential informant, the buy-bust team was by the apprehending officer/team. Its non- dangerous places does not only approve of a
by the apprehending officers, the Court is left formed, a team briefing was conducted, and the compliance will not render an accused’s arrest hollow justification for deviating from statutory
with absolutely no guarantee of the integrity of team went to the target area with the informant. illegal or the items seized/ confiscated from him requirements, but reinforces outdated
the sachets other than the self-serving assurances Conspicuously absent in the narration of facts by inadmissible. stereotypes and blatant prejudices.
of PO3 Lim and SPO1 Jacinto. (People v. Que, G.R. the prosecution is the part where the buy-bust Islamophobia, the hatred against the Islamic
No. 212994, 31 Jan. 2018) team sought the attendance of the three required What is of utmost importance is the preservation community, can never be a valid reason to justify
witnesses. From the time they received the tip at of the integrity and the evidentiary value of the an officer's failure to comply with Sec. 21 of R.A.
Citing People v. Que, what is critical in drug cases 4:30 p.m. up to the time they went to the target seized items, as the same would be utilized in the No. 9165. (People v. Samiah Abdulah, G.R. No.
is not the bare conduct of the inventory, marking, area at around 9:15 p.m., there was a span of determination of the guilt or innocence of the 243941, 11 Mar. 2020)
and photographing. Instead, it is the certainty around five (5) hours where they could have accused. (Imson v. People, G.R. No. 193003, 13 July
that the items allegedly taken from the accused easily contacted the required witnesses, but there 2011) No Need for Everyone who Came into Contact
retain their integrity, even as they make their way was no hint that they made any effort to do so. with the Seized Drugs to Testify in Court
from the accused to an officer effecting the Consequently, the requirement of the presence of In cases of dangerous drugs, what is important
seizure, to an investigating officer to a forensic all the witnesses at the time of the operation, and necessary is for the prosecution to prove There is no need for everyone who came into
chemist, and ultimately, to courts where they are conduct of inventory, and photographing was not with moral certainty “that the dangerous drug contact with the seized drugs to testify in court.
introduced as evidence. Sec. 21(1)’s fulfilled. presented in court as evidence against the There is nothing in R.A. No. 9165 or in its
requirements are designed to make the first and accused be the same item recovered from his implementing rules which requires that each and
second links foolproof. Conducting the inventory While the IRR has a saving clause excusing possession.” (People v. Bautista, G.R. No. 191266, everyone who came into contact with the seized
and photographing immediately after seizure, deviation from the required procedure, the 06 June 2011) drugs to testify in court. As long as the chain of
exactly where the seizure was done, or at a application of such clause must be supported by custody of the seized drug was clearly established
location as practicably close to it, minimizes, if the presence of the following elements: (1) the Q: As a rule, non-compliance by the to have not been broken and the prosecution did
not eliminates, room for adulteration or planting existence of justifiable grounds to allow apprehending/buy-bust team with Sec. 21 of not fail to identify properly the drugs seized, it is
of evidence. (People v. Banding, supra) departure from the rule on strict compliance; and R.A. 9165 is not fatal as long as there is not indispensable that each and every person
(2) the integrity and the evidentiary value of the justifiable ground therefore, and as long as who came into possession of the drugs should
Justifiable Reasons for Non-compliance on the seized items are properly preserved by the the integrity and the evidentiary value of the take the witness stand. (People v. Amansec, G.R.
Chain of Custody Rule apprehending team. confiscated/seized items, are properly No. 186131, 14 Dec. 2011)
preserved by the apprehending
Minor deviations from the chain of custody rule is The above grounds were not present in this case; officer/team. When will this provision not Q: SPO1 Calupit and PO2 Lobrin acted as key
justified when; thus, the buy-bust team's failure to comply with apply? persons to the search conducted at the house
the three-witness rule is inexcusable. Moreover, of accused Derilo. The testimonies given by
1. Lapses in procedure were recognized and the buy-bust team likewise failed to immediately A: If there were not merely trifling lapses in the them are bereft of any evidence that show that
explained in terms of their justifiable conduct the inventory and photographing of the handling of the evidence taken from the accused the plastic sachets supposedly containing the

shabu were ever marked, whether at the condition of the specimen at the time the dangerous drugs), and 12 (possession of drug Duties of School Heads, Supervisors, and
scene or at the police station, and that they specimen was handed over to SPO1 Corea, the paraphernalia) of R.A. No. 9165. Teachers if they Caught a Person Violating the
were marked in the presence of the precautions taken by SPO1 Corea to ensure that Provisions of R.A. No. 9165
petitioner. Additionally, the Chemistry Report there had been no change in the condition of the The RTC found Holgado and Misarez guilty of
and the Certification of Laboratory item, and how SPO1 Corea transferred illegal sale of dangerous drugs and acquitted 1. They shall affect the arrest of any person
Examination show inconsistencies with possession of the specimen to PO3 Carranza. In them of the charges pertaining to Sec. 11 as violating Art. II of the Act and turn over the
regard to the referenced markings on the short, the chain of custody of the specimen from the drugs supposedly seized were not investigation of the case to the PDEA;
plastic sachets and to the weight of the drug PO2 Santiago to SPO1 Corea and from SPO1 Corea introduced in evidence. Holgado, was also
specimens. to PO3 Carranza was not firmly established. acquitted of the charges relating to Sec. 12 of 2. They may summon the services of other law
(People v. Noel Cardenas, G.R. No. 229046. 11 Sept. as the paraphernalia to which PO2 Castulo enforcement agencies to arrest or cause the
Thus, Derilo contended that he should not be 2019, J. Caguioa) testified to in court were different from those apprehension or arrest of persons violating
convicted for the manifest inconsistencies in indicated in the inventory supposedly made. Art. II of the Act;
the testimonies and failure to preserve the Q: Pamela, a high school student, was caught The CA affirmed the conviction. Is the
links in the unbroken chain of custody. Is he using shabu inside the campus of the school presumption of regularity in the performance 3. They shall be trained on arrest and other
correct? she is attending. Who shall have the authority of duties applicable in this case? legal procedures relative to the conduct of
to apprehend her? arrest of violators of the Act along with
A: YES. To show an unbroken link in the chain of A: NO. The presumption of regularity in the student leaders and Parents Teachers
custody, the prosecution’s evidence must include A: All school heads, supervisors and teachers are performance of duties cannot be applied in this Association (PTA) officials; and
testimony about every link in the chain, from the deemed persons in authority and empowered to case. Given the flagrant procedural lapses the
moment the item was seized to the time it is apprehend, arrest or cause the apprehension or police committed in handling the seized shabu 4. They shall refer the students or any other
offered in court as evidence, such that every arrest of any person who shall violate any of the and the obvious evidentiary gaps in the chain of violators found to be using dangerous drugs
person who handled the evidence would said provisions of Art. II of Dangerous Drugs Act, its custody, a presumption of regularity in the to the proper agency/office. (Sec. 44, IRR of
acknowledge how and from whom it was pursuant to Sec. 5, Rule 113 of the Rules of Court. performance of duties cannot be made in this R.A. No. 9165)
received, where it was and what happened to it (Sec. 44, IRR of R.A. No. 9165) case. The presumption applies when nothing in
while in the witness’ possession, the condition in the record suggests that the law enforcers Promotion of “drug-free workplaces”
which it was received and the condition in which Q: PO1 Aure (poseur-buyer) and an deviated from the standard conduct of official
it was delivered to the next link in the chain. The informant, approached Holgado. Holgado duty required by law; where the official act is The drug-free workplaces are promoted by:
same witness would then describe the asked the informant if he was buying drugs. irregular on its face, the presumption cannot
precautions taken to ensure that there had been The informant introduced PO1 Aure as a drug arise. (People v. Holgado, G.R. No. 207992, 11 Aug. 1. A National Drug-Free Workplace Abuse
no change in the condition of the item and no user. PO1 Aure then handed Holgado two 2014) Prevention Program shall be formulated by a
opportunity for someone not in the chain to have marked Php 100 bills. Holgado called Misarez. tripartite Task Force composed of
its possession. Misarez stepped out of the restroom and Instances when the School Heads, representatives from the DOLE, workers’ and
handed a plastic sachet containing a white Supervisors, and Teachers Deemed to be employers’ groups.
It is from the testimony of every witness who crystalline substance to PO1 Aure. PO1 Aure Persons in Authority in the Apprehension,
handled the evidence from which a reliable examined the sachet’s contents and took out Arrest or Cause of Arrest of Person Violating 2. The Secretary of the DOLE shall issue a
assurance can be derived that the evidence his cellphone which was the pre-arranged the Act Department Order creating a Task Force
presented in court is one and the same as that signal that the sale of drugs had been consisting of tripartite and other agencies to
seized from the accused. (Derilo v. People, G.R. No. consummated. The police operatives then They shall be deemed persons in authority if they formulate policies and strategies for the
190466, 18 April 2016) approached PO1 Aure and apprehended are in the school or within its immediate vicinity, purpose of developing a National Action
Holgado and Misarez. or even beyond such immediate vicinity if they Agenda on drug abuse prevention in the
Q: X was convicted for the crime of illegal are in attendance at any school or class function workplace. Pursuant to the declared policy of
possession of illegal drugs. During trial, the PO3 Abuyme prepared an inventory of the in their official capacity as school heads, the State and the national workplace policy,
person who handled the specimen was not the seized items. PO1 Aure supposedly marked supervisors, and teachers. (Sec. 44, IRR of R.A. the DOLE shall issue a Department Order
one presented as a witness. Is the unbroken the plastic sachet handed to him by Misarez at 9165) (DO) requiring all private companies to
chain of custody established in such case? the site of the buy-bust operation. Following adopt and implement drug abuse prevention
their arrest, Holgado and Misarez were programs in the workplace, including the
A: NO As SPO1 Corea was not presented by the charged with violating Secs. 5 (sale of formulation of company policies.
prosecution, the evidence on record is silent as to dangerous drugs), 11 (possession of
how SPO1 Corea handled the specimen, the

3. Pursuant to the functions of the Board under IS A DRUG-FREE WORKPLACE: LET’S KEEP 3. Within three (3) days from receipt of the 3. The cost of treatment and rehabilitation
Sec. 81(a) of the Act, the existing Civil Service IT THIS WAY!” or such other messages of complaint, a hearing shall then be conducted based on a center’s facilities, programs and
rules and policies needed to respond to drug similar import. (Sec. 48, IRR of R.A. No. 9165) by the administrative board, with notice to services (Sec. 74, IRR of R.A. No. 9165).
abuse in the public sector shall be adopted. both parties, and the administrative board
(Sec. 47, IRR of R.A. No. 9165) Inclusion of Workplace Drug Abuse Policies may consider any evidence submitted, If the Family Income is within the Poverty
and Programs as Part of CBA including evidence of general reputation of Threshold
Guidelines for the National Drug-Free the place or premises;
Workplace Program to be formulated by the It is required that all labor unions, federations, A family whose income is within poverty
Board and the DOLE associations, or organizations in cooperation 4. The owner/manager of the premises or place threshold shall be fully subsidized by the
with the respective private sector partners shall shall also be given an opportunity to present government. (Sec. 74, IRR of R.A. No. 9165)
1. All private sector organizations with ten (10) include in their collective bargaining or any any evidence in his/her defense;
or more personnel shall implement a drug similar agreements, joint continuing programs Duties of DOH in the Treatment and
abuse prevention program. and information campaigns for the laborers 5. After hearing, the administrative board may Rehabilitation of Drug Dependent
similar to the programs provided under Sec. 47 of declare the place or premises to be a public
a. The workplace program shall include the Act with the end in view of achieving a drug- nuisance; and 1. Formulate standards and guidelines for the
advocacy and capability building and free workplace. (Sec. 49, IRR of R.A. No. 9165) operation and maintenance of all treatment
other preventive strategies including but 6. The hearing shall be terminated within ten and rehabilitation centers nationwide;
not limited to: company policies, training Procedure to be Followed in Abatement of (10) days from commencement. (Sec. 52, IRR
of supervisors/managers, employee Drug-Related Public Nuisances of R.A. No. 9165) 2. Develop a system for monitoring and
education, random drug testing, supervision of all drug rehabilitation centers
employee assistance program, and Any place or premises which have been used on Persons Sharing the Cost of Treatment and nationwide;
monitoring and evaluation; two or more occasions as the site of the unlawful Rehabilitation of a Drug Dependent who
sale or delivery of dangerous drugs, or used as Voluntarily Submitted Himself 3. Create programs which will advocate for the
b. The workplace program shall be drug dens for pot sessions and other similar establishment of LGU-assisted rehabilitation
integrated in the safety and health activities, may be declared to be a public The parent, spouse, guardian, or any relative facilities in each province;
programs. nuisance, and such nuisance may be abated, within the fourth degree of consanguinity of any
pursuant to the following procedures: person who is confined under the voluntary 4. Submit to the Department of Budget and
2. DOLE and labor and employers’ groups shall submission program or compulsory submission Management (DBM) a budget for the
also encourage drug-free policies and 1. Any city or municipality may, by ordinance, program shall share the cost of treatment and establishment, and operation of drug
programs for private companies with nine create an administrative board to hear rehabilitation of a drug dependent. (Sec. 74, IRR of rehabilitation centers; and
(9) workers or less. complaints regarding the nuisances, to be R.A. No. 9165)
composed of the following: 5. Facilitate the turn-over of all the
3. Any officer or employee found positive for If the Dependent has No Parent, Spouse, rehabilitation centers from the PNP and NBI
use of dangerous drugs shall be dealt with a. City/Municipal Health Officer as Guardian or Relative within Fourth (4th) thru a Memorandum of Agreement that shall
administratively which shall be a ground for chairperson; Degree of Consanguinity be signed within sixty (60) days after
suspension or termination, subject to the b. City/Municipal Legal Officer as member, approval of this IRR. (Sec. 75, IRR of R.A. No.
provisions of Art. 282 of Book VI of the Labor provided that in cities/municipalities In case a dependent has no parent, spouse, 9165)
Code. with no Legal Officer, the City/Municipal guardian or relative within the fourth degree of
Administrator shall act as member; and consanguinity, his/her rehabilitation shall be PROGRAM FOR TREATMENT AND
4. Private sector organizations may extend the c. The Local Chief of Police as member. through the auspices of any government REHABILITATION OF
drug education program to the rehabilitation center. (Sec. 74, IRR of R.A. No. DRUG DEPENDENTS
employees/personnel and immediate 2. Any employee, officer, or resident of the city 9165) (ART. VIII)
families to contribute in the promotion of a or municipality may bring a complaint before
healthy drug-free family, community and the administrative board after giving not less Factors in Determining Costs for the Sharing Submission for Treatment and Rehabilitation
society. than three (3) days written notice of such in Cost of Treatment and Rehabilitation of a Drug Dependent who is Found Guilty of
complaint to the owner of the place or the Use of Drugs
5. All private sector organizations shall display premises at his/her last known address; 1. Family income;
in a conspicuous place a billboard or 2. Capacity of the province/city/municipality A drug dependent who is found guilty of the use
streamer with a standard message of “THIS based on their income classification; and of dangerous drugs may voluntarily submit

himself for treatment and rehabilitation. The regulations of the center, the applicable rules related to or operating in conjunction with such Cybersecurity refers to the collection of tools,
drug dependent may, by himself/herself or and regulations of the Board, including the device. It covers any type of computer device policies, risk management approaches, actions,
through his/her parent, spouse, guardian or after-care and follow-up program for at least including devices with data processing training, best practices, assurance, and
relative within the fourth degree of consanguinity eighteen (18) months following temporary capabilities like mobile phones, smart phones, technologies that can be used to protect the cyber
or affinity, apply to the Board or its duly discharge from confinement in the Center; computer networks and other devices connected environment and organization and user’s assets.
recognized representative, for treatment and to the internet. (Sec. 3(d), R.A. No. 10175) (Sec. 3(k), R.A. No. 10175)
rehabilitation of the drug dependency. 2. He/she has never been charged or convicted
of any offense punishable under this Act, the Computer data refers to any representation of Database refers to a representation of
Upon such application, the Board shall bring forth Dangerous Drugs Act of 1972 or R.A. No. facts, information, or concepts in a form suitable information, knowledge, facts, concepts, or
the matter to the Court which shall order that the 6425, as amended; the RPC, as amended, or for processing in a computer system including a instructions which are being prepared,
applicant be examined for drug dependency. (Sec. any special penal laws; program suitable to cause a computer system to processed, or stored or have been prepared,
54, R.A. No. 9165) perform a function and includes electronic processed, or stored in a formalized manner and
3. He/she has no record of escape from a documents and/or electronic data messages which are intended for use in a computer system.
Compulsory Confinement Center; or whether stored in local computer systems or (Sec. 3(l), R.A. No. 10175)
online. (Sec. 3(e), R.A. No. 10175)
Notwithstanding any law, rule and regulation to 4. He/she poses no serious danger to Interception refers to listening to, recording,
the contrary, any person determined and found himself/herself, his/her family or the Computer program refers to a set of instructions monitoring, or surveillance of the content of
to be dependent on dangerous drugs shall, upon community by his/her exemption from executed by the computer to achieve intended communications, including procuring of the
petition by the Board or any of its authorized criminal liability. (Sec. 55, R.A. No. 9165) results. (Sec. 3(f), R.A. No. 10175) content of data, either directly, through access
representative, be confined for treatment and and use of a computer system, or indirectly,
rehabilitation in any Center duly designated or Computer system refers to any device or group through the use of electronic eavesdropping or
accredited for the purpose. N. CYBERCRIME PREVENTION ACT OF 2012 of interconnected or related devices, one or more tapping devices, at the same time that the
R.A. No. 10175 of which, pursuant to a program, performs communication is occurring. (Sec. 3(m), R.A. No.
A petition for the confinement of a person alleged automated processing of data. It covers any type 10175)
to be dependent on dangerous drugs to a Center of device with data processing capabilities
may be filed by any person authorized by the including, but not limited to, computers and Service provider refers to:
DEFINITION OF TERMS
Board with the RTC of the province or city where mobile phones. The device consisting of
such person is found. (Sec. 61, R.A. No. 9165) hardware and software may include input, output 1. Any public or private entity that provides to
Access refers to the instruction, communication
and storage components which may stand alone users of its service the ability to
with, storing data in, retrieving data from, or
Length of Confinement for Treatment and or be connected in a network or other similar communicate by means of a computer
otherwise making use of any resources of a
Rehabilitation by the Drug Dependent devices. It also includes computer data storage system; and
computer system or communication network.
devices or media. (Sec. 3(g), R.A. No. 10175)
(Sec. 3(a), R.A. No. 10175)
Confinement in a Center for treatment and 2. Any other entity that processes or stores
rehabilitation shall not exceed one (1) year, after Cyber refers to a computer or a computer computer data on behalf of such
Alteration refers to the modification or change,
which time the Court, as well as the Board, shall network, the electronic medium in which online communication service or users of such
in form or substance, of an existing computer
be apprised by the head of the treatment and communication takes place. (Sec. 3(i), R.A. No. service. (Sec. 3(n), R.A. No. 10175)
data or program. (Sec. 3(b), R.A. No. 10175)
rehabilitation center of the status of said drug 10175)
dependent and determine whether further Subscriber’s information – Any information
Communication refers to the transmission of
confinement will be for the welfare of the drug Critical infrastructure refers to the computer contained in the form of computer data or any
information through ICT media, including voice,
dependent and his/her family or the community. systems, and/or networks, whether physical or other form that is held by a service provider,
video, and other forms of data. (Sec. 3(c), R.A. No.
(Sec. 54, R.A. No. 9165) virtual, and/or the computer programs, relating to subscribers of its services other than
10175)
computer data and/or traffic data so vital to this traffic or content data and by which identity can
country that the incapacity or destruction of or be established:
Computer refers to an electronic, magnetic,
Exemption from Criminal Liability of a Drug interference with such system and assets would 1. The type of communication service used, the
optical, electrochemical, or other data processing
Dependent who is under the Voluntary have a debilitating impact on security, national or technical provisions taken thereto, and the
or communications device, or grouping of such
Submission Program and upon Release from economic security, national public health and period of service;
devices, capable of performing logical, arithmetic,
Confinement in the Center safety, or any combination of those matters. (Sec.
routing, or storage functions and which includes 2. The subscriber’s identity, postal or
3(j), R.A. No. 10175)
any storage facility or equipment or geographic address, telephone and other
1. He/she has complied with the rules and
communications facility or equipment directly access numbers, any assigned network

address, billing and payment information, deleting, deteriorating, altering, or the name of a person other than the 3. Content-Related Offenses –
available on the basis of the service suppressing computer data or program, registrant, in case of a personal
agreement or arrangement; and electronic document, or electronic data name; and a. Cybersex – The wilful engagement,
message, without right or authority, maintenance, control, or operation,
3. Any other available information on the site of including the introduction or c. Acquired without right or with directly or indirectly, of any lascivious
the installation of communication transmission of viruses. intellectual property interests in it. exhibition of sexual organs or sexual
equipment, available on the basis of the activity, with the aid of a computer
service agreement or arrangement. (Sec. e. Misuse of Devices: 2. Computer-Related Offenses system, for favor or consideration.
3(o), R.A. No. 10175)
i. The use, production, sale, a. Computer-related Forgery b. Child Pornography – The unlawful or
Traffic data or non-content data refers to any procurement, importation, prohibited acts defined and punishable
computer data other than the content of the distribution, or otherwise making i. The input, alteration, or deletion of by R.A. No. 9775 or the Anti-Child
communication including, but not limited to, the available, without right of a device, any computer data without right Pornography Act of 2009, committed
communication’s origin, destination, route, time, including: resulting in inauthentic data with through a computer system: Provided,
date, size, duration, or type of underlying service. the intent that it be considered or That the penalty to be imposed shall be
(Sec. 3(p), R.A. No. 10175) a. A computer program, designed acted upon for legal purposes as if (1) one degree higher than that
or adapted primarily for the it were authentic, regardless provided for in R.A. No. 9775.
PUNISHABLE ACTS purpose of committing any of whether or not the data is directly
the offenses under this Act; or readable and intelligible. NOTE: Child pornography committed
Cybercrime Offenses (Sec. 5, R.A. No. 10175) online as to which, charging the offender
b. A computer password, access ii. The act of knowingly using under both Sec. 4(c)(2) of R.A. No. 10175
1. Offenses against the confidentiality, code, or similar data by which computer data which is the product and R.A. No. 9775 or the Anti-Child
integrity, and availability of computer the whole or any part of a of computer-related forgery as Pornography Act of 2009 is void and
data and systems: computer system is capable of defined herein, for the purpose of unconstitutional. (Disini v. Secretary of
being accessed with intent that perpetuating a fraudulent or Justice, G.R. No. 203335, 18 Feb. 2014)
a. Illegal access - The access to the whole it be used for the purpose of dishonest design.
or any part of a computer system committing any of the offenses c. Unsolicited Commercial
without right. under this Act. b. Computer-related Fraud – The Communications – The transmission of
unauthorized input, alteration, or commercial electronic communication
b. Illegal Interception - The interception ii. The possession of an item referred deletion of computer data or program with the use of computer system which
made by technical means without right to in the preceding paragraph with or interference in the functioning of a seek to advertise, sell, or offer for sale
of any non-public transmission of intent to use said devices for the computer system, causing damage products and services are prohibited
computer data to, from, or within a purpose of committing any of the thereby with fraudulent intent: unless:
computer system including offenses under this Sec. 4 of R.A. No. Provided, that if no damage has yet been
electromagnetic emissions from a 10175. caused, the penalty imposable shall be i. There is prior affirmative consent
computer system carrying such one (1) degree lower. from the recipient; or
computer data. f. Cyber-squatting – The acquisition of a
domain name over the internet in bad c. Computer-related Identity Theft – The ii. The primary intent of the
c. Data Interference – The intentional or faith to profit, mislead, destroy intentional acquisition, use, misuse, communication is for service
reckless alteration, damaging, deletion reputation, and deprive others from transfer, possession, alteration or and/or administrative
or deterioration of computer data, registering the same, if such a domain deletion of identifying information announcements from the sender to
electronic document, or electronic data name is: (2019 BAR) belonging to another, whether natural its existing users, subscribers or
message, without right, including the or juridical, without right: Provided, that customers; or
introduction or transmission of viruses. a. Similar, identical, or confusingly if no damage has yet been caused, the
similar to an existing trademark penalty imposable shall be one (1) iii. The following conditions are
d. System Interference – The intentional registered with the appropriate degree lower. present:
alteration or reckless hindering or government agency at the time of 1. The commercial electronic
interference with the functioning of a the domain name registration; communication contains a
computer or computer network by simple, valid, and reliable way
inputting, transmitting, damaging, b. Identical or in any way similar with for the recipient to reject.

receipt of further commercial of an accused if he or she publishes a unsolicited commercial communications; 2. An authority to take decisions on behalf of
electronic messages (opt-out) libelous article on an online news the juridical person: Provided, That the act
from the same source; platform? Explain. (2019 BAR) 2. Sec. 12 which authorizes the collection or committed falls within the scope of such
recording of traffic data in real-time; authority; or
2. The commercial electronic A:
communication does not a. Mr. L’s contention that truth is a valid defense 3. Sec. 19 which authorizes the Department of 3. An authority to exercise control within the
purposely disguise the source in libel is tenable. Under Art. 361 of the RPC, Justice to restrict or block access to juridical person, the juridical person shall be
of the electronic message; and if the defamatory statement is made against suspected Computer Data; held liable for a fine equivalent to at least
a public official with respect to the discharge double the fines imposable in Sec. 7 up to a
3. The commercial electronic of his official duties and functions, and the 4. Sec. 4(c)(4) with respect to persons who maximum of Ten million pesos (P10 Million).
communication does not truth of the allegations is shown, the accused simply receive the post and react to it; and
purposely include misleading will be entitled to an acquittal even though he If the commission of any of the punishable acts
information in any part of the does not prove that the imputation was 5. Sec. 5 with respect to Secs. 4(c)(2) on Child herein defined was made possible due to the lack
message in order to induce the published with good motives and for Pornography, 4(c)(3) on Unsolicited of supervision or control by a natural person
recipients to read the message. justifiable ends. (Lopez v. People, G.R. No. Commercial Communications, and 4(c)(4) on referred to and described in the preceding
172203, 14 Feb. 2011) online Libel. (Disini v. Secretary of Justice, GR paragraph, for the benefit of that juridical person
d. Libel — The unlawful or prohibited acts No. 203335, 18 Feb. 2014) by a natural person acting under its authority, the
of libel as defined in Art. 355 of the RPC, b. The accused may be liable under RA 10175, juridical person shall be held liable for a fine
as amended, committed through a The terms “aiding or abetting” constitute broad
or the Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012. equivalent to at least double the fines imposable
computer system or any other similar sweep that generates chilling effect on those who
Under Sec. 4(c)(4), a cybercrime offense in Sec. 7 up to a maximum of Five million pesos
means which may be devised in the express themselves through cyberspace posts,
includes the unlawful or prohibited acts of (P5 Million).
future. (Sec. 4, R.A. No. 10175) comments, and other messages. For example,
libel as defined in Art. 355 of the RPC
when “Google procures, stores, and indexes child
committed through a computer system or The liability imposed on the juridical person shall
Q: Mr. L is a newspaper reporter who writes pornography and facilitates the completion of
any other similar means which may be be without prejudice to the criminal liability of
about news items concerning the judiciary. transactions involving the dissemination of child
devised in the future. the natural person who has committed the
Mr. L believed that members of the judiciary pornography,” does this make Google and its
offense (Sec. 9, R.A. No. 10175).
can be criticized and exposed for the users aiders and abettors in the commission of
Thus, RA 10175 penalizes the publication of
prohibited acts that they commit by virtue of child pornography crimes?
a libelous article on an online news platform, SEARCH, SEIZURE, AND EXAMINATION OF
the public nature of their offices. and the penalty to be imposed shall be one
With respect to online libel, its vagueness raises COMPUTER DATA
(1) degree higher than that provided under
Upon receiving numerous complaints from apprehension on the part of internet users
the RPC, pursuant to Sec. 6 thereof. Where a search and seizure warrant is properly
private citizens, Mr. L released a scathing because of its obvious chilling effect on the
freedom of expression, especially since the crime issued, the law enforcement authorities shall
newspaper expose involving Judge G and his
Other Offenses (Sec. 5, R.A. No. 10175) likewise have the following powers and duties.
alleged acts constituting graft and corruption. of aiding or abetting ensnares all the actors in the
Consequently, Mr. L was charged with the cyberspace front in a fuzzy way. What is more, as
1. Aiding or Abetting in the Commission of Within the time period specified in the warrant,
crime of Libel. the petitioners point out, formal crimes such as
Cybercrime – Any person who wilfully abets to conduct interception, as defined in this Act,
libel are not punishable unless consummated.
or aids in the commission of any of the and:
In response, Mr. L contended that truth is a
offenses enumerated in this Act shall be held
valid defense in Libel and in this relation, CORPORATE LIABILITY
liable. 1. To secure a computer system or a computer
claimed that he was only exposing the truth
regarding Judge G's misdeeds. Further, Mr. L data storage medium;
When any of the punishable acts herein defined
2. Attempt in the Commission of Cybercrime – 2. To make and retain a copy of those computer
contended that in any event, his expose on are knowingly committed on behalf of or for the
Any person who willfully attempts to commit data secured;
Judge G is based on the complaints he benefit of a juridical person, by a natural person
any of the offenses enumerated in this Act 3. To maintain the integrity of the relevant
received from private citizens, and as such, acting either individually or as part of an organ of
shall be held liable. (Sec. 5, R.A. No. 10175) stored computer data;
should be deemed as a mere fair commentary the juridical person, who has a leading position
on a matter of public interest. 4. To conduct forensic analysis or examination
within, based on:
NOTE: The Supreme Court declared void for of the computer data storage medium; and
a. Are the contentions of Mr. L tenable?
being unconstitutional the following provisions 5. To render inaccessible or remove those
Explain. 1. A power of representation of the juridical
of R.A. No. 10175: computer data in the accessed computer or
person provided the act committed falls
b. What is the effect on the criminal liability computer and communications network.
1. Sec. 4(c)(3) which penalizes posting of within the scope of such authority;

The law enforcement authorities may order any units and nongovernment organizations in Defacing or Tampering with a Serial Number
person who has knowledge about the functioning cybercrime prevention programs and other O. NEW ANTI-CARNAPPING ACT OF 2016
of the computer system and the measures to related projects; Secs. 3 to 4, R.A. 10883 It is the altering, changing, erasing, replacing, or
protect and preserve the computer data therein scratching of the original factory-inscribed serial
to provide, as is reasonable, the necessary 6. To recommend the enactment of appropriate number on the motor vehicle engine, engine
information, to enable the undertaking of the laws, issuances, measures and policies; block or chassis of any motor vehicle. Whenever
NOTE: The old Anti-Carnapping law, R.A. No.
search, seizure and examination. any motor vehicle is found to have a serial
7. To call upon any government agency to 6539, as amended by R.A. No. 7659, has been
number on its motor engine, engine block or
render assistance in the accomplishment of superseded by R.A. No. 10883, otherwise known
Law enforcement authorities may request for an chassis which is different from that which is listed
the CICC’s mandated tasks and functions; and as the “New Anti-Carnapping Act of 2016.”
extension of time to complete the examination of in the records of the Bureau of Customs for motor
the computer data storage medium and to make vehicles imported into the Philippines, that
8. To perform all other matters related to Carnapping (1993, 2008 BAR)
a return thereon but in no case for a period longer motor vehicle shall be considered to have a
than thirty (30) days from date of approval by the cybercrime prevention and suppression, defaced or tampered with serial number. (Sec.
including capacity building and such other The taking, with intent to gain, of a motor vehicle
court. (Sec. 15, R.A. No. 10175) 2(b), R.A. No. 10883)
functions and duties as may be necessary for belonging to another without the latter’s consent,
the proper implementation of R.A. 10175. or by means of violence against or intimidation of Repainting
Exclusionary Rule
(Sec. 26, R.A. No. 10175) persons, or by using force upon things. (Sec. 3, R.A.
No. 10883) There is repainting whenever the new color of a
Any evidence procured without a valid warrant
or beyond the authority of the same shall be Restricting or Blocking Access to Computer motor vehicle is different from its color as
inadmissible for any proceeding before any court Data PUNISHABLE ACTS registered in the Land Transportation Office
or tribunal. (Sec. 18, R.A. No. 10175) (LTO). (Sec. 2(g), R.A. No. 10883)
When a computer data is prima facie found to be 1. Carnapping (Sec. 3, R.A. 10883)
in violation of the provisions of this Act, the DOJ 2. Concealment of Carnapping (Sec. 4, ibid.) Body Building
CYBERCRIME INVESTIGATION AND
COORDINATING CENTER (CICC) shall issue an order to restrict or block access to 3. Defacing or Tampering with Serial Numbers
such computer data. (Sec. 19, R.A. No. 10175) of Motor Vehicle Engines, Engine Blocks, and A job undertaken on a motor vehicle in order to
Chassis (Sec. 14, ibid.) replace its entire body with a new body. (Sec.
The CICC shall have the following powers and
Court having Jurisdiction over Offenses in 4. Identity Transfer (Sec. 15, ibid.) 2(a), R.A. 10883)
functions:
Violation of this Act 5. Transfer of Vehicle Plate without Securing
Remodeling
1. To formulate a national cybersecurity plan the Proper Authority from the Land
and extend immediate assistance for the The RTC shall have jurisdiction over any Transportation Office (LTO) (Sec. 16, ibid.)
The introduction of some changes in the shape or
suppression of real-time commission of violation of the provisions of this Act including 6. Sale of Second Hand Spare Parts Taken from
form of the body of the motor vehicle. (Sec. 2(h),
cybercrime offenses through a computer any violation committed by a Filipino national a Carnapped Vehicle (Sec. 17, ibid.)
R.A. No. 10883)
emergency response team (CERT); regardless of the place of commission.
Motor Vehicle
Dismantling
2. To coordinate the preparation of appropriate Jurisdiction shall lie if any of the elements was
and effective measures to prevent and committed within the Philippines or committed Any vehicle propelled by any power other than The tearing apart, piece by piece or part by part,
suppress cybercrime activities as provided with the use of any computer system wholly muscular power using the public highways, of a motor vehicle. (Sec. 2 (c), R.A. No. 10883)
for in this Act; orpartly situated in the country, or when by such except road rollers, trolley cars, street-sweepers,
commission any damage is caused to a natural or sprinklers, lawn mowers, bulldozers, graders, Overhauling
3. To monitor cybercrime cases being bandied juridical person who, at the time the offense was fork-lifts, amphibian trucks, and cranes if not
by participating law enforcement and committed, was in the Philippines. used on public highways, vehicles, which run only The cleaning or repairing of the whole engine of a
prosecution agencies; on rails or tracks, and tractors, trailers and motor vehicle by separating the motor engine
There shall be designated special cybercrime traction engines of all kinds used exclusively for and its parts from the body of the motor vehicle.
4. To facilitate international cooperation on courts manned by specially trained judges to agricultural purposes. (Sec. 2(e), R.A. No. 10883) (Sec. 2(f), R.A. No. 10883)
intelligence, investigations, training and handle cybercrime cases. (Sec. 21, R.A. No. 10175)
capacity building related to cybercrime NOTE: Trailers having any number of wheels, Commission of Carnapping
prevention, suppression and prosecution; when propelled or intended to be propelled by
attachment to a motor vehicle, shall be classified 1. When carnapping is committed WITH
5. To coordinate the support and participation as separate motor vehicle with no power rating. violence against or intimidation of persons,
of the business sector, local government (Sec. 2(e), R.A. No. 10883) or force upon things; or

Illustration: Pedro is about to leave from No. 187044, 14 Sept. 2011) of this Act, every owner or possessor of motor vehicle engine, engine block, chassis or
UST. Upon boarding his car, he was poked by unregistered motor vehicle or parts thereof body until it is numbered by the LTO; Provided,
X with a gun. X, subsequently, took Pedro’s Unlawful Taking in knock down condition shall register with that a PNP clearance shall be required prior to
car. the LTO the following: engraving the engine or chassis number. (Sec. 9,
In People v. Bustinera, the Supreme Court defined R.A. No. 10883)
2. When carnapping is committed WITHOUT unlawful taking, or apoderamiento, as the taking a. Motor vehicle engine
violence against or intimidation of persons, of the motor vehicle without the consent of the b. Engine block Duty of Importers, Distributors, and Sellers
or force upon things. owner, or by means of violence against or c. Chassis
intimidation of persons, or by using force upon Any person engaged in the importation,
Illustration: Pedro, a law student, parked his things. It is deemed complete from the moment 2. Registration of sale, transfer, conveyance, distribution, and buying and selling of motor
car somewhere. While attending his Criminal the offender gains possession of the thing, even if substitution or replacement of a motor vehicles, motor vehicle engines, engine blocks,
2 class, Pedro’s car was taken. he has no opportunity to dispose of the same. vehicle engine, engine block or chassis. chassis or body, shall:
(People v. Lagat, supra)
NOTE: In either case, the taking is always NOTE: Within twenty (20) working days 1. Keep a permanent record of his stocks,
unlawful from the beginning. Presumption of Unlawfully Taking of the upon purchase/acquisition of a motor stating therein:
Motor Vehicle vehicle and substitution or replacement of a a. Their type, make, and serial numbers;
Even if the car was taken by means of violence or and
motor vehicle engine, engine block or
intimidation, the crime is carnapping and not In Litton Mills, Inc. v. Sales, we said that for such b. The names and addresses of the
chassis, every sale, transfer, conveyance of a
robbery. (People v. Bustinera, G.R. No. 148233, 08 presumption to arise, it must be proven that: persons from whom they were
motor vehicle, substitution or replacement of
June 2004) acquired; and
a motor vehicle engine, engine block or
a. The property was stolen; c. The names and addresses of the
chassis of a motor vehicle shall be registered
Q: Pedro was hired as a taxi driver under the b. It was committed recently; persons to whom they were sold
with the LTO.
boundary system. One day, Pedro failed to c. That the stolen property was found in the
return the taxi since he was short of the possession of the accused; and 2. Render an accurate monthly report of his
Effect if the Motor Vehicle Engines, Engine
boundary fee. Is Pedro liable for carnapping? d. The accused is unable to explain his transactions in motor vehicles to the LTO.
Blocks and Chassis are NOT Registered
possession satisfactorily. (People v. Lagat, (Sec. 10, R.A. No. 10883)
A: YES. While the nature of Pedro’s possession of supra)
1. It shall be considered as:
the taxi was initially lawful as he was hired as a Requirement of Clearance and Permit
a. Untaxed importation;
taxi driver and was entrusted possession thereof, Intent to Gain
b. Coming from an illegal source;
his act of not returning it to its owner 1. For assembly or rebuilding of motor
In Bustinera, the Court elucidated that intent to c. Carnapped vehicle.
transformed the character of the possession into vehicles – Any person who shall undertake to
gain or animus lucrandi is an internal act, 2. It shall be confiscated in favor of the
an unlawful one. (People v. Bustinera, supra) assemble or rebuild or cause the assembly or
presumed from the unlawful taking of the motor Government.
rebuilding of a motor vehicle shall first
NOTE: Qualified theft of a motor vehicle is the vehicle. Actual gain is irrelevant as the important secure a certificate of clearance from the
Duty of Collector of Customs
crime if only the material or physical possession consideration is the intent to gain. The term Philippine National Police (PNP).
was yielded to the offender; otherwise, if juridical “gain” is not merely limited to pecuniary benefit
The Collector of Customs of a principal port of
possession was also yielded, the crime is estafa. but also includes the benefit which in any other NOTE: No such permit shall be issued unless
entry where an imported motor vehicle, motor
sense may be derived or expected from the act the applicant shall present a statement under
vehicle engine, engine block chassis or body is
Elements of Carnapping which is performed. Thus, the mere use of the oath containing the type, make, and serial
unloaded, shall, within seven (7) days after the
thing which was taken without the owner’s numbers of the engine, chassis and body, if
arrival of the imported motor vehicle or any of its
1. That there is an actual taking of the vehicle; consent constitutes gain. (People v. Lagat, supra) any, and the complete list of the spare parts
parts enumerated herein, report the shipment to
2. That the vehicle belongs to a person other of the motor vehicle to be assembled or
the LTO, specifying the make, type, and serial
than the offender himself; REGISTRATION rebuilt together with the names and
numbers, if any, of the motor vehicle, motor
3. That the taking is without the consent of the addresses of the sources thereof.
vehicle engine, engine block and chassis or body
owner thereof; Requirement of Registration and stating the names and addresses of the owner
4. That the taking was committed by means of In the case of motor vehicle engines to be
or consignee thereof.
violence against or intimidation of persons, 1. Registration of motor vehicle engine, mounted on motor boats, motor bancas and
or by using force upon things; and engine block and chassis. other light water vessels, the applicant shall
If the motor vehicle engine, engine block, chassis
5. That the offender intends to gain from the secure a permit from the Philippine National
or body does not bear any serial number, the
taking of the vehicle. (People v. Lagat, G.R. NOTE: Within one (1) year after the approval Police, which office shall in turn furnish the
Collector of Customs concerned shall hold the

Office the pertinent data concerning the A: NO. The Court has already ruled that it is Persons Liable under Sec. 5, R.A. No. 7610
motor vehicle engines including their type, P. SPECIAL PROTECTION OF CHILDREN inconsequential that sexual abuse under R.A. No.
make and serial numbers. (Sec. 12, R.A. No. AGAINST ABUSE, EXPLOITATION, AND 7610 occurred only once. Sec. 3(b) of R.A. No. 1. Those who engage in or promote, facilitate or
10883) DISCRIMINATION ACT 7610 provides that the abuse may be habitual or induce child prostitution;
Secs. 3(a), 5, and 10, R.A. No. 7610 not. Hence, the fact that the offense occurred only 2. Those who commit any act of sexual
2. For shipment of motor vehicles, motor once is enough to hold Garingarao liable for acts intercourse or lascivious conduct with child
vehicle engines, engine blocks, chassis or of lasciviousness under R.A. No. 7610. exploited in prostitution or subject to other
body – Any person who shall undertake to (Garingarao v. People, G.R. No. 192760, 20 July sexual abuse; and
NOTE: See also discussion on R.A. No. 7610 under
ship motor vehicles, motor vehicle engines, 2011) 3. Any person who shall derive any profit or
Title VIII: Crimes against Persons – page 303-310.
engine blocks, chassis or body shall first advantage therefrom, whether as manager or
secure a certificate of clearance from the PUNISHABLE ACTS owner of the establishment where the
Children as understood under R.A. 7610
PNP. prostitution takes place.
Children refer to: 1. Child prostitution and other sexual abuse

NOTE: The PPA shall not allow the loading of Q: AA asked BB to remove her shirt otherwise
1. Persons below eighteen (18) years of age; or (Sec. 5, R.A. No. 7610);
motor vehicles in all interisland and international he would tell her friends that she has
2. Those over but are unable to fully take care 2. Attempt to commit child prostitution (Sec. 6,
shipping vessels without a motor vehicle contraceptive pills. He then mashed her
of themselves or protect themselves from ibid.);
clearance from the PNP, except cargo trucks and breast, which prompted BB to push him out of
abuse, neglect, cruelty, exploitation, or 3. Child trafficking (Sec. 7, ibid.);
other trucks carrying goods. Land Transportation her room. AA was convicted of Acts of
discrimination because of a physical or 4. Attempt to commit child trafficking (Sec. 8,
Franchising and Regulatory Board (LTFRB)- Lasciviousness under Art. 336 of the RPC in
mental disability or condition. (Sec. 3(a), ibid.);
accredited public utility vehicles (PUV) and other RTC. On the Court of Appeals, the judgment
R.A. No. 7610) 5. Obscene publications and indecent shows
motor vehicles carrying foodstuff and dry goods. was modified and he was convicted of Section
(Sec. 9, ibid.);
5 (b), Art. III of R.A. No. 7610. Is it proper?
Child Abuse (2004 BAR) 6. Other acts of neglect, abuse, cruelty or
The Philippine Ports Authority shall, within seven
exploitation and other conditions
(7) days upon boarding, submit a report to the A: YES. For a conviction under Sec. 5 (b), Art. III
The maltreatment, whether habitual or not, of the prejudicial to the child’s development (Sec.
Philippine National Police of all motor vehicles of R.A. No. 7610, there must be confluence of the
child which includes any of the following: 10, ibid.);
loaded on board the “RORO”, ferry, boat, vessell following requisites, thus: (1) The accused
7. Establishments or enterprises promoting,
or ship for interisland and international commits the act of sexual intercourse or
1. Psychological and physical abuse, neglect, facilitating, or conducting activities
shipment. (Sec. 13, R.A. No. 10883) lascivious conduct; (2) The said act is performed
cruelty, sexual abuse, and emotional constituting child prostitution and other
with a child exploited in prostitution or subjected
Convicted Foreign Nationals Deported After maltreatment; (2002, 2005 BAR) sexual abuse, child trafficking, obscene
to other sexual abuse; and (3) The child, whether
Service of Sentence publications and indecent shows, and other
male or female, is below 18 years of age. While
2. Any act by deeds or words which debases, acts of abuse (Sec. 11, ibid.);
the Information against petitioner made no
Foreign nationals convicted under this Act shall degrades or demeans the intrinsic worth and 8. Employment of children (Sec. 12, ibid.);
particular mention of Sec. 5 (b), Art. III of R.A. No.
be deported immediately after service of dignity of a child as a human being; 9. Discrimination of children of indigenous
7610, this omission is not fatal to petitioner's
sentence without further proceedings by the cultural communities (Sec. 20, ibid.); and
3. Unreasonable deprivation of his basic needs right to be informed of the nature and cause of
Bureau of Immigration. (Sec. 18, R.A. No. 10883) 10. Confidentiality. (Sec. 29, ibid.)
for survival, such as food and shelter; or accusation against him. What controls are the
actual facts recited in the Information as
PENALTIES Child Prostitution and Other Sexual Abuse
4. Failure to immediately give medical constituting the offense charged, not its caption
treatment to an injured child resulting in or designation. (Carbonell v. People, G.R. No.
1. If committed without violence against or Children, whether male or female, who for
serious impairment of his growth and 246702, 28 Apr. 2021)
intimidation of persons – twenty (20) years money, profit, or any other consideration or due
and one (1) day to thirty (30) years development or in his permanent incapacity to the coercion or influence of any adult,
or death. (Sec. 3(b), R.A. No. 7610) (2002 Q: Interviewed for a newspaper, a former
syndicate or group, indulge in sexual intercourse
BAR) beauty queen revealed that when she was 16
2. If committed with violence or intimidation or lascivious conduct, are deemed to be children
years old, she had her first sexual intercourse
of persons, or by force upon things – thirty exploited in prostitution and other sexual abuse.
Q: When Garingarao touched the breasts and with her ex-boyfriend, who was then 28 years
(30) years and one (1) day to forty (40) years (Sec. 5, R.A. No. 7610)
private parts of the minor, AAA, is it correct to old. In her narration, she said that she did not
say that the accused should have been know what she was doing and noted that her
3. If committed and in the course thereof, the NOTE: R.A. No. 7610 recognizes the existence of
convicted only of acts of lasciviousness and ex-boyfriend of a more advanced age misled
owner, driver, or the occupant of the car is a male prostitute as a victim and not just as an
not of violation of R.A. No. 7610 since the her into doing what he wanted. She added
killed or raped – life imprisonment. offender.
incident happened only once? that, at certain points during the encounter,

she repeatedly said no but her ex-boyfriend No. 210161, 10 Jan. 2018) against double jeopardy. b. Inducing a person to be a client of a
was just too strong for her. The ex-boyfriend child prostitute by means of written or
left her shortly thereafter. Was there a crime Here, regardless whether the former beauty The “force, threat or intimidation” or deprivation oral advertisements or other similar
committed by the ex-boyfriend? Explain queen gave or did not give her consent to the of reason or unconsciousness elements under means;
briefly. (2020-21 BAR) sexual intercourse, the adult ex-boyfriend having Art. 266-A (1) is not the same as the “coercion or c. Taking advantage of influence or
sexual intercourse with a 16-year-old child influence” required under the Sec. 5 (b), R.A. relationship to procure a child as
A: YES, the ex-boyfriend is liable for violation of defined under the law is liable for committing 7610. Consent is immaterial in the crime of sexual prostitute;
R.A. 7610. Consent is immaterial in cases sexual abuse under R.A. 7610. abuse because the mere act of having sexual d. Threatening or using violence towards
involving sexual abuse under R.A. No. 7610 intercourse with a child exploited in prostitution a child to engage him as a prostitute; or
where the offended party is below 12 years of Q: One evening in Sept. 2002, AAA, then 12 or subjected to sexual abuse is already e. Giving monetary consideration goods
age. However, consent is material when the years old, drank alcoholic beverages with punishable by the law. However, consent or other pecuniary benefit to a child
offended party is a child, who is 12 years old or Udang's children, her neighbors Betty Udang exonerates an accused from a rape charge. with intent to engage such child in
above. This punishes sexual intercourse or and Bienvinido Udang, Jr. at their house. After (People v. Udang, G.R. No. 210161, 10 Jan. 10, prostitution.
lascivious conduct not only with a child exploited drinking, AAA became intoxicated. Udang 2018)
in prostitution but also with a child subjected to carried her into a dark room where he laid 2. Those who commit the act of sexual
other sexual abuse. It covers not only a situation her on the bed, undressed her, and started NOTE: The ruling in the case of People v. Udang as intercourse or lascivious conduct with a child
where a child is abused for profit but also one in kissing her. Udang then went on top of AAA regards the non-application of double jeopardy exploited in prostitution or subject to other
which a child, through coercion, intimidation or and inserted his penis into her vagina. After overturned the 2009 People v. Abay ruling sexual abuse; Provided, that when the victim
influence, engages in sexual intercourse or the incident, Udang went out to report for wherein the Supreme Court ruled that charging is under twelve (12) years of age, the
lascivious conduct. (People v. Tulagan, G.R. No. duty as barangay tanod while AAA remained an accused with both rape, under Art. 266-A (1) perpetrators shall be prosecuted under Art.
227363, 12 March 2019) inside his house as she was still too weak to of the RPC, and sexual abuse under Sec. 5(b), of 335, par. 3, for rape and Art. 336 of the RPC,
move. R.A. 7610 would constitute a violation of the right for rape or lascivious conduct, as the case
Under the given facts, the more advanced age of of the accused against double jeopardy. may be; and
the ex-boyfriend over the victim who was only 16 One (1) year and three (3) months after, in
years old, a child within the definition of the law, Dec. 2003, AAA, who by then was already 13 Non-applicability of Sweetheart Theory 3. Those who derive profit or advantage
constitutes influence over the latter and the fact years old, again had some drinks at Udang's therefrom, whether as manager or owner of
that the victim did not know what she was doing house. This time, she was with Bienvinido, Jr. In the case of People v. Udang (supra), the the establishment where the prostitution
and repeatedly said no during their enocounters and Udang himself. When AAA felt sleepy, she sweetheart theory applies in acts of takes place, or of the sauna, disco, bar, resort,
show absence of consent. The ex-boyfriend then went into one (1) of the rooms inside the lasciviousness and rape, felonies committed place of entertainment or establishment
may be held liable for violation of R.A. No. 7610. house. While AAA was lying in bed, Udang, against or without the consent of the victim. It serving as a cover or which engages in
who had followed her into the room, went on operates on the theory that the sexual act was prostitution in addition to the activity for
Alternative Answer: YES, the ex-boyfriend is top of her, undressed her, and inserted his consensual. It requires proof that the accused and which the license has been issued to said
liable for violation of R.A. 7610. For purposes of penis into her vagina until he ejaculated. After the victim were lovers and that she consented to establishment. (Sec. 5, R.A. No. 7610)
sexual intercourse and lascivious conduct in child having sexual intercourse with AAA, Udang the sexual relations. For purposes of sexual
abuse cases under R.A. 7610, the sweetheart went out to report for duty as barangay tanod. intercourse and lascivious conduct in child abuse Q: CCC, AAA's uncle, filed a complaint for
defense is unacceptable. A child exploited in AAA, too tired, remained lying in bed. cases under R.A. No. 7610, the sweetheart malicious mischief against Torres, who
prostitution or subjected to other sexual abuse defense is unacceptable. A child exploited in allegedly caused damage to his multicab. AAA
cannot validly give consent to sexual intercourse Bienvinido claims that AAA welcomed his prostitution or subjected to other sexual abuse witnessed the alleged incident and was
with another person. The language of the law is kisses and touches and consented to have cannot validly give consent to sexual intercourse brought by CCC to testify. At the barangay,
clear: it seeks to punish those who commit the act sexual intercourse with him. They engaged in with another person. CCC, CCC’s wife and AAA were waiting for the
of sexual intercourse or lascivious conduct with a these acts out of mutual love and affection conciliation proceedings to begin when they
child exploited in prostitution or subejcted to (sweetheart theory). Is Bienvinido Udang, Sr. Persons Liable for Child Prostitution and chanced upon Torres. CCC's wife, persuaded
other sexual abuse. Unlike rape, therefore, liable for two (2) counts of sexual abuse under Other Sexual Abuse Torres to attend the proceedings to answer
consent is immaterial in cases involving violation Sec. 5(b) of R.A. No. 7610 or under Art. 266-A for his liability which he vehemently denied.
of Sec. 5, Art. III or R.A. 7610. The mere act of (1) of the RPC? 1. Those who engage in or promote, facilitate or
having sexual intercourse or committing induce child prostitution which include, but In the middle of the brewing argument, AAA
lascivious conduct with a child exploited in A: The trial court was wrong in ruling that are not limited to the following: suddenly interjected that Torres damaged
prostitution or subjected to sexual abuse charging Udang with both rape, under under Art. CCC's multicab and accused him of stealing
constitutes the offense. It is malum prohibitum, an 266-A(1) of the RPC, and sexual abuse under Sec. a. Acting as a procurer of a child CCC's fish nets. Torres told AAA not to pry in
evil that is proscribed. (People v. Udang, Sr., G.R. 5(b), of R.A. No. 7610, would violate his right prostitute; the affairs of adults and warned AAA that he

would whip him if he did not stop. However, or any other hidden or secluded area under induce, or coerce a child to perform in obscene or legal duty.” (Disclaimer: R.A. No. 11648 is
AAA refused and continued the accusations. circumstances which would lead a exhibitions and indecent shows, whether live or not covered under the 2022 Bar Syllabus
Infuriated, Torres whipped AAA on the neck reasonable person to believe that the child is in video, or model in obscene publications or for Criminal Law)
using a wet t-shirt three times causing the about to be exploited in prostitution and pornographic materials or to sell or distribute the
latter to fall down from the stairs. CCC came to other sexual abuse. said materials. (Sec. 9, R.A. No. 7610) 3. Any person who shall induce, deliver or offer
AAA’s defense and punched Torres. They a minor to any one prohibited by this Act to
engaged in a fistfight until they were 2. Any person is receiving services from a child Persons Liable for Other Acts of Neglect, keep or have in his company a minor as
separated by Brgy. Captain. in a sauna, parlor or bath, massage clinic, Abuse, Cruelty or Exploitation and Other provided in the preceding paragraph;
health club and other similar Conditions Prejudicial to the Child's
Based on the physical examination, AAA establishments. (Sec. 6, R.A. No. 7610) Development 4. Any person, owner, manager or one
sustained a contusion. The RTC and CA entrusted with the operation of any public or
convicted Torres guilty of Other Acts of Child Persons Liable for Child Trafficking 1. Any person who shall commit any other acts private place of accommodation, whether for
Abuse under Sec 10, par A of R.A. 7610. Is of child abuse, cruelty or exploitation or to be occupancy, food, drink or otherwise,
Torres liable under Other Acts of Child Abuse Any person who shall engage in trading and responsible for other conditions prejudicial including residential places, who allows any
under Sec. 10, par. A of R.A. No. 7610? dealing with children including, but not limited to the child's development; person to take along with him to such place
to, the act of buying and selling of a child for or places any minor herein described; or
A: YES. Torres is liable under Other Acts of Child money, or for any other consideration, or barter. 2. Any person who shall keep or have in his
Abuse under Sec. 10, par. A of R.A. 7610. The (Sec. 7, R.A. No. 7610) company a minor, twelve (12) years or under 5. Any person who shall use, coerce, force or
victim, AAA, was a child when the incident or who is ten (10) years or more his junior in intimidate a street child or any other child to:
occurred. Therefore, AAA is entitled to protection Attempt to Commit Child Trafficking any public or private place, hotel, motel, beer
under R.A. No. 7610 the primary purpose of joint, discotheque, cabaret, pension house, a. Beg or use begging as a means of living;
which has been defined by previous There is an attempt to commit child trafficking: sauna or massage parlor, beach and/or other b. Act as conduit or middlemen in drug
jurisprudence as a measure geared towards the tourist resort or similar places. Provided, that trafficking or pushing; or
1. When a child travels alone to a foreign this provision shall not apply to any person c. Conduct any illegal activities. (Sec. 10,
implementation of a national comprehensive
country without valid reason therefor and who is related within the fourth degree of R.A. No. 7610)
program for the survival of the most vulnerable
without clearance issued by the DSWD or consanguinity or affinity or any bond
members of the population, the Filipino children,
written permit or justification from the recognized by law, local custom and tradition Sanctions of Establishments or Enterprises
in keeping with the Constitutional mandate
child's parents or legal guardian; or acts in the performance of a social, moral
under Art. XV, Sec. 3, par. 2, that "The State shall
or legal duty; All establishments and enterprises which
defend the right of the children to assistance,
2. When a person, agency, establishment or promote or facilitate child prostitution and other
including proper care and nutrition, and special
child-caring institution recruits women or NOTE: Sec. 10(b) of R.A. No. 7610 has been sexual abuse, child trafficking, obscene
protection from all forms of neglect, abuse,
couples to bear children for the purpose of amended by R.A. No. 11648 which was publications and indecent shows, and other acts
cruelty, exploitation, and other conditions
child trafficking; signed into law on March 4, 2022. Sec. 3, R.A. of abuse shall be immediately closed and their
prejudicial to their development."
No. 11648 provides: authority or license to operate cancelled, without
3. When a doctor, hospital or clinic official or prejudice to the owner or manager thereof being
Although it is true that not every instance of
employee, nurse, midwife, local civil registrar "(b) Any person who shall keep or have in his prosecuted under this Act and/or the RPC, as
laying of hands on the child constitutes child
or any other person simulates birth for the company a minor sixteen (16) years of age or amended, or special laws. (Sec. 11, R.A. No. 7610)
abuse, petitioner's intention to debase, degrade,
purpose of child trafficking; or under or who is ten (10) years or more his
and demean the intrinsic worth and dignity of a
junior in any public or private place, hotel, NOTE: An establishment shall be deemed to
child can be inferred from the manner in which
4. When a person engages in the act of finding motel, beer joint, discotheque, cabaret, promote or facilitate child prostitution and other
he committed the act complained of. (Torres v.
children among low-income families, pension house, sauna or massage parlor, sexual abuse, child trafficking, obscene
People, G.R. No. 206627, 18 Jan. 2017)
hospitals, clinics, nurseries, day-care centers, beach, and/or other tourist or similar places publications and indecent shows, and other acts
or other child-caring institutions who can be shall suffer the penalty of prision mayor in its of abuse if the acts constituting the same occur in
Instances when There is an Attempt to
offered for the purpose of child trafficking. maximum period and a fine of not less that the premises of said establishment. (Sec. 11, R.A.
Commit Child Prostitution
(Sec. 8, R.A. No. 7610) Fifty thousand pesos (P50,000.00): Provided, No. 7610)
1. Any person who, not being a relative of a That this provision shall not apply to any
Persons Liable for Obscene Publications and Employment of Children
child, is found alone with the said child person who is related within fourth degree of
Indecent Shows
inside the room or cubicle of a house, an inn, consanguinity or affinity or any blood
hotel, motel, pension house, apartelle or recognized by law, local custom and tradition GR: No child below fifteen (15) years of age may
Any person who shall hire, employ, use, persuade, be employed.
other similar establishments, vessel, vehicle or acts in the performance of a social, moral

XPNs: Prohibition on the Employment of Children in rest the conflicting resolutions of the Secretary of
1. When a child works directly under the sole Certain Advertisements Q. SWINDLING BY SYNDICATE Justice and more importantly, determine the
responsibility of his parents or legal P.D. No. 1689 liability, if any, of petitioner BB.
guardian and where only members of the No person shall employ child models in all
employer's family are employed: Provided, commercials or advertisements promoting: The elements of Syndicated Estafa are as follows:
however, that his employment neither (a) Estafa or Other Forms of Swindling, as defined
1. Alcoholic beverages; A special law enacted for the specific purpose of
endangers his life, safety and health and in Arts. 315 and 316 of the RPC, is committed; (b)
2. Intoxicating drinks; defining syndicated estafa and imposing a
morals, nor impairs his normal the Estafa or Swindling is committed by a
3. Tobacco and its byproducts; and specific penalty for the commission of the said
development: Provided, further, That the syndicate of five [5] or more persons; and, (c)
4. Violence. (Sec. 14, R.A. No. 7610) offense; no manifest intent to repeal or alter the
parent or legal guardian shall provide the defraudation results in the misappropriation of
penalty for syndicated estafa. (People v. Mateo,
said minor child with the prescribed moneys contributed by stockholders, or
Discrimination of Children of Indigenous G.R. No. 210612, 09 Oct. 2017)
primary and/or secondary education; or members of rural banks, cooperative, "samahang
Cultural Communities nayon[s]," or farmers' association, or of funds
Elements (F-E-M)
2. When a child's employment or participation solicited by corporations/associations from the
Children of indigenous cultural communities general public.
in public entertainment or information
shall not be subjected to any and all forms of 1. Estafa or other forms of swindling as defined
through cinema, theater, radio or television
discrimination. (Sec. 20, R.A. No. 7610) in Arts. 315 and 316 of the RPC is committed; The Court finds no existing syndicate in which BB
is essential: Provided, the employment
contract concluded by the child's parent or and the other accused had any participation. As
Who may File a Complaint 2. The estafa or swindling is committed by a found by the DOJ Secretary, Atty. AA acted on his
guardian, with the express agreement of the
syndicate of Five (5) or more persons; and own, without the participation or involvement of
child concerned, if possible, and the
1. Offended party; BB or the other accused. Atty. AA was never
approval of the DOLE: Provided, that the
2. Parents or guardians; 3. Defraudation results in the Misappropriation authorized by the ILC shareholders, i.e., BB and
following requirements in all instances are
3. Ascendant or collateral relative within the of moneys contributed by stockholders, or the other accused, to transact with CC. There is
strictly complied with:
third degree of consanguinity; members of rural banks, cooperatives, simply no proof that all of the accused, including
4. Officer, social worker or representative of a “samahang nayon(s),” or farmers’ BB, acted through ILC in defrauding CC. (Debuque
a. The employer shall ensure the
licensed child-caring institution; associations, or of funds solicited by v. Nilson, G.R. No. 191718, 10 May 2021)
protection, health, safety and morals of
5. Officer or social worker of the DSWD; corporations/associations from the general
the child;
6. Barangay chairman; or public. (People v. Timbayan and Puerto, G.R. Syndicate; When Considered (5-In-Fo)
7. At least three (3) concerned responsible No. 209655-60, 14 Jan. 2015)
b. The employer shall institute measures
citizens where the violation occurred. 1. Purported swindlers must at least be five (5)
to prevent the child's exploitation or
Q: Atty. AA, BB and other accused were in number;
discrimination taking into account the “Comprehensive program against child abuse, charged for syndicated estafa after the
system and level of remuneration, and exploitation and discrimination” Assistant City Prosecutor found probable 2. They must have Formed or managed a rural
the duration and arrangement of
cause for alleged defrauding CC. Atty AA, BB bank, cooperative, “samahang nayon,”
working time; and This refers to the coordinated program of and the other accused elevated the finding to farmer’s association or any other
services and facilities to protect children against: the DOJ Secretary who after flip-flopping corporation or association that solicits funds
c. The employer shall formulate and
many times ruled that only Atty. AA is liable from the general public; or
implement, subject to the approval and 1. Child Prostitution and other sexual abuse;
for estafa. Meanwhile, an Information for
supervision of competent authorities, a 2. Child trafficking;
Syndicated Estafa was filed before the RTC 3. They formed or managed such association
continuing program for training and 3. Obscene publications and indecent shows;
which was dismissed pursuant to a demurrer with the Intention of carrying out an
skill acquisition of the child. (Sec. 12, 4. Other acts of abuses; and
to evidence. Will the case for syndicated unlawful or illegal act, transaction,
R.A. No. 7610) 5. Circumstances which threaten or endanger
estafa prosper? enterprise, or scheme. (Remo v. Secretary of
the survival and normal development of Justice, G.R. No. 192925, 09 Dec. 2016)
NOTE: In the above exceptional cases where any children. (Sec. 3(d), R.A. No. 7610)
A: NO. It has become moot considering the
such child may be employed, the employer shall
dismissal by the RTC of the case against PENALTY
first secure, before engaging such child, a work
petitioner BB based on a demurrer to evidence
permit from the DOLE which shall ensure
which effectively amounted to an acquittal, and in Any person or persons who shall commit estafa
observance of the above requirement. (Sec. 12,
view of the death of the principal accused Atty. or other forms of swindling as defined in Arts.
R.A. No. 7610)
AA. Nonetheless, the Supreme Court deem it 315 and 316 of the RPC, as amended, shall be
necessary to rule on the merits if only to lay to punished by life imprisonment to death if the

Special Penal Laws
swindling (estafa) is committed by a syndicate still under the same P.D. 1689 with a lower
consisting of five or more persons formed with penalty than syndicated estafa.
the intention of carrying out the unlawful or
illegal act, transaction, enterprise or scheme, and
the defraudation results in the misappropriation

of moneys contributed by stockholders, or
members of rural banks, cooperatives,
“samahang nayon(s),” or farmers’ associations, or
of funds solicited by corporations/ associations
from the general public.
When not committed by a syndicate as above

defined, the penalty imposable shall be reclusion
temporal to reclusion perpetua if the amount of
the fraud exceeds 100,000 pesos. (Sec. 1, P.D.
1689)
Q: The president, treasurer, and secretary of

ABC Corporation were charged with
syndicated estafa under the following
information: That on or about the 1st week of
Jan. 2010, the above-named accused,
conspired with one another to defraud Virna,
Lana, Deborah, and several other persons by
falsely or fraudulently pretending or
representing a transaction or series of
transactions. The accused made it appear that
they were in a legitimate business of foreign
exchange trading successively or
simultaneously operating under the name
and style of ABC Corporation and DEF
Management Philippines. The said
corporations are not licensed nor authorized
to engage in foreign exchange trading. They
induced and succeeded in inducing
complainants and several other persons to
give and deliver the amount of at least
P20,000,000. Will the case for syndicated
estafa prosper? Explain. (2010 BAR)
A: NO. A case for syndicated estafa will not

prosper because a syndicate for such crime under
P.D. 1689 must be comprised of five (5) or more
persons committing the estafa or other forms of
swindling defined in Arts. 315 and 316 of the
RPC; whereas the case given involved only three
(3) accused who are alleged to have conspired in
the commission of the swindling. But because the
amount defrauded exceeds P100,000, the case is
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 506

2022 GOLDEN NOTES

3 Criminal Law 2022 Ust Golden Notes Confidential Converted 2

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

3 Criminal Law 2022 Ust Golden Notes Confidential Converted 2

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Crimes under the RPC – Book 2 Criminal Law

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 160 161 UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 162 163 UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 164 165 UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 166 167 UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 168 169 UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 170 171 UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 172 173 UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 174 175 UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 176 177 UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 178 179 UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 180 181 UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 182 183 UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 184 185 UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 186 187 UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 188 189 UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 190 191 UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 192 193 UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS

A: The police officer incurs no criminal liability Illegal Associations

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 194 195 UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 196 197 UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 198 199 UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 200 201 UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 202 203 UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 204 205 UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 206 207 UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 208 209 UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 210 211 UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 212 213 UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS

As to Time of Commission 3. Illegal Use of Uniforms and Insignia (Art. 179,

1. Illegal Possession and Use of False Treasury CHAPTER 1: FORGERIES

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 214 215 UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 216 217 UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 218 219 UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 220 221 UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 222 223 UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 224 225 UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 226 227 UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 228 229 UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 230 231 UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 232 233 UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 234 235 UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 236 237 UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 238 239 UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 240 241 UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 242 243 UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 244 245 UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS

Rule 18.04. A lawyer shall keep the client

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 246 247 UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 248 249 UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 250 251 UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 252 253 UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 254 255 UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 256 257 UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 258 259 UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 260 261 UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 262 263 UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 264 265 UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 266 267 UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 268 269 UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS

The essence of the crime is the mere making of

Ways of Committing Abuses against Chastity

Soliciting or making immoral or indecent

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 270 271 UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS